The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-10-20
REFORM LEAGUE REPLIES
Again Asks the Civil Service Com
mission to Open Its Records.
The BOnapnrte Committee Renews
the Controversy Over the Right to
Examine Them-Surprisc Express
ed mt the Letter of September Is
The Full Text of the Answer.

Cary, and Frederick L. Siddons, has ad-
dressed letter to the United States Civil
Service Commission in reply to the com
missions letter of September rs, concern
ing the leagues right of access TO its rec
ords. The letter says:
Your letter of September rs, in reply
to ours of the 18th, with reference TO the
right of access to the commissions rec
ords, informs us that:
:" The commission is and always has
been in full harmony and accord with what
is said in the committees letter
and knows OF no action on its part which
expressly or by Implication could be re-
garded as contrary to these views or OF
any change of policy whatever in this re-
spect.'
the controversy, the special committee OF
the reform league says:
This information is very gratifying. but
we must add that it is no less surprising
The policy OF the commission before the
Presidents order OF May 90, 1899, was de-
scribed by Messrs. Lyman, Thompson. and
Roosevelt as follows:
The books and records of the commits
sion and of all the local boards are open
to any responsible person. No fraud can
be committed without leaving a record by
which it can be found out.
In the minute of July IA, 1900, to which
you refer, the commission declared its pur-
nose to deny thereafter access to any OF its
records to all persons not members of the
commissions force and added:
".All orders or minutes heretofore made
by the commission in conflict with the pro-
visions of this order are hereby revoked.
This latter part OF the minute you DO
not quote. Until enlightened by your let
ter We certainly regarded this action as
indicating a definite abandonment OF the
policy of Messrs. Lyman, Thompson, and
Roosevelt. and no less certainly we were
not alone in that opinion, for on June 10,
1899. when, for the first time in its his
tory, the commission denied to the Ma
tional Civil Service Reform League access
to its files, the president of the commits
sion said in dissenting minute:
The vote of the commission to
keep it's records secret is an absolute re-
versal, for the first time in the history of
the commission, of policy which has
| been universally commended as wise.
| 1T has been the constant public beast
| of the commission that its records are
| subject to inspection and thst the inspec-
ton is invited / can conceive CT nothing
| which is calculated to do more damage 10
| the work Of the commission and its power
for good than the refusal to permit access
| to files OF cases in which acticn has bee:
, completed
Since, however, you say that 'misap-
| prehension' exists as to the consistency
| of the present with the past practice OF
| the commission in this respect we ,e-
| specially suggest that you can readily
| remove this 'misapprehension.' Your pre-
decessors. Messrs. Lyman, Thompson, end
| Roosevelt, told the public: The books
and records of the commission
| are open to any responsible persrn'
| You have only to tell the public that this
| is still true You further tell us that:
Notwithstanding the staten -nts
| made by the secretary of your leagle.
| the commissions files and records show
| that substantially all of the information
| proper to be furnished to the public.
| which was requested in his letter Ct July
| %, had already been furnished to him
| This passage in your letter has caused
the delay in its acknowledgment by lead
ing the secretary of the league to request
| that we further examine his somewhat
voluminous correspondence with the COM
| mission before replying. While we do not
| understand that the question as to what
| had or had not been secured by the league
| at the time of previous examinations OF
| the records has any pertinence to the
question really at issue, we feel that the
| facts in this regard may be briefly stated:
Having obtained limited access to the files
of the commission in November, 1899, af-
ter tedious delay of five months, the
league ascertained and tabulated facts
which showed. with certain omissions, the
nracticaI working of the Pre- sident's or
der of Nav % 1889. from its date to jan
nary 1 1900. 1t was subsequently, decid-
cd tn extend this investigation until the
r.erIte NJ n wears anplication of the order
I'D no sbown and at the same time
toth IN co,nIate and verify the work al
road, done and tn take I'm certain ad-
a;t;or.I srb,octe Refore the new work
..'a a,.;.haG ho,roror tho commission,s
was ni'ies 81 ~. ", no., aso,,oa II n,as
.iinu.e u -, =, .ho soora..rv.s ,ottar -,
,n,s a on ieu ~ .;.o.i,, ton coass ~ r.o
july 20 ashihs VII III .S,,.,.
oras cieaiiS eo,eieu y! nc ~ -, .
concession VI .NoNeiioet' io''. ne pa
ticular omissions 10 De covered III COM
pleting tables were not specineo ior the
reason that thls' very haturahy, was not
understood to be necessary. Inc letter
was met with repetition OF the denial
of access contained IN the minute OF July
IA. Aside from the question OF pertinen-
CIV we do not see why the commission
should cite the incident of July % as
reason for its action taken nine days pre-
viously. Nor can we agree with the COM
mission II 1t holds either that 'substan-
TALLY all the information to be gained
by twelve months experience is afforded
by The first seven, or that such informa-
ton can be proper to be furnished to the
public when it relates to the year 1899
and improper when 1t relates to the year
1900.
hnt he