The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1892-06-22

WASHINGTON, June 1.-THE democratic
majority of the house committee on reform
in the civil service has agreed upon re-
port drawn up by Representative Boatner
of Louisiana upon the results OF the COM
mittee's investigation of the alleged vio-
lation of the civil service law at Baltimore.
The report quotes the postmaster-gen-
erals statement that none of the persons
whose dismissal from Office had been rec
commended by the civil service commits
sion for violation OF law had been dismissed
or prosecuted, and gives at some length
his reasons for failing to act according to
his testimony before the committee, which
reasons the committee characterize as con-
Trajectory 1t says: at is singular that
the acknowledgement should have in
dorsed the idea that men charged with
violation of the civil service law we're en-
titled to notice before any inquiry as to
their guilt was entered upon and that
they were entitled to the assistance of
counsel in the investigation" The exam
ination of the testimony taken by the in
spectors and upon which the postmaster
general claims to have acted, shows that
neither their conclusions nor his are
supported by the statements of the par
tee implicated. On the contrary the
testimony reported by the inspectors
confirms and corroborates fully that taken
by the civil service commission. Sub
stantially the same facts admitted by the
parties before the commission were sworn
10 before the inspectors, and the severe
structures and criticisms which the in
spectors passed on the work of Mr.. Roose-
welt in making the investigation are not
borne out by any facts stated by the wit
nesses on that examination. 1.-THE accept
ance by the acknowledgement without
further instructions or inquiry of the re-.
port of the inspectors, which, If proved.
convicted the civil service commissioners
OF the grossest official misconduct and most
dishonorable practices is, to say the least,
extraordinary.
The report continuing says "the replies
of the postmaster-generalt to many of the
questions propOunded by your committee
were evasive and utterly inconsistent with
the evidence on which he claims to have
acted. 1t also comments upon the failure
of the postmaster-general TO produce a
written opinion from the assistant attor-
ney-general Of his department. to the effect
that contributions to the primary election
upon which the case was based did not
constitute a violation of law, and doubts
whether any reputable attorney would
risk his reputation b giving such an opin-
ion. Further 1t says "The garbled state
ment of the evidence taken before the in
spectors furnished by the postmaster gen.
ersl shows the desperate straits to which
he is driven In the attempt to sustain the
action of his inspectors and his own"
The report holds that the accused en-
ployes were actually guilty of a violation
OF law, and that their excuses were
transparent evasions." 1t says Had
the postmast ter general been able to show
that he had been advised by the depart
ment of justice that the law did not apply
to contributions for political primaries, or
had he frankly declared his belief that
the men violated the law in ignorance of
its provisions or that he was invested with
discretionary power not to execute the
law and had had exercised his discretion
in refusing TO remove these men there
might have been some excuse for his fail
ure to do so, but on the ground stated by
him his action indicated either n deter
mination not to enforce the law or negli-
gence therein to the last degree"
The report concludes as follows: owe
therefore find that the report of the civil
service commission recommending the re-
moval of certain employees in the postotiice
at Baltimore was we'll founded that the
postmaster at Baltimore has not removed
any of these parties substantially by direc-
ton OF the postmaster general; that the
report of the inspectors, upon which they
We're retained, is unsupported by the evil
dence taken by themselves, and indicates
either complete ignorance of the civil
service law or determination that in this
particular case its violation should not
be punished"
The secretary of the treasury frankly
admitted that his attention had not
been called to the report of the civil .serv-
ice commission until the resolution under
(which this resolution is made was adopted,
and that he had construed the recommen-
dation of the civil service commission in
regard TO the men in the customs service
as not requiring their dismissal, and that
reprimaud was sufficient punishment.