New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-12-13
DEFENDS ITS COURSE.
The CiuI Service Board Replies to
Criticism

The Municipal Civil Service Commission has
sent letter to the Mayor in reply 10 the strict
ures of the executive committee of the Civil
Service Reform Association II refers TO these
structures as certain charges Of inefrciency.
accompanied by somewhat caustic comments"
The letter deals first with the cost Of tha
work II says in part:
This charge is that the cost in the federal ser.
vice during the year ended June 30 1902 for
each person examined was 50 -; the cost for
each person examined in New-Yorb and Brook
lyn in 1897, five years ago. was 81 a. and that
during the present year the cost has been IS IS.
As we are furnished with no data upon which
these figures are based, IL is not possible to
discuss them with exactness-
II states that the comparison is not proper, for
the reason that in the federal service. exaralna-
tfons are conducted by local boards without eest
to the commission; that payrolls examined
and certified by the Treasury Department; that
there is no examination or registration Of Ia
borers. and that there is no expense to the COM
mission for postage
The reply continues:
One of the savings which the commission has
made 10 the city is a substantial reduction OF
the rent which the city was paying for its Offices
(aItheugh not paid out of its appropriations
amounting to s.. 900 a year. Following cousoii-
dation the expenses of the commission were az
once greatly Increased, but from 1898 TO 1902
the decrease in the cost per capita has been
steady. In 1898, the first year of the sonsoli-
dated city. the cost per capita was S17 50: in
1850, So Is; in 1900, 50 o.; in 1901. ST %; in
1902. So SO.
The character of the work is then taken IN.
OF the charge that the inef1ciency Of the Civil
Service Commission has seriously embarrassed
the other departments of the city's public SER
vice, and obstructed the conduct Of public busi-
pess" it is said that the commission "has held
every important examination. where il was
physically possible, on one day, hiring fer the
purpose the available building having the Iarg-
est seating capacity, such as the Grand Central
Palace
1t is further stated that cit Is only hasty
and i'll considered Judgment which viii charge
the Civil Service Commission with inefhcieney
in the furnishing Of eligible lists under these
circumstances, when, as the fact is, there has
been no commission, so far as we are aware.
since the Inauguration OF the merit system in
the city of New-York, which has furnished lists
of comparable character in so brief time as
we have done,
The letter continues:
The association states that the commission
appealed to the State legislature for an eXten-
sion of time to mark its examination papers.
The commission made no appeal TO the State
legislature for an extension Of time % mark
it's examination papers. There is no limit OF
time fixed in which such marking can be mads-
The association charges that the commission
has invited nood OF Appeals from Sne markings
of It's examiners" and that between February
10 and November 7 the commission had enter
tanned more than 1,25o appeals and granted
more than 100.
AS matter Of fact the nuulher of appeals
from the ratings of the examiners during this
period was 57I, and the number which were
granted was LOT.
The association onnits TO indicate that any et
the appeals concerning which il complains were
improperly granted.
Constructive werk is then discussed The let
ter closes with reply 20 Justice z B. Hins-
dale In his statement 70 the Civil Service Re
form Association, in part, as follows:
The justice urges as cause OF complaint ina,
veterans are certified TO him for appointment.
we think that we cannot justly be blamed for
keeping our oath 10 support the eonstltullon
OF the State, which provides that they snaH ne
preferred for appointment TO once.