The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-12-27
THE OPINION OF PROCTOR
Maclay's Discharge Not Against Civil Service Rules
Neither Politics Nor Secret Charges Figure in the Case of the
 Malignner of the Hero
 of Santiago.

Washington, Dec. 26.-The Civil Ser vice Commission today notified Edgar s. Maclay, the historian, recently em- his removal from his position at that point was not in violation of the civil service act. This notification is con tained in a letter written to Mir. Maclay by President Proctor of the Commission, and is in reply to an inquiry from him. MT. Maclays letter is as follows:
 ''ofice of the General Storekeeper.
 Navy Yard. New York; Dec. 24. ''Hon. John R. Proctor President Civil
 Service Commissions:
 "Sir-On December g I received the following communication from the Sec retary of the Navy:
 'Sir--I am directed by the President to ask Edgar s. Maclay, special laborer, general storekeeper's office, Navy Yard, New York, to send in his resignation.
 (Signed.) :. John D. Long, Secretary This communication was addressed to the commandant of this navy yard, and was duly forwarded to me. I desire to get an authoritative opinion from the Civil Service Commission on the following points:
 ''First-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.
 "Second-Has the President authority or power to cause the dismissal of any civil service employe without preferring charges in writing, and giving such ern- ploye an opportunity in which to make a defense.
 "Very respectfully yours,
 Edgar s. Maclay." To this commission replied as follows'
 December 26, 1901 ''Mr. Edgar s. Maclay. Office of the
 General Storekeeper, Navy Yard New
 York:
 Dear Sir-The commission is in re- ceipt of your letter of December 24.
 "In response, you are informed that it is contrary to the practice of the Com mission to undertake to answer hypo- thetical questions. Your separation from the service, according to the facts in your case as they appear in the public press, was made upon the order of the Secretary of the Navy, in whom the power of re- movaI rests. The demand for your resig- nation 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 in view of the we'll known facts in your case.
 ''The object of the rule~requiring notice and a hearing was to prevent political removals or removals upon secret chages. No issue of this kind is involved in your case. Very respectfully,
 John R. Proctor, President" President Proctor of the Civil Service Commission also gave out this statement bearing upon the case:
 ''The rule of the President, July 27, 1s97 requiring that a person should only be removed for just cause and upon reasons in writing, and after an opportunity for making answer, was for the purpose of preventing political or religious removals, or 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 re- moval are to be a matter of record but it does not impair in the slightest degree, the prompt exercise of the power of dis cipline. In discussing this rule in the fourteenth report of the Commission. Dec. 3l, 1897 1t is stated that If the reasons are sufficient the officer will not hesitate to make the removal. It cannot be as- serted that Maclay's removal was for political or religious reasons or upon se- cret charges, as the reasons for the de- mantments action are well known both to Maclay and the public"