Evening star., 1903-07-27

for the rural free delivery service for the
year ended June 30. 1902. was double the
amount for the preceding year.
He does not explain why. although the
appropriation was again more than dou-
bled for the year ended June 30. 1903, it was
necessary to appoint but seventeen persons
in Washington from November q. 1901.
to May. 1903. 1t seems a fair inference that
the appointments prior to classification SO
far exceeded the needs of the service that
few appointments were necessary even
when the appropriation was more than dou-
bled for the year ended June 80. 1903.
He adds:
You have been Postmaster General a
year and half and you have not dropped
one OF them! If the service was packed,
now faithless you have been to your duty!
This needless critic didn't see that this
blow was aimed at you well as me-"
Mr Smith apparently failed to recognize
the fact that the rapid growth of the rural
free delivery service under your administra-
ton would speedily relieve this condition.
without resource to removals.
He cites the fact that forty-one Of a GER
tain group of f1fty-six employees mentioned
IN the commissions letter were women as
indicating that the influences leading to
these appointments were not political. The
commission has not claimed that the infiu-
ences which prompted the numerous ap-
po1ntments under consideration were all po-
lftfcal: nor will anything be found in the
letter or report which necessitates an anal
ylsfs on the basis of sex 1t Is a fact
however, that nearly all Of the persons
men as well women, appointed or en-
pioYed In evasion or contravention of the
civil service law and rules who were exam
1ned during the investigation were ap-
pointed through the influence Of senators
ana representatives or high officials of the
Post Off1ce Department. Their names and
the names of the persons who urged their
appointments appear in the report of the
Investigation
Mr. Smith states that the department was
engaged for some weeks with the civil
service commission in framing a system and
pooy OF rules for the appointment of rural
letter carriers and that In this work Mr.
Procter proved so unreasonable, so dog
matte. and so impracticable, that he had
to be overruled by his own associates and
eliminated from all part in the construction
of the framework.
This statement will be amusing as both
Mr.. Foulke and Mr. Garfield were aware
OF the fact that 1t was at my request that
Commissioner Foulke took up the question
of the examination of rural letter carriers
with the Post Office Department. There was
never the slightest difference Of opinion be-
tween the three commissioners with re-
spect to the advisa bility of making the ex-
animation for entrance to these positions
as simple and practical as possible
Mr. Smiths letter closes with the state
ment that Mr.. Procter's innuendos justify
a personal statement which will be more
becoming In a less formal paper"
An editorial in the Philadelphia Press of
July 70, 1903, presumably contains this per-
sonal statement. The article is given over
almost entirely to abuse and vituperation.
One or two exceptions will be noted in a
supplementary statement I shall give to
the public press with copy of this letter.
AS the matters under consdera ton had
their origin prior to your induction into Of
flee, this letter cannot properly be regard
ed as referring in any way to your admins
tration of the department.
Very respectfully
JOHN r. PROCTER
Mr. PrOCter'S g reDlv TO the editorial in 20
Press answers a statement that he sought
exceptions to the civil service rules on be-
half of his own relatives and friends He
pronounceS this charge untrue and says he
never asked exceptions for relatives or
friends and so far he knows has no rela-
tfves in the classified service