Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-06-13

L
said outside offices. Eighteen Of the twenty
employees were either in unclassihed posi-
lions in the government service in Wash
ington or resided in Washington or it's VI
cinity at the time of their nominal ap-
pointment. Only six ever entered upon
duty in outside offices. Eight of them have
been continuously in the government serv-
ice In Washington from dates preceding
their nominal appointments to outside Of
fees to the present time the Formally of
appointment and transfer having caused
no break in their service. Ten of the en-
ployes took the oath Of their nominal APP
pointments in Washington. seven took it In
the outside offices and three have no recol-
lection of taking 1t at all. Four drew pay
from the outside offices, but did no work
there. and one drew pay from the post Of
fee at Salisbury, Md, for seven months.
serving there four or five weeks and the
remainder of the time in the Washington
office. Most. If not all. Of these cases in
volved the cooperation of the postmasters
at the several outside offices with the de-
partment in evasion of the law, and the
Washington postmaster was similarly iu-
volved by the subsequent transfers OF the
persons so appointed. The commission Is
sued certificates for these transfers under
protest and endeavored to stop the prac-
tice, as stated elsewhere, insisting upon
actual service in the outside office prior to
transfer when 1t found that persons who
had not so served were being transferred.
From March, 1897, to May, 1903, there
were flfty-six transfers to the Washington
post office, while during the same period
there were only thirty-four transfers to the
post offices in Buffalo. Cincinnati Cleve-
land, New Orleans and Pfttsburg. each of
which has greater population than Wash
ington.
Willing to "Stand for It."
Closely akin to the cases just considered
are those of at least four employees appoint
ed in small offices shortly before their con-
solidation with the Washington office, who
were appointed in order that they might be
covered by the classification rather than
in the interests of the service, as is shown
by their immediate transfer to other sta
tons. According to Postmaster Merritt, the
first assistant postmaster general declared
that one of the persons, who was classified
in the post office at Langdon by It's con-
solidation with the Washington Office on
May 1. 1903 was appointed partly for the
purpose of classification and that he would
stand for it.
The Case of O. n. Smith.
Mr.. Oliver H. Smith. now on the rolls of
the Office under the designation of finance
clerk, is engaged mainly in the supervision
of the laboring force. and has never been
regularly and actually assigned to act as
auditor. such assignment being one of the
conditions necessary to the exception of the
position of finance clerk from the require
ment of examination. 1t appears that Mr.
Smith should be actually assigned to the
duties of auditor or be separated from the
service
Concerning the second subject of the in
Observation-Disclosures the civil service rules
had been observed in the employment and
assignment OF laborers-the report shows
that of the fifty-nne laborers constituting
the present laborer force of the Washing
ton post office forty-two are performing in
the MAN. work properly pertaining to the
position of unclassified laborer. though
nnrlyr n14 e.
that ten are performing the duties of
watchmen. which should be performed by
classifed employees, and that seven are en-
gagged mainly upon duties of a classified
nature. Fifty-six laborerS were appointed
and removed during the administration of
the present postmaster-a number but
slightly smaller than the present total force
OF laborers. Or this number thirty-fve
were appointed by Erection Of the depart
ment. thirteen by the postmaster at the
solicitation of members of Congress and
other prominent men, and eight by the
postmaster on his own initiative.
The Postmaster Protected.
Twenty nine of these employees were as
signed to classified work, with the knowl-
edge and consent of the Post Office De-
partment. 1t appears from the testimony
of the postmaster that he protested against
this practice; that in the cases of several
of these appontees there was no necessity
for their services; that persons appointed
under the designation of laborer and as
signed to classified work were inferior to
those selected from the eligible registers of
the commission, and that equal efficiency
would have been secured, with much
greater economy, had the department left
the personnel of the force to his own Sc
lection. Mr.. Proctor continues:
The Present Administration.
The third question which the investiga-
ton was to Observation-Disclosures there had
been a general observance of the civil
service law and rules in the administration
of the Washington post office during the
incumbency of the present postmaster
hardly admits of a direct affirmative or
negative answer. The principal instances
of disregard of the civil service rules are
those already considered