The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1897-05-13
TRIAL Of THE kEIM CASE
Court of Claims Hears an I'm
portant Test Cause.
1T GROMS GUT OF A DISMISSAL
The Plaintiff is an ex-Union Sol
der and CInims That He Was Dis
missed From the Pension Office
for Political tseasons and Not Tor
Incompctency, as stated

The test case of Norris kein, an eA-
Union soldier, who was discharged ihoah
a,e Pension Bureau under the last Admin
lstration. came up for hearing IN the
Court of Claims today
Keini makes the contention that his dis
a,issal " as in violation OF the civil serV-
lce law aud contrary to section lF54, OF
he Revised Statutes of the United states.
He charges that the system of rating the
efficiency OF clerks in the Pension Bureau
was up ust, aud that clerks were diserlul-
aat,d AGAINST on account of their political
INVITATIONS
The Government contends that keim was
dismissed fer inrfficiency, and Incidentally
voatpadS that the statute relating Lo the
,refer4nrnt OF old soldiers and sailors Ia
be. civi, service is a directory and not
mandatory statute.
Keim contends that the record on which
me Go-ersment based its action OF dis
nissal was doctored that political Offend
srs might he discharged, and that the stat
tte rpfcrred to is mandatory and not
directory one.
maintained that the discretion OF the
sesas o. the executive departments should
rot be suhservient to the courts. This
seemed to be an unfortunate point ana
ater i'm the proceedings il was modified
Counsel Chaney, for the piamuif, showed
that Keim was appointed TO Ger6Shlp
"a the old Army and Navy snrUNors
division of the Pension office. He sketch
ID the character Of his work and quoted
bis rating on the efficiency record oi that
division. His rating averaged SO. HIS
chief provided him with letter tcstIi WIG
&c his capsbility as Clerk
Then Kciln was transferred to the east
ern division OF TIE bureau. Here, he main
tained. mis- troubles began. TIE chief was
A Democrat OF the most Democratic tee
5encics hpim was given desk IA q dark
corner OF the office. and the most difficult
eases were turned over to him for adJuGi-
cation. After repeated protests he was
allowed TO take a desk in a better lighted
part Of the office.
Ia addition TO the regular duties a. clerk
Keim translated letters from foreign ap-
glicants for pensions. Still, witt al tnc>7
conditions against him, his efficiency
rating stood at an average of go.
Notwithstanding that he WAS becoming
more lalI.iliar with the work OF that divi-
sion. and was doing, 50 he maintains, one
third more work OF equal character than
several Of lis fellow-clerks, his rating
for oUe month fell TO 20 and Ia the next
n,onth to So Then he was dismissed
Tie lriuted testimony showed that an
error IN The eaStern,tiiyison Counted three
poK,ts aLaiust the clerk, and an error n
corresponding work in the other divisions
or the office counted but one Uoint against
the clerk.
Counsel CLANCY read section la54 OF the
Revised statutes. which sets forth that a
man who had Ecen hOnoraby discharged
from the military or naval service OF the
United States, and had'heen appointed To
spoSition in the civil service of the United
States. should Toe preferred to those ap'
pointees not honorably discharged from the
military or naval service, where his ahllity =
was equal 10 that OF his strictly civilian q
feIlOw-Clelk
Tie exact language Of the statute is that
the veteran shall be preferred This,
argued counsel for Keiu. was mandatory,
and LEFT il rot TO the CapliCe OF the eN-
lc,Itfve officer as TO whether OF not such
clerk should be retained in the civil ser
vice in preference to others.
He cited the case Of peI kins rs the I'M
ted States, Perkins was cadet enEi
peer, and had graduated from Annapolis,
There seemed To he no duties for him 70
perform. and he was dismissed lTom the
service, not in pursuance Of the findings
of a couut-martial He recovered agalns'
he United States in the Court OF Claims,
which decision was affirmed 10y the Su-
prcme Court.
Counsel Chaney argued that the head oi
an executive department WAS never Supe
nor to the law under which his offici
was created He maintained that the
civil service act limited the discretion
of the head Of an executive department
and that the civil service act had been
adiudged constitutional. If the discre-
tiun Of the head Of a department could
not be limited by law, OF what use OF
validity were the various statutes indt
eating, restricting, and controlling then
authority He charged that the Commits
sioncr OF Pensions had eyadcd the Jaw
which he was sworn = obey, in has dis
nnssal of Keip' rom the Government sery-
ice