Evening star., 1902-08-09
Mr.. Roots Reasons for Dis
charging Miss Taylor.
PAPER FILED TODAY
WOMAN LATELY A CLERK IN THE
DEPARTMENT.
The Suit an outgrowth Of Petitioners
Published Letter Criticising
Governments Policy.

fer the District of Columbia, and Assist
ant United States Attorney II. H. Classic,
today filed answer to the petition Of Miss
Rebecca J. Taylor fer writ of mandamus.
Miss Taylor has asked the Supreme Court
Of the District of Columbia to compel Sec
retary Root, by writ of mandamas. to re-
instate her as a clerk in the War Depart
ment. She was recently discharged for
writing an article published in rewspa-
per, criticising the administrations Philip
pine policy 1t is contended by Miss Tay
lor that her dismissal was in violation Of
the civil service law.
The answer is signed John c. Scofield,
chief clerk, War Department. for the Sec
retary of War" 1t is set forth that Miss
Taylor was January "a, 1900, legally ap-
pointed a temporary clerk in the office of
the adjutant general of the army, and re-
manned a clerk in that Office until June Z,
1902, when. she was lawfully removed and
discharged.
That BY virtue of the act of April 25, 1902.
she was transferred to the classified civil
service Of the United States, and thereby
became subject to all acts, rules and regu-
lations in force and governing such classi-
fled civil service.
1t is admitted to be true that November
2, 1896 the President of the United States
promulgated certain rules, but such rules
are, in law, administrative directions or in
structions from the President to those hold
ing office by virtue of his appointment, indi-
eating the manner in which they shall ex-
ercise their duties as his agents in the re-
moval of subordinates, and have no other
full effect or virtue whatsoever.
Restricts No Constitutional Rights.
The answer further says that such orders,
directions or instructions were not intend
ed, and, II so intended, could not have the
effect to restrict in any wise the eonstitu-
the head Of department of the government
to appoint and remove such inferior officers
In the department as are provided for by
the Congress of the United States; nor do
such orders, directions or Instructions have
force, effect or virtue to vest in any en-
ploye any right cognZa Bile in a court of law
in the enforcement of or obedience to such
Instructions or to make the head of any
executive department answerable to the
judicial power for any supposed violation,
disregard, evasion or disobedience of the
same; but for all violation, disregard, eva
sion or disobedence thereof the head Of
each executive department is answerable
only to the President, in whom the execu-
tive power is vested by the Constitution.
1t is remarked in the answer that the
Secretary, becoming coznizant of a certain
newspaper article or letter published May
II, 1902. and purporting to be signed by
Miss Taylor he, as Secretary of War, by
reason of the derogatOry and diSreSpectful
statements therein appearing of and con-
cerning the President of the United States
In relation to the conduct of as comma nder-
in-chef of the army of the United States
in the suppression of the iusurrection in the
Philippine Islands, as we'll as Of and con-
corning the officers and men acting under
his command and direction, which state
ment purported to be supported by evil
dence of an official character within the
knowledge of the author thereof did on
May 2f 1902 cause the chief clerk Of his
department to address to the adjHant gem
eral of the United States army in whose
office Miss Taylor was then employed as a
clerk, letter in which was inclosed and
referred to copy Of the letter published
in the newspaper and directing that Miss
Taylor be called upon for statement as to
whether she was the author of the article
and, If so, that she should be given three
days in which to make any explanation or
statement In writing In regard to the same
Cites Civil Service Rule.
In pursuance of the direction. 1t is set
forth, the chief clerk of the adJutant GER
erals office did, May 20, 1902, refer to Miss
Taylor the letter inclosing and referring to
the newspaper article with an indorse-
ment requesting her to make the statement
called for and at the same time setting
forth section of civil service rule II,
which letter, inclosed newspaper clipping
and Endorsement requesting an answer
thereto, constituted, upon their face a
charge that Miss Taylor had, while an en-
ploye in the office of the adjutant general
of the army, written and published the said
letter or article under the heading The
Flag Shall Stay Put" which article was
then and there set out in words and figures
and showed upon its fact derogatory and
disrespectful statements of and concerning
the President of the United States and the
officers acting under his orders, which
statements purported to be supported and
verified by evidence of an official chara acter
within the knowledge of the author thereof.
Within three days after the receipt by
MISS Iaylor of the letter, newspaper ar
ticle and Endorsement, the answer further
states and In response thereto Miss Taylor
returned the same. together with an In
dorsement thereon of her own wherein she
admitted that she was the author OF the
newspaper article referred to- and made No
defense to the charge of having written
and published the same; nor did she offer
or submit any justification, excuse retrac.
ton or mitigation of the statements CON
cerning the President by her in the article
made and published. But on the contrarv
ignoring the plain and obvious nature of
the statements made in the newspaper ar
ti ticie thus drawn to her natice and atten-
tion she proceeded to take exception to
the character of the notice addressed to her
with the apparent object of involving the
secretary OF war In controversy with her
In respect thereof, and stating that if the
proper authorities will submit notice in
writing in compliance with section & civil
service rule No. H. she would be pleased
to consider the privilege of answering the
same in writing" as permitted bv sectinn
g. civil service rule No. IL
Alleged INSTRUMENTATION.
All Of which answer except the exnrass
admission of the authorship of the pub-
iished article was and is. in the opinion of
the respondent as Secretary of War. can
tlous, insubordtnate and disrespectfu,
preJudicial to order and the efficiency of
the service.
The Secretary further says that the
statement of the petitioner was, Jne O.
i'W2, submitted to the Secretary of War
by the adjutnat general with an indorse-
ment June q. 1902, he. as Secretary of war.
atter due consideration of the article and
after consideration of the answer submit
| ted by the petitioner. decided that the
article was, pretudicial to order and the
ef1ciency of the service of the War De-
partmen.t and such an offense as rendered
| the further connection Of Miss Taylor with
the service incompatible with the best In
terests of the same: whereupon the Sec
n