Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-03-06
WHAT MR. PAUL DOESN'T KNOW.
The Civil Service Investigators Have a
Hard Time Getting Information.

n
Hard Time Getting Information.
THE WITNESS ALLOWED ANOTHER DAY TO Pill
HIMSELF TodETHER-HE SAYS He RESIGNED
THREE TIMES, But DOESN'T REooLLEcr THE
DATEs-HE KNEW THE RULES, BUT
The civil service committee was slow in get
ting together this morning and the usual in
terested audience was conspicuously absent
The chairman and Mr.. Stone were the only
members of the committee present when the
examination began. Messrs Bother and Green
haige arrived later. Mr.. Hatton and Commits
sioners Roosevelt and Thompson were present.
Mr.. Roosevelt continued the examination of
Mr.. Paul.
THE LITTLE JOKER IN PoLIrIcs
Mr.. Roosevelt stated that the certi6cations
from "a to GO showed that by shifting rom ono
list to another half dozen men had been de-
prived of their right to be certified, and half a
dozen other men not entitled to certiiicstion
by their relative standing had been certified
He asked witness how he explained the fact
that he had chosen the six men thus put for
ward improperly.
Mr.. Paul said this was matter for the local
examining board to answer. MIR. Roosevelt
explained that the question related not to
the certlticatlon, but Pauls having selected for
appointment all these men improperly certified
IN preference to others.
The witness objected TO the assumption on
the part of Mr.. Roosevelt
THAT THE CERTIfICArIoNs WERE CROOKED.
Mr.. Roosevelt then submitted the record to
him and asked if he regarded the Qualifications
from 81 to 60 as proper.
Witness examined the record and replied that
the certlfications as shown there were improper.
he lur,her said that In making the appoint
monts he had not examined the record.
=, Mr: Roosevelt then asked what he meant
then by saying in letter to the commission
that an examination of the record showed q
certain state of affairs as to the appointment
Witness said he did not know that in that
letter he was referring to that record; it might
have been his own record he was referring to-
or 1t might have been that he had asked Shidy
to refer to the record, and that ne had written
his letter on what Shldy told him the record
showed.
The record showed that these six appoint
ments had all been signed for on one day, Feb
ruary 13, 1888.
Witness said his memoranda of facts did not
accord with the record as presented by Mr.
Roosevelt.
SAYS sHIDY WAS INUNDATED
Witness testified that as register and clerk
Shidy was an efficient man, but that he was
slovenly and careless about his work as a men,
Der of the examining board. He thought
Snldy was timid, weak man, and had not IN
tended to do wrong, but that he had been in
undated by the commission into giving his
testimony from desire to protect himself
from the consequence of his errors. He had
been intimidated thus by Messrs. Lyman,
Roosevelt and Thompson.
MIR. Roosevelt asked if witness thought this
intimidation could have occurred nine months
before these commissioners went into office,
when Shidy was examined by Webster and
Doyle.
Witness was then asked if he was ever in
Inundated by Shidy and forced to make certain
selections
Witness replied that he had not been IN
Inundated by Shidy or forced by him TO make
any particular selection. He said he had merely
PLACED TOO MUCH CONFIDENCE IN sHIDY
as representative of the commission.
In answer to question by Mr.. Boatner as to
the appointment of Keayeny witness said that
he did not know Keaveny; that Judge Jenkins
came to HIM and said that man who had
passed the examination and passed high would
probably be certified to him, and asked him to
consider his case. In answer to the question if
he had acted under political influence or favor
ltism witness said that he did not know any of
the men appointed and had no personal favor
ltism toward them.
Several direct questions failed to get direct
answer as to whether or not there had been any
political influence effectins the appointments.
Mr.. Boatner called attention to the fact that
man might appoint another on political intiu-
ence and yet not know the appointee. But this
statement failed to bring out any more direct
answer. Witness said merely in a general way
tina: he had never made any appointment in
violation OF the law or Improperly.
WHAT Mr.. PAUL KNEW OF THE RULES AND THEIR
APPLICATION.
Witness was asked if he had not said that he
was familiar with the rules
He said he was familiar with their practical
workings. He had studied the rules all night
after his appointment
He was asked then how he had come to make
appointments which he acknowledged the
record showed to be improper.
He did not give q direct answer to this ques-
ton.
He WAS asked if he did not consider his sig
nature to the record book as a part Of the
record.
He said he did
He was asked then how he had come to make
appointments, as he had testified, not signing
the book until afterward
Witness failed to give an explanation of this
RESIGNED THREE TIMES But COULDN'T FIX TIE
DATES.
Witness was questioned as to the date of his
He said he had resigned three
times, but after considerable questioning and
long replies the committee failed to get the
GAZE desired.
Mr.. Greenhalge remarked aside that this was
making record III contrast to the declaration
OF Mr.. jefferson that none resigned and few
died. Here was man who had resigned three
times.
Mr.. Thompson put in evidence copy of the
Postmaster Generals letter accepting Mr.
Pauls resignation.
Witness remarked that the Postmaster Gen
erai had no authority to accept ms resignation.
GIVING THIS WITNESS MORE TI,rE.
In order to enable the witness to prepare
himself as TO the details of the running OF the
Milwaukee post Office an adjournment was
taken about II 80 until 10 tomorrow morning
Ir. Stone explained that he would ask ques-
tions to show the practical workings of a civil
service post office.
Mr.. Boatner suggested facetlousiy that the
Milwaukee post office ought not to be taken as
cn example, since II had had the vice president
OF q civil service association for postmaster.
Judgment Against the Marquis.
Yesterday afternoon in the Circuit Court.
Judge Montgomery, the case of Madame Mira
Wright de Potestad against the Marquis Charles
A. dc Chambrun was tried and Il verdict found
for the plaintiff for sl674.5O and interest from
July 3, 1888. 1t was claimed that the plaintiff,
being about to visit Europe, left with de-
PENDANT certain moneys to disburse in
some building operations for her. When
she returned she endeavored to have a
settlement, and through her counsel. NJ. V. r.
Berry, procured statement showing the above
amount dine Tho defendant rpfrsel IN nay