The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-05-13
TRIED TO TRAP wANAMAKER
Mr.. Boatner Fails To Put the Postmaster-
General in U Hole.

Mr.. Boatner Fails To Put the Postmaster-
General in Hole
WASHINGTON, May 12.-The House COM
mittee on reform in the civil service to-
day resumed the investigation of charges
that certain federal employees in Baltimore
have violated the civiI-service law with
out mourning punishment Postmaster
general Wanamaker appeared. bringing
with him. at the request of the committee.
the report of the postoffice inspectors Civ
ing the result of their stigation INTO
the Baltimore postoffice. He said he desired
to correct his former testimony so far TO
say that he regarded the question present.
ed 20 him as q single question and not as q
"small question" referring to the question
of veracity, which. of course. he would not
so characterize. He had been informed
that Z. c. Perrine. recommended for re-
moval. had never testified before the COM
mission. Also be desired TO say In view
of the comment upon the time that elapse d
between the Investigation and the denials
of the employees that more than fonr
months had elapsed after the commissions
Investigation before the report reached the
President. so that the mon had had no op-
portunity to make an earlier answer 20 the
charges.
The Postmaster general said: 81 have
had no disposition TO defend these men. but
there were complaints arising. and | can
not personally investigate their cases l
turn them over to the proper officers. and
must be governed by their reports"
Mr.. Boatner-It appears that these parties
were before the commission authorized
10 make this in vestigation. They admitted
their guilt, and the postmaster whose duty
it was under the law 10 dismiss these men
because OF their confessed violation OF law
Il
came 10 you, instead of acting upon the
confessions of the parties you instituted
another Investigation for the purpose or
| enabling these people 10 deny what they
had already admitted.
The PostInester-general moved his hand
| in remonstrance while MI. Boatner was
| putting this question. and then replied; II
respectfully protest against the statement
that the investigation was instituted Tor
| the purpose OF having these men deny. It
is not the truth"
Mr.. Boatner-But the report of the Civil.
| service Commission
The Postmaster general 1t does not
manage the P0stoffice Department.
Mr.. Rance requested that the Postmas-
| ter-general be permitted 10 proceed and
read the statement he had prepared. but
| Mr.. Boatner would not be diverted. and
| insisted that the committee wanted light
upon the point he had suggested. The
| Postmaster general bac sent TWO inspect
ors to reInvestigate the matter. and. acting
! upon their report, had declined TO dismiss
| the men. The Postmaste general had
| admitted that the men had confessed their
| guilt. and To exculpate himself bad said ho
| was not responsible for It. Now" said
| he. 81 wish 10 know why has the depart
| ment ignored the recommendations of the
| commission and accepted the statements OF
| these men made in exoneration OF them
selves ss having greater weight than the
| statements inculpating themselves
Mr.. Raines protested against this con.
| struction. and he and Mr.. Boatner bad
some words upon this point but the latter
| insisted that no matter how Mr.. Raines
| understood the matter he Dir. BoatnerI,
| was stating the understanding of the couss
| mittee.
| The Postmaster general quietly remarked
that he had no information on tbe subject
| that he WAS not willing and anxious TO lay
| before tho committee. But II 10 not true.
said he. that any attempt has been made
TO shield these men. or that any unusual
| course had been pursued"
| The inspectors report upon which Mr..
Wanamakcr based his action in the Baltl-
| more case was made by Chief Postotfice-
| inspector Wheeler and Inspector Sharp,
| the report. that the facts do not justify
the dismissal of the twenty one men named.
nor any one of them, for violation OF the
| civil service law. as charged. The state
| ments of witnesses before Mr.. Roosevelt,
and upon which his recommendations were
based. were taken at a time, under circnnl-
stances and in q manner that Instines rs IN
saying that they were not proper material
upon which TO base recommendations Tor
dismissal or severe criticisms" IL further
says that the evidence taken and accom-
pauylpg Mr.. Rooseveits report itself shows
on it's face that the investigation was un-
fair and partial In the extreme.