The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-06-11
MISS TAYL0R'S
Is to Be Taken Up by the Democrats
10 Earnest.
THE LETTERS GIVEN OUT
Show that the Civil Service Law Has
Been Violated.
NO CHARGES HAVE BEEN FILED
To Which the Clerk Could Make an
Answer In Writing.
ACKNOWLEDGED SHE WROTE ARTICLE
Which Criticised the Administrator
Conduct OF Affairs in the Philippines
ard Fire Followed at Once.
To Which the Clerk Could Make an
Answer In Writing.
ACKNOWLEDGED SHE WROTE ARTICLE
Especial to The POST

Washington, June Io.--The democrats |
in congress are determined to probe TO
the bottom the matter of the dismissal of
Miss Rebecca Taylor, the war department
clerk who incurred the displeasure OF the
president and the secretary OF war by
writing to a local paper communication
criticising the administration OF affairs
in the Philippines. A resolution similar
to that introduced in the house yesterday
Ivy Shalenberger of Nebraska, calling on
the secretary for the cause and reasons
of Miss Taylor's dismissal, was introduced
in the upper house by Senator Carmsck
today. and will be vigorously pushed
Miss Taylor today gave out the CORE
spondcnee exchanged between herself and
Secretary Root in regard TO the natter.
The chief clerk of the adjutant gen
erals office, in which Miss Taylor was
employed, was directed by the chief clerk
Of the war department TO ask her TO state
whether or not she was the author OF the
published letter. Miss Tsylor's attention
was invited to the section of the civil
service regulations providing that persons
whose removal is sought shall have op-
portunity TO file statements at their cases.
Miss Taylor replied that she was the au-
thor of the letter. She protested, how
ever. that no charges had been filed IN
reply to which she could make a state
ment, but that she had only been asked
If she was the author. The only answer
she received TO this was the order that she
be discharged,
| Miss Taylor's position in the matter
! is indicated in letter she wrote TO Secre-
| tary Root protesting against her removal
| as illegal. In this she says: : have the
honor TO acknowledge the receipt OF your
| communication OF June 7. I9o2, purporung
TO be an order of discharge from the elassi-
fed service of the war department. This
order does not comply with the provisions
| of the civil service rule ,, section 3, as
follows: No removal shall be made from
the competitive classified service except
for lust cause and for reasons given III
writing, and the person sought to be re-
moved shall have notice and be furnished
cory OF such reasons, and be allowed a
reasonable time for personally answering
the same in writing | was not furnished
the reasons given in writing explaining
the lust cause for alleged removal. Ia
this | was entitled, and therefore pro-
test against this alleged order as illegal.
Il hereby declare that am, and at al
times since the receipt of said ALLEGED
order OF discharge have been, willing ane
have held myself in readiness to perform
the duties OF my office, and that vii
report for duty whenever notified"
So lar the correspondence ends here
Secretary Root has not replied to Mis-
Taylor's letter of protest, and it is safe
that he will not continue the CORE
spondence.