The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-09-15
THE BILL OF JOHN WOOD ASKING
AN INJUNCTION DIS
MISSED
TEST OF CIVIL t SERVICE,
POWER OF THE PRESIDENT TO
MAKE CHANGES BEYOND THE
COURTS.
COMMISSION IS NoT DIsrLEAsED.
Nothing, 1t Is Said, fnn the Ruling
InflnicaI to the Principles of
the Service.

Wy ASdlN6ION, sept. H. - JuQSe
Cox, of the supreme court of the Dis
trict of Columbia. today dismissed the
bill of complaint of John G. Wood,
superintendent of mails at Louisville,
praying that Postmaster General Gary
and Assistant Postmaster General
Heath be enjoined from removing him
from office. The case has been con-
sidered in the nature of a test of the
power of removal, and the delivery OF
the opinion drew to the court room
many public officials, including mem
bers of the civil service commission.
Judge Coxs decision was an elabor-
ate review of the law bearing on re-
movals of federal employees. He held
at the outset that it was not within
the power of a court of equity to grant
relief in matters of appointment and
removal from office. Then taking up
the merits of the case he stated that
it was settled law that the power of
removal was an incident to the power
of appointment, and that both could
be exercised by the head of depart
ment in reference to subordinate Of
ficials. Concerning the civil service
law, Judge Cox held that it must not
be construed to grant authority either
to the civil service commission or to
the president to make rules contrary
to the law itself, or of legislative
character. He quoted with approval
a decision of Justice Brewer that con-
gress could not delegate it's power to
legislate to any administrative body.
The decision sums up as follows:
I know of nothing more important to the
interests OF the country than the policy which
the civil service legislation was intended to
initiate and promote, and it is perhaps a
matter OF great regret that the act of JAN
IT, 1883 the civil service 'act has not gone
to construe it as it is: To sum up, I con-
clude that, apart from the civil service act
the postmaster general had the authority to
pleasure; that this all makes no change In
this respect, except to forbid removals for
refusal to contribute to partisan objects;
that the power given to the commission and
the president to establish rules to carry that
act into effect does not authorize any rule
which shall make a change in the law in this
respect; and consequently even If this court
had jurisdiction in case like the present one,
the complainant is not entitled to the relief
prayed.
1t is probable that an appeal will be
taken from the decision, and it is said
that ultimately the United States su-
preme court will be asked to pass upon
the question involved.
That the civil service commission
does not regard Judge CoX's decision
as inimical to the service is indicated
by the following statement made by
one of the members of that body:
The opinion of Judge Cox in no way
affects the binding character of the
presidents order upon all officers Of
the service The president has author
ity, inherent in his ONCE, to make re-
movals. The intent was that the ap-
pointing officer in making removals
should be put on record as to the
grounds of his action and give the ac-
cused an opportunity to be heard to
his own defense. 1t was deemed that
this action would prevent removals for
other causes than the good of the ser
vice. Such an order does not in the
least impair the power of discipline
nor impede the proper exercise Of the
power of removal 1t simply serves as
a check upon the appointing officer
who acts from political or less worthy
motives.
1.-THE appointing officer who acts
with sole regard to the best interests
Of the service will deem it but just to
the public and to the employees affected
that a record be made. j 1t was the
lack OF just Such records as these, that
has given opportunity to the critics of
the civil service law, since it's enact
ment. to charge that removals from
the the public services have been made
mainly for political reasons. The fact
is that the majority of removals have
been made for proper reasons, but be-
cause these reasons were. not put upon
record, different administrations have
exposed themselves to much unjust
criticism The practice of making
record of the reasons for removals has
existed for many years in some parts
of the service with highly beneficial re-
suits, and the new order merely makes
this practice mandatory in all parts of
the service. Undoubtedly many en-
ployes have been removed for political
reasons because no reason was re-
CURED to be given by those in author
to be given, the new order will, it is
believed, largely check this abuse"