New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-11-29

remained mistaken. In the case of the ,chiers
Gooderson and Burns, warned not 10 Try 1oL
promotion, intimidation was clearly SHOWN, al
other motive being lacking. IN the case OF Chlet
Terpeny, constantly transferred from one pat
talon TO another for five months, while his
juniors were permanently stationed; in those OF
the officers and men whose names were re-
peatedly passed over, though at or near the
head of their respective eligible lists. while men
lower down and with less distinguished RECORDS
were promoted, appears retr1outon Iof Iai ii
to propiti9te the recommending power ny JON
Ing the organization and personal following
which he trying to create in the Depart
ment.
TREATMENT OF WAR VETERANS
In the case of the Civil War veteran, Lindsay
Williamson. is apparent determination, TO pre-
vent his well earned promotion so tenacious ana
reckless of consequences as 10 leau the "
PENDANT not only to ignore the laws OF the otate
and of the Civil Service, which make IL mtnda-
tory that preference shall be given 10 veterans
but further to take such steps to enforce the
veterans retirement as called for the cohdenna-
ton of the Supreme Court This veteran stood
at the head of the list July "a, 1000. thirty
eight men below him were promoted on July -;
On July 81 he was sent before the medical board
and examined and retired from service IN one
day, one of the orders signed in blank by the
then Commissioner twho had been absent Tor
considerable period being used by the defendant
for that purpose.
In dealing with this matter the weight of the
position and the enormous power or the de-
PENDANT. as chief of department, must be briefly
considered, and his duties to the members OF
the uniformed force arising therefrom, 1t is not
too much to say that their daily lives and those
of their families their comfort or misery, Ihelr
promotion their failure to rise-in word,
their present and their future-are in his hands;
By him they are assigned to duty, severe ana
dangerous. or easy and safe. BY him they are
placed in service near their homes or miles
away BY him kept in one company OF trans
ferred constantly from place to place. BY him
recommended for promotion or passed over ana
stricken from the eligible lists. On his recon-
rncndation they are sent before the medical
board for retirement. or kept on full pay long
after they have ceased to be efficient. To gain
sgansH mi
means misfortune. Under the charge cited
number of illustrations are specified showing
various forms of alleged i'll treatment These
are Of so far reaching character as 10 strike
broadly at the enthusiasm. energy and efnclency
of the force. From men who know that merit
Will surely be rewarded. and that nothing else Is
necessary TO advancement, may be gained the
maximum of service and devotion. Let them
know that they must seek the favor Of an lndi-
viduai by becoming a personal adherent and
member OF his party in the department, and
their thoughts and efforts are turned into an un-
worthy channel.
GUILTY OF PERSECUTION.
It may be properly urged that a discretionary
power is vested i'm the chief of department to
recommend such selections from the eligible lists
will best raise and strengthen the personnel
of the department, but 1t is manifest that the
of this great power can only be justified by
an honest and single minded devotion to this
worthy end If but one two or even several
exceptions were made a proper purpose could
be assumed: but where a large number involv-
ing all grades of rank, have been thus dtscrim
mated against. where all had good records. and
some highly meritorious ones, where personal
threats used in some cases to induce conf
plianCe with demands outside of the duty Of
fireman. 1t is impossible to resist the conclusion
that the power of the defendant was being used
for personal ends and not for the good of the
service. Such conclusions sustain the charge of
which the defendant is hereby found guilty.
RELATIONS BETWEEN OFFICIALS.
The seventh charge concerns the personal re-
lations between the defendant and the present
preceding
Commissioner has merely official relation. In
causing them to be brought to a hearing he has
performed simply the duty enjoined by his oath
of office. to preserve the discipline and wellbe-
ing of the uniformed force, and to take cog
niZance of the acts of any member of the force
detrimental thereto. In this connection the rank
of any accused person is immaterial except in
so far as that the higher rank imposes the high
er obligations Of preserving the discipline OF
the department and strict observation of its
rules and regulations. The standing OF fourth
grade fireman is as precious to him. and should
be to the Commissioner, that of a chief of the
higher grades. On account OF the nature of the
present charge. the Commissioner approaches it
with regret. The relations between the Com
missioner and the chief of department should
be those Of mutual trust. respect and reliance.
nheFe these fail the proper management OF the
department is impossible.
The first allegation is that OF false and dis
respectful statement made by the defendant to
the representative of a daily newspaper and
published in full by il. The managing editor
refused TO give the name Of the informant or
that OF the representative. and upon this speci-
THE CHARGE OF INSTRUMENTATION.
The second allegation is that OF nsubordina-
ton. The conclusion given below is derived
solely from the testimony of the defendant as
the Commissioner did not become "A witness. It
appears that on July 81 the defendant received
at his own request, a leave of absence for two
months, from August = 10 October / and that
the necessary orders detailing his successor aud
otnef ofnclais TO new duties We're directed by the
Commissioner. That the defendant returned ON
or about August Ia, and talked with the Com
missioner That the latter told him that he did
not wish him to return from his vacation to
which the defendant assented and again left
town That on August IS he again returned,
and, during the absence of the Commissioner bv
reason Of illness, assumed command of the de-
partment, sending letter 10 the Commits
sioners office after taking this action, informing
the Commissioners that he had done So That on
August -, in another interview the Commits
sloner told the defendant that he objected 10
this action and the resembling Of the Commits
sloners order and he then ordered the defend
ant to restore the previous condition which the
defendant refused TO do
The defence presented was The provisior NJ
Rule 52l, TO wit:
Amy officer member who may. before the
expiration OF leave OF absence, return 10 quar-
ters and report himself for duty to the com
manding officer, shall be deemed to have aban-
doned the unexpired portion of such leave OF
absence and be regarded as present for duty"
The defence also relies on the ground appar-
entity sustained by a justice of the Supreme
Court. that the defendant was within his legal
right in abandoning the unexpired portion Of his
leave OF absence and returning to duty.
ACTED AGAINST ORDERS.
These defences do not touch the real question
At issue An act may be strictly speaking legal
and yet insubordinate In the present INSTANCE
the fact was that the chiefs action in resumine
command Of the uniformed force was in direct
opposition 10 the clearly expressed wishes and
directions of the Commissioner. The CHIEF Of
department knew, therefore, that his act was
contrary to orders and yet he persisted in II
Such conduct is plainly and Enthusiastically in
subordinate 80
Nor can the construction which the defence
civ N Rule .a.