Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1898-02-05
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS
Mr.. Bailey Criticises the Civil Service
Commission.
GIVES INSTANCES OF IRREGULARITIES
Charges Mr.. Proctor With an At
tempt to Silence Him.
HEARING BEFORE COMMITTEEi

ing in the Maltby building. when the inves-
tigation into the methods of the civil SER
vice was continued. number of employees
OF the civil service commission had been
summoned to appear to give their testi-
| mony. Senators Pritchard and Harris were
present.
W. r. Bushby, chief of the certificatiou
| division of the commission. was questioned
regarding methods of work in the commis-
| sion.
MIR. +. ID. Bailey was then placed on the
stand. Mr.. Bailey said that for the past
two years number of things in the opera
| ton of the civil service commission had
troubled him detrimental to the public
service and injurious to the application OF
| the merit system
Mr.. Bailey continued that there were four
| methods of evading the reinstatement rules,
lie referred to case in the San Francisco
custom house.
Senator PrItchard said he hoped the wit
ness would give names of persons figuring
| In these cases.
Mr. Bailey replied that he would do so as
| far possible but could not 90 SO in AN
cases. as he had been requested by the
commission not to refer to the records of
the commission for any facts which he de-
| sired 10 bring out before the committee.
Mr. Procter-"Wil you state when such
| a request was made?'
| Mr.. BniIey's Serious Charpe.
Mr.. Bailey-'The request was communi-
Gated to me through Mr.. Seryen and after
ward by Mr.. Proctor. Mr.. Server stated
! that the commission requested that 1
| should not refer to the records OF the COM
mission for the presentation Of any facts,
Dut said L was at liberty TO present any,
tnlnS L was able to carry in my memory.
That was Friday OF last week Mr. Proc
| ter. in the presence of Mr.. Serven repeated
the same request 10 me. He said 4 was
not tc search records. and said he wanted
| to break up the holding of interviews with
| Clerks of the commission. / supposed he
| meant he forbade me to make inquiries Of
| clerks informed in matters / wanted TO
| bring before the committee. He reminded
me tnat there was certain loyalty or SUBJ
seiviency in all departments due 10y SUBJ
| ordinates 10 their superior officers, and also
| reminded me that my position in the COM
mission depended upon the course | should
pursue. In substance, he said my situation
| depended upon the course 1 should pursue"
| Mr. Pritchard-"What did you say to Mr..
Procter?'
| Mr. Bailey: Il stated TO him that I had
| always recognized the obligation to which
| he referred. and that anything 1 had done
had been done so confidentially THAI il was
not expected il would work injury to my
supericrs. L said that while 1 recognized
| that obligation up to the Time he made a
| personal attack upon me, 1 did not recog-
rize il any longer"
Mr.. Bailey then continued to exnlain
cases he regarded as a violation OF the civil
service rules by the commission. In tbs
San Francisco custom house he said
| reinsta tement was made after the one
year limit had expired. on the ground that
the charges on which he was removed were
untrue.
Alleged Violations.
The witness said the rules gave the COM
mission no authority to make such an ex-
ception. Another instance of violation
OF the rules. Mr.. Bailey said. was in the
90 nf hit.-xr fi.-..
ernment printing office. They had been out
of the office three years. but were rein
stated on the ground that they mad been
discharged on form intended for tenn
porary discharges, instead of one for per-
manent discharges.
Another case cited by Mr.. Bailey was
that of E. 7. Farcher, dismissed January
5 1897, and reinstated January 2l 1895.
The commission gave authority for the
dating back of the certificate of reinstate-
ntent TO bring ii within the year
In the case of Miss Agnes Gerry, Mr..
T&iley said, the Interior Department made
requisition on July =, 1897, for reinstate-
ment. She had been out of the service
since June 30. 1896. and hence on July ?,
1857, her time of eligibility for reinstate-
ment had expired. The Interior Depart
ment requested that the certifcation be
dated back to bring ii within one year. in :.
which way the reinstatement was made
Another case was that of Miss Mary Van
t1anken, in the internal revenue service.
She was separated from the service Sep
tember q, 1894. and reinstated June II, 1897
The records show, the witness SAID that
the reinstatement was made because the
year limit was suspended on the principle
of right and equity. This action was TAKEN
Mr.. Bailey said, by Commissioners Proctor ,
and Harlow.
MIR. Bailey said the rules gave the COM
nissfoners 70 authority to waive the year
limit.
The witness also cited the case of Edwin
G. Rose, who had been an apprentice in
rha snf
resigned three years ago on account Of mis-
health. The commission allowed Rose TO
be reinstated by regarding his discharge as
furlough, and he was reinstated as an
apprentice when he was twenty-five or
twenty-six years Of age, while the rules
fixed the age for such apprentices from
fourteen to twenty years.
Illegal Promotions Charged.
Mr.. Bailey gave instances of cases in
which he thought promotions had been,
made in the civil service commission not
in accordance with the rules for promotion
adopted by the commission itself.
In the case of Jane Bruce, a copy holden
in the government printing Office, Mr. Rai.
ley said she had been transferred to the
Post Office Department. January 8, 1894.
and the question was whether the work OF
ccpyholder In the government printing ofs
flee was the same as that of clerk in the
Pest ONCE Department. Commissioner
Rice. he said. on a statement by Secretary
was made.
The witness said the Departme mt Of Jus.i
- had asked for the transfer to that de-i
ttment Of a railway mail clerk, but it,
xas not allowed. because the character OF
the work in the two positions were not the
same. but the department was Informed
that IL the railway mail clerk was trans
ferred to the Post Once Department and
should serve there six months, he could be
transferred to the Department Of Justice.
Mr.. Bailey also said the appointment rule,
had not been strictly adhered TO by the
commission. II, instanced -he case OF
George X. Leet, a stenographer at the
navy yard. who had secured transfer to
the Navy Department. or from n non-ap-
pcrtioned branch of the service to an ap.'
portioned branch.
Ths witness said the home rule fea.,
ture OF the rules had been violated by the,
commission Recently. he said. the Post;
once Department had been allowed by the
commission to select carriers Cor ths eer-i
vice by passing over the names OF persons
who do not reside In the place where the
work Is to be done.
Alleged Irregular Appointaent.
A. ~sk- A-~l r.