Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-04-26
CIVIL SERVICE LAW
And Violations of It by Some Baltl-
more Postofice People.
Mr.. WANAMAKER ON THE STANr
Admits His Ignorance of the Statutes on
the Subject, and Is
INCLINED TO BE RATHER SARCASTIC

WASHINGTON, April 25-The House
Committee on Reform in the Civil Service
to-day began its investigation into the alle-
cations that the civil service law has been
violated by the Federal officials at Balti-
more. The resolution under which the
committee is proceeding recites in the pre-
amble that Theodore Roosevelt, Civil
Service Commissioner, in MAY, 1891, re-
ported to the Civil Service Commission that
a number of Federal Office holders in
Baltimore took an active part in the pri-
mary election there, raised and spent money
for political expenses, and, as they admitted,
violated the United States civil service
statutes, the punishment for which is dis
missal from Office and imprisonment; that
the commission, upon Roosevelt's findings,
recommended to the President the dismissal
of the guilty officials, and that the Civil
Service Reform Association, of Baltimore,
called attention to the fact that no official
action has been taken in consequence.
Therefore the committee is directed to
ascertain whether any or all fthe guilty
officials are still in Office, and whether they
have been indicted or prosecuted. Post
master General Wanamaker was the first
witness.
Purpose Of the investigation.
Chairman Andrews briefly reviewed the
purpose of the investigation, stating that 21
OF the employees found to have violated the
law were in the Baltimore postofice. He
asked whether any of these persons were
still in Office or had been indicted.
The Postmaster General replied that the
persons were all in the employ Of the Gov
ernment, and none had been indicted. The
witness said the postmaster at Baltimore
had asserted that injustice had been done
the employees in Mr.. Roosevelt's report, and
witness thereupon ordered an investigation
by the Postoffce Inspectors who reported:
"It is our opinion that the facts do not JUS
tify the dismissal of the q employees, or
any of them, for violating the civil service
laws, as charged"
The employees in the case, said the wit
ness, were poor men, soldiers, and sons Of
soldiers, and the amount of their contribu-
tions was not much larger than the sum
that would be required to pay for printing
the report of the Civil Service Commission.
Mr.. Boatner, a member of the committee,
asked if there was any law authorizing the
investigation by the inspectors.
Mr.. Wanamaker's Ignorance of Laws.
The Postmaster General was unable to
point to anv such law, but explained the
precedents and the functions of the inspec-
tors. In this case, Postmaster johnson had
been reprlmanded.
Mr.. Andrews wished to know why the
postmaster had been reprimanded.
The witness replied: "For allowing his
men to be in the position of making state
ments that could be excepted to. If these
men gave an impression to the Civil Service
Commissioners that could not be verified
under oath, that makes trouble for the COM
missioners"
To Mr.. Boatner, the Postmaster General
said that If the men were engaged in assess
ing each other, or in coercing votes, these
actions were certainly violations of the law,
but the men denied that they had done so.
Mr.. Boatner asked of what use was the
Civil Service Commission if the heads of
departments had authority to go behind the
commissions reports and direct investiga-
tions on their own account
Inclined to Be Sarcastic.
The Postmaster General replied that this
was the first intimation given to him that
the Civil Service Commission or any other
had control of the departments, independent
of its head, and could step in and order dis
missals of its own sweet will.
Mr.. Andrews asked the Postmaster Gen
eral if any employe who made one state
nent in April and another at subsequent
time, contradicting absolutely his former
statements, ought to be retained in Office.
Mr.. Wanamaker said he did not think
that any untruthful persons ought to be
employed, but he called attention to the
fact that 19 of the men contended that they
did not say the words attributed to them.
He would not keep any dishonest person in
his employ. but he referred to the fact that
man might say that he had done some-
thing and had told another person, through
fear, that he had not. There were two men
of the 21 he had not forgiven, but none OF
the men were held for q violation OF the
civil service law
MI. Wanamaker admitted that he had not
read all of the insnector's 8 rennrt