Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-05-29
The Local POstnasfe rship.

The attempt to excuse the appointment of
a New Yorker Washington's postmaster
by throwing the blame upon this communi-
~ and the numerous local candidates is
thoroughly and exasperatingly unjust. No
confusion was created by the local COM
petition for the office. Washington sug-
gested several good men, any one of whom
would have been acceptable 10 the COM
munity, and every one of whom, learning
that he could not himself secure the ap-
pointment, would have indorsed favored
| local competitor over any outsider There
has been little or no bitterness and recfpro-
cal throat cutting in the local rivalry over
the postmas tership. The fact that nearly
I everybody in Washington has Endorsed
some one local candidate without disparag-
ing any of the others involves declaration
by all Washington against outside APP
pOintment. as well as an indication of in
dividual preference among the local COM
petitOrs. The community in presenting sew
erai names Of able, popular and unobjec-
uonable Nashingtonians to the President
and indicating that it would formally unite
upon and approve any one of them who
found favor In the Presidents eyes facili-
tated instead of embarrassing the executive
task of selection. if a local man had been
desired.
The excuse for the appointment that the
present postmaster Is the only Washing
tonian who has ever held the office is also
f1imsy, because grossly inaccurate. The
Star printed a few months ago the record
on this point of the postmasters of Wash
ington. which disclosed that with excep-
lions so few as to be marked the men who
have been chosen for this post have been
residents of the District at the time of
their appointment. The issue does not turn
upon the nativity of a man, but upon the
degree of his Identification with the COM
munity prior to his selection for office.
Two Observation-Disclosures and Jones'
held the office between them for nearly
forty-seven years. 1t was not until 1880
that the President went deliberately and
unnecessarily outside to secure a pOStmas-
ter. In 1888 a man thoroughly identified
with the capital secured the place. and he
was followed by one who had, by virtue of
long official residence, become in every
sential a Washingtonian. He in turn was
succeeded by man of local birth and I'M
interrupted residence.
The argument that the pledge of local
appointment should not be carried out in
Washington's case because the government
is the largest patron of the office is rdicu-
| louS. The government pays nothing for the
| handling of its matter. The work attached
| to this handling is not even considered in
| fixing the postmaster's salary. 1t is al
| legged that 10 per cent of the mail matter
| in the local office is governmental If this
| be true. then the remaining 30 per cent
representing local Washington which buys
| its stamps. supplies the funds not only to
! do It's own postal business but that of the
non-paying national government 1t is
we'll known that the receipts Of the local
| office make It self-suppOrtng, though the
! government, which furnishes two-thrds of
| the mail matter to be handled. supplies no
| part of these receipts. Would it not be i'm
| pudent for this dead-head patron to urge
| that because without compensation the local
| post-office was burdened with an immense
| amount of work on its account it should be
/ permitted to furnish the postmaster to the
| exclusion of the stamp-buying local com
munity which pays the postmaster and
maintains the pOSt-office?
Assent by thoughtless Washingtonians to
| such excuses for an outside appointment as
those recited is far more to be blamed for
such appointments than is a multiplicity of
| local candidates.