Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-07-31
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM.
Another Letter From the National
Leagues Secretary.

Another Letter From the National
Leagues Secretary.
Mr.. George McAneny, secretary of the
National Civil Service Reform League, has
| written another open letter to the Secretary
of the Treasury, in which he further dis
cusses the case of deputy collectors and
others in the internal revenue service,
claiming that in the changes that have been
made the spirit and the letter of the civil
service law have been violated. He also
refers to the decision of the controller OF
the treasury as to the right of payment of
those appointed outside the civil service
commission, and in response to the Secre-
tarys statement that from the controllers
decision the Secretary has no appeal, and
the reference to the remark of President
Grant that 1.-The only way to change the de-
cision Of tie controller of the treasury is
to change the controller Mr. McAneny
says:
Whatever may be the limit of the power
OF initiative the Secretary possesses in this
respect, | may remind you that the remedy
OF President Grant was that which L i'm
piedly suggested. / said that it had not
appeared that any steps had been taken to
displace the officer who thus stands in the
way of correct administration, or to set
aside his disastrous ruling
Mr.. McAneny then refers again to the
rule permitting the reinstatement of per-
sons removed for delinquency or miscon-
duct without regard to the length of time
elaosing since their separation from the
service, which he had discussed in his for
mer communication, and says:
Il pointed out that the way had been
opened for the practice Of wholesale politl-
cal reprisals at each change of administra-
uon, involving the multiplication Of remov-
ais IN order to permit reinstatementS.
allowed, however for some limitation on
this rule imposed, it was supposed by the
nature of its terms. The Treasury Depart
ment has virtually abolished all Limitation
by adopting the following construction, to
be found in Treasury Decisions, under
date of June DC No. 21313:
referring to this clause of rule 0, ii is
evident that if persons dismissed from the
service on false charges are reinstatabe
without regard to the one-year time limit,
those persons who have been summarily
dismissed without the formaIity of charges
preferred, without delinquency or miscon-
quot. and for no Just cause, are equally en-
Titled to reinstatement at any time and it
is held that the rule applies to the latter
class.
The effect of the rule, as thus con-
strued, will be to permit the reinstatement
without examination, of any person dis
missed from the service at any past time
with or without the statement of cause
and for reasons altogether within the dis
erection of department officers
The letter concludes as follows:
1t has been said that the changes in the
removal order of July, 1897, to which
effectiveness of that rule. 1t now appears
that the reverse is true. 1t was pointed
out to the President some time ago that in
certain departments it had been claimed
mat this rule-requiring the statement of
reasons for removal, and an opportunity
for eNplanation-did not relate to removals
made from particular positions, but only to
those taking the employe altogether out of
the service. 1t was shown that under this
construction, in order to evade that rule a
department officer might reduce the en-
ploye to salary that he could not afford
to accept, and thus force him out by indi-
rectfon. In the Philadelphia post office
alone fifty such reductions were made af-
fect1ng, among Others a superintendent who
the year before had received medal for
tne highest degree of efficiency in his work
1t was suggested that the only way in
which to remedy this practice would be to
apply to reductions the same reasonable
rule that governed removais-a construc-
tlon already adopted under the treasury
rules. 1t was supposed by some that the
language contained in the revised rule was
intended to accomplish this result.
month ago, however, superintendent of
station in the New York post office who
mad secured his position by successive pro-
motions, was notified, while at his work
that he would be reduced that same day
to low-grade clerkship, involving a change
In salary from $1,000 to $1,000. The pro-
cedure prescribed for cases of removal was
not followed. I he case was taken TO the
Post Office Department, and a formal de-
reductions, even of this extreme sort are
not to be considered as removals. The only
effect of this change, therefore, is to repeal
those parts of the treasury rules referred
TO, and to recognize this means of evasion
as a regular proceeding. Coupled with the
provision for indiscriminate renstatements,
In Whatever vacancies may exist or be Gre
ated, the effect of this ruling will readily
be appreciated.
Il would not detract unnecessarily from
the value of anything the President has
done But | repeat that il is of public i'm
portance that the scope and effect of this
order, as well as the Significance of condi-
tons existing prior to Its appearance,
should be clearly appreciated. 1t has been
the purpose of this letter merely to cover
the questions of fact to which you have re-
ferred; of these, I think, none have been
omitted L have not, of course, believed il
necessary to rehearse the various features
OF the Presidents order, that have already
been reviewed, and that must still form the
subject of more or less public discussion"