The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-07-27
GIVES
POSTOFFICE FILTH
FURTHER STIRRING
Punctures Former Postmaster
General Smiths Defense by
Quotations From the CiviISer-
vice Laws and the Records.


vice Laws and the Records.
WASHINGTON, D. c.. July 90
Chairman Proctor of the civil service
commission. has made reply to the re-
cent letter of former Postmaster Cen
eral Smith concerning the latter's at
tack on his report on the investigation
of the Washington postoffice. The reply
to Mr. Smiths formal letter is as fol-
lows:
MY attention has been called to the
letter, dated July IA, of Hon. Charles
Emory Smith, as it appeared in the
public press of July 20, commenting on
the recent letter of the commission IN
regard to the administration of the
public service in the Washington post
office. If this letter were based upon
the facts disclosed by the records, or
could be read in connection with the
commissions letter and the report or
the investigation upon which 1T was
based. there would be no necessity for
remark or reply. Under the circunl-
stances, there are certain parts OF Mr..
| Smiths letter which seem to demand
attention. The relevancy of a portion
Of the commissions letter has been
denied by Mr. Smith, although the es-
| sential facts it contained have not been
| controverted. Concerning the question
of relevancy, it may be stated that the
| present postmaster general requested
! the commission to Investigate and re-
port whether the civil service law and
| rules had been and were being complied
with in the Washington poStoffice; and
| that, as the investigation disclosed the
| fact that the postoffice occupied, to
| considerable extent. the relation OF
bureau to the department, in the matter
of appointments and other changes,
some of the department affairs nee
essarily came within it's scope. This
was especially true with regard to per-
| sonh appointed to outside offices for the
purpose of classification and afterwafd
| transferred to the washington post
office and later to the department, as
| well as in the cases of persons appoint
| ed as laborers, but irregularly assigned.
| to classified duty in the Washington
| postofice who were afterwards ap-s5
pointed in the rural fee delivery service
| just before it's classification.
Evasion of the Points.
"Mr. Smith states that the one-third
| of Mr.. Proctor's letter which immedl-
ately concerns the washington post
| office may properly be left to the an
swer of the postmaster. whom 1t direct
! ly concerns. -
'nThe facts as disclosed by the inves-s
tigation show that the department
and not the postmaster, was RESPONSE
BILE for most of the violations ana
evasiens of the civil service law and.
rules of the Washington postoff1ce 1t
is, therefore, an evasion and not a
REPUTATION of the facts recited In this
part of the letter to say that it may
properly be left to the answer of the
NOS eff "a
master is already recorded in the re-
port of the investigation in statements
signed by him. When questioned as to
the responsibility for the infractions of
the civil service rules in the Washing
ton postoffice, he said:
Gas most of the appointments of the
people who have in any degree violated
the civil service regulations have BEEN
designated or made by the DEPART
ment, it seems to me that the response
bility for violation of the regulations
should be located with the parties df-
recting the appointments Again he
said People that had proved ineffil
cient in the department had been I'M
| loaded upon the postoffice on several
| occasions. as is instanced by the case
| of -'
THE postmaster also stated that in
| his opinion his office could have been
| run with the same degree of efficiency,
y,
| department had left the personnel OF
| the force to his own selection.
Hides Behind Rules.
I'm commenting upon that part of the
! commissions letter which deals with
| the lassifcation-t transfer method
! adopted by the department to eVade
| the rules, he avoids, by a safe margin,
! the facts disclosed by the investiga-
| ton He saws:
"It is the statute, not the depart
| ment, that puts the clerks of new free
delivery offices into the classified ser
| vice. Their classification is a matter
of law. Their transfer is matter of
rule
| This statement begs the question. 1t
| is a civil service rule promulgated by
! the president which provides for the
classification of clerks at free delivery
] offices, and the commission CONSTITUTES
| this rule as recognizing only bona fide
employees as acquiring classification
/ status. 1t was the department, and
| not the statute or the rules, that placed
| the names of eighteen residents of
i washington or it's vicinity on the rolls
! of postofffces in various parts of the
| United States, without reference to the
| needs of those offices, and In most cases
without their ever serving in those
| offices, for the sole purpose of getting
| IH0In llIO C1dSSliltu pOSlltOllS III t1S
Washington postofice or the depart
ment. The department, in making
these appointments, without doubt, re-
| verted to the practice which the civil
/ service act was designed to prevent,
and to this extent nullified the law.
MIR. Smith says in reference to the
same subject: In 1897, before be-
came postmaster general, some per-
sons were appointed to offices about
! to be classified, and after classification
transferred to other parts of the ser
| vice. The practice thus introduced con-
| tinued in limited degree.
"As a matter of record, there We're
only four such appointments made dur
ing the latter part of 1897 and the early
! part of 1898, prior to the appointment
of Mr.. Smith, and 124 under his admin
| istration.
"No Rule Forbids."
"Mr. Smith says: No rule, even at
| this time, forbids transfer at any time
/ in the exactly parallel case where small
unclassified offices are classified by be-
| ing consolidated with larger classified
/ Offices
This assertion ignores the fact that
section of civil service, rule II for
bids the classification of an employee
in an Office which is to be consolidated
with a classified Office, unless he has
| actually served therein during the sixty
/ days preceding the consolidation or