Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-05-12

Today Postmaster General wnnarnaker was
again before the House committee on reform in
the civil service, which resumed the investiga-
ton Of charges that certain federal employees in
Baltimore have violated the civil service law
without mourning punishment.
in the course of the examination the Post
master General said II have had no DISPOSE
ton TO defend these men. but there were com
plants arising and cannot personally investi-
gate these cases. turn them over to the
proper officers and must be governed by their
reports"
Mr. Boatner-Itappears that dhese parties were
before the commission authorized to make this
Investigation They admitted their guilt and
the Postmaster, whose duty it was. under
the law. to dismiss these men. be-
cause Of their confessed violation Of
law, took no action Mt all. and when the matter
came to you. instead of acting upon the confess
slon OF the parties you instituted another inyes-
tgation for the purpose of enabling these people
10 deny what they had already admitted
ME- wASANAKER PROTESTS.
The Postmaster General moved his hand in
remonstrance while IIr. Boatner was putting
the question and then replied:
Il respectfully protest against the statement
that the investigation was instituted for the
purpose of having these men deny. 1t is not
the truth
Mr.. Boatner-But the report Of the civil ser
vice commission
The Postmaster Generals does not manage
the Post Office Department.
Nh. BoA1SER INSISTS.
Mr.. Raines requested that the Postmaster
General be permitted to proceed and read the
statement he had prepared, but Mr.. Boatner
would EOt be diverted, and insisted that the
committee wanted hight upon the point he had
suggested The Postmaster General he said.
had sent two Inspectors to reinvestigate the
matter. and acting upon their report hal de-
clincd to dismiss the men
The Postmaster General had admitted
that the men had confessed their guilt
and to exculpate himself had said that
he was not responsible for it. Now
SAID Mr.. BCatner- Il wish to know why
his department ignored the recommen datiOns
OF the commission and accepted the statements
OF these men, made In eXOncration of themselves,
as having greater weight than the statements
iEeulpatlng themselves
Mr. Raines protested against this construc-
ton, and he and Mr. Boatner had some words
upon this point, but the hitter insisted that no
matter how 1lr. Raines understood the matter
he Mr. Boatner) was stating the understanding
of the committee.
TIE POSTMASTER GENERAL WILLING TO TELL.
The Postmaster General quietly remarked
that he had no informa ton on the subject that
he was not willing and anxious 10 lay before
the committee. But it is not true = said he
that any attempt WAS made to shield these
men or that any unusual course has been
pursued
He read from the report of the commission
Mr.. ROosevelts suggestion tha. the law should
De amended so - to permit persons accused To
defend themselves. and added: The policy of
the department has been TO give every body a
hearing
Nher these men said they had been wrong
fuIly accused from a political motive and with
view to preventing them from exercising
their right TO vote. there WAS nothing else 10 be
done IN fairness than TO give these men an
OPPORTUNITY to be heard The testimony
when received was carefully examined. and
eanno. feel that there has been any mistake.
NOT ASTAGOSIsTIc TO THE COMMISSION
After number OF questions had been asked
In the same line Nr. Wanamaker said: ..SIany
Of these questions seem 10 be based on the
assumption that the Post Office Department is
antagonists to the civil service commission.
which Is no. true The commits ion Is not in
fallible. and t. findings any question are not
TO be taken without question" ~
After further examination Gr Hanar,al.er
was allowed 10 read ms prepared statement eco
The report Of the post ONCE Inspectors, pre-
sentei by Iir- Waaanlakcr. asserts thar there
was nol Proper material in the investigation in
the civil service commission upon which TO base
recommendation for dismissal or severe criti-
eisI.s. Grsd That the Investigation was unfair and
partial IN the extreme