Freeland tribune. (Freeland, Pa.) 1888-1921, 1896-09-21
MIR. BERRY'S OBJECTIONS.
MINORITY REPORT OF THE MINE
INSPECTORS BOARD.

IDcontrovertibIe Proof offered That the
| Candidate Who Was Recommended Did
Not Attain the Standard Required by
Law-High- Handed Proceedings.
John w. Berry, of Pittston, few
days ago submitted his minority report
to Governor Hastings. objecting to the
appointment of William IL. Davies, of
Nesquehoning, as mine inspector to sue
ce3d Mr.. Roderick, of this district, who
has resigned. Governor Hastings has,
however, made the appointment. There
has been great interest manifested in
Mr.. Berry's minority report and thous-
ands of miners and others who are
interested in the inspe ,torship have
been anxious to know Just what Mr..
Berrys reasons for objectng are. In
| the Wilkesbarre Record of recent date
is published the following, taken from
Mr.. Berry's report:
As one Of the engineer members of
| the board of examiners for the Office of
| inspector of mines for the counties of
Luzerne, Carbon and Schuylkill, appoint
| ed in accordance with Article III, Section
3, of the act of 1891, | beg leave to
submit this minority report on the
recent examination of candidates for
inspector of the fifth district, vice James
E. Roderick resigned.
First. The board of examiners, con
trary to law, have fixed an arbitrary
grading for each question; to Illustrate,
questions No. 4, > and relate to eXper-
ience and are as follows:
"QueStiOn 4. What occupation have
you held in the anthracite coal mines of
Pennsylvania? Give the name and
location of the collieries, and the time
employed in each situation.
"Question 5. With what methods of
mining have you had experience? Give
the names of mines, with brief des-
cripton Of the system adopted in each.
Explain also the best methods of mining
for the fifth anthracite district.
"Question 6. Give the length of time
and nature of your experience with
noXious and explosive gases, naming
the colleries in which the said gases
were found"
In all thirty-scven questions were
asked. To the first three questions no
points were allotted.
To the remaining thirty-four questions
including Nos. 4, and 6. 425 points
were allotted An applicant receiving
10 points would have passed perfect
examination, and an applicant losing
over 42l9 points would in accordance
with this arbitrary method have failed
to reach the 90 per ccntum required in
Article IL, Section ; of the act.
The first paragraph of Section &,
Article ii. of the act of 1891 is as fol-
lows: The person so appointed must
be citizen of PENNSYLVANIA and shall
have attained the age Of thirty years.
lie must have knowledge of the diff
Ierent systems of working coal mines
and he must produce satisfactory evil
dencc to the board of examiners of
having had at least five (j) years prac-
tical experience in anthracite coal mines
of Pennsylvania. He must have had
experience in coal mines where noXious
and explosive gases are evolved"
As | understand this section of the
act, candidate is either eligible or in
eligible in the matter of experience.
The language of the act is ''IIe must
and the word ''muSJ" is used in every
sentence. "MuSt be Il citizen of Pcnn-
Sylvania. Must have Il knowledge of
the different systems of working coal
mines. MnSt produce satisfactory evl-
dcncc of having had at least five years
practical experience in anthracite coal
mines of Pennsylvania Must have had
experience in coal mines whore noXiouS
and explosive gases are evolved" An
| experience less than five years will not
do. A partial knowledge of the diff
Ierent systems of mining will not do.
He must have the Xperienee-and hav-
ing it-he is eligible for examination
"a nt hnr hn
no rating of the questions /, : and even
assuming that the method Of rating the
other questions was in accordance with
the law.
The second clause of Section ;, Arti-
Gle ii, of the act of 1891, provides as fol-
lows: The said examiners shall be
sworn to Il faithful discharge OF their
duty, and four Of them shall agree in
their recommendation of all candidates
to the governor who have answered
ninety per centum of the questions"
Can this be construed in any way TO
mean 30 per centum of the sum of an
arbitrary number of points fixed to the
questions by board OF examiners? The
language of the act IS 100 per centum of
the questions, not 80 per centum of an
arbitrary number of points.
Suppose for illustration that the ma
iority of the board had favorite candi-
date: further, that he had had some of
the questions previous to the eXamina-
tion or that such questions as he had
answered We're known to said ma aority
OF the board. Then a higher value
could be set on those questions and the
fayorite candidate would probably pass.
Again, each member of the board has
equal powers and equal rights (as stated
in an opinion given me by Deputy Attor-
ney General Elkin under date of March
II, lS95) and the questions given by each
member of the board should have equal
values.
If it be allowed otherwise then one of
the safeguards against fayoritism, pro-