The Topeka state journal., 1901-12-26
President Has a Right to Turn
Him Out.
CHARGES NOT NEEDED.
What Maclay Did is Well Known
to All.
His Discharge Is Matter of
Discipline.
He Shows Up For Work and is
Again Dismissed.

Washington, Dec. 2s.-The civil SER
vice commission today notified Edgar s.
Maclay, the historian recently employed
in the Brooklyn navy yard that his re-
moval from his position at that point
was not in violation of the civil service
act. This notification is contained in a
letter written to Mr.. Maclay by Presi-
dent Proctor of the commission and is
in reply to an inquiry from him.
Mr.. Maclay's letter is as follows:
Office of the General Storekeeper. Navy
Yard, New York, Dec. "a. 1901.
Hon. John r. Proctor, President Civil
Service Commission.
Sir:-On December %, yesterday, re-
ceived the following communicat ton
from the secretary of the navy:
"Sir:-I am directed by the president
to ask Edward S. Maclay, special la
borer, general storekeeper's office navy
yard, New York. to send in his resigna-
ton. (Signed)
JOHN D. LONG,
This communication was addressed to
the commandant of this navy yard and
was duly forwarded to me. desire to
get an authoritative opinion from the
civil service commission on the follow
ing points:
ted States any authority under the law
governing civil service to demand the
resignation of a civil service employe
in the classified list?
SecOnd-HaS the president the auth
orfty OF power to cause the dismissal of
any civil service employe without pre-
ferring charges in writing and giving
said employe an opportunity in which
to make defense?
Very respectfully yours,
EDGAR S. MACLAY.
THE REPLY.
To this the commission replied as fol-
lows:
December 26, 1901.
Mr.. Edgar S. Maclay.
Office of the General Storekeeper Navy
Yard, New York. N. Y.
Sir:-The commission is in receipt of
your letter of December "a. 1901, asking
its opinion upon the following ques-
tions:
HAS the president of the United
States any authority under the laws
governing civil service to demand the
resignation of a civil service employe in
the classified list?
Has the president the authority
power to cause the dismissal of any
civil service employe without prefer
ring charges in writing and giving said
employe an opportunity in which to
make a defense?'
In response, you are informed that
it is contrary to the practice of the
commission to undertake to answer
Hypothetical questions. Your Separa-
ton from the service, according to the
facts in your case, as they appeared
in the public press, was made upon the
order of the secretary of the navy in
whom the power of removal rests. The
demand for your resignation followed
by your removal, upon the direction of
the president through the secretary of
the navy was not in violation of the
civil service act and rules, in view of
the well known facts in your case.
The object of the rule requiring notice
removals, or removals upon secret
charges No issue of this kind is in
volved in your case.
Very respectfully,
JOHN r. PROCTOR, President.
President Proctor of the civil service
commission also gave out the following
statement bearing upon the case:
The commission has always held, as
shown in it's thirteenth report January
1, 1897, 1.-THE civil service act did not in
tend that incompetent persons should
be retained in office. The authority of
removal and its exercise for proper rea-
sons are necessary for the discipline
and the efficiency of the public service
The power of rem oval is not affected
by the law the rules, further than
that they provide that removals shall
not be made for political or religious
reasons
The rule of the president July 27, 1897
requiring that person should only be
removed for just cause and upon rea-
sons in writing and after an opportuni-
ty for making answer was for the pur-
pose of preventing political or religious
removals removals upon secret
charges but was in no way intended
to curtail the power of removal for just
cause. Under this rule the reasons for
a removal are to be a matter of record
but it does not impair in the slightest
degree the prompt exercise of the power
of discipline. In discussing this rule in
the 14th report of the commission Dec.
81 1897. it is stated that IF the reasons
are sufficient the officer will not hesi-
tate to make the removal" 1t can not
be asserted that removal was for politi-
cal or religious reasons, or upon secret
charges as the reasons for the depart
ment's action are well known, both to
Maclay and to the public.
WON'T BE DISMISSED.
New York, Dec 26.-Edward Stanton
Mac1ay who refused to resign as special
laborer in the office of the general store
keeper of the navy yard was summarily
discharged today Maclay went to the
navy yard as usual today and prepared
to reissue his duties. Pay Director Put
nam went to Maclay's desk, read him
the telegram of dismissal received from
Washington yesterday and told him
that he was dismissed Maclay left the
yard Immediately. He said he would
return at the usual time tomorrow. pre-
pared to go to work.