The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-06-17

| were to be very slightly amended by data from the certain public documents
 to bring the statistics up to date since they had been prepared some time ago.
 MT. Deming stated that at one time he had been on the committee having in
 charge the examinations for positions on the police department, and that he had prepared his statistics from his intimate knowledge with the depart- ment. He stated that the passing mark on the examination was 70 in the scale of 100. All who passed this examina- ton were eligible to appointment as su- pernumerary officers on the police de- partment Of those who were appoint ed supernumeraries, some were later appointed regular patrolmen by the police commissioners. His statement
 was not that the police department had violated the letter of the law, but that they had neglected and violated the spirit of the civil service system, by lnot appointing the most deserving of the eligibles. One would naturally ex- pect that the examination mark of those appointed on the department
 would be considered higher than the
 average examination mark of those
 who were eligible to appointment, that 1 is, that those would receive appoint
 ments who passed with the high credit His enquiries had been to ascertain
 how far this principle had been follow | ed. The witness would divide his sta- tistics into two parts: First, in refer ence to the appointment of patrolmen, which he considered very important; and, second, in reference to the ap- pointment of police sergeants, not in his estimation as important as the first. first.
 The witness started to quote some statistics in regard to appointments lreaching back to 1898 and coming down to date. Attorney Gum objected to the evidence being submitted in regard to lany appointments made in 1898 on the ground that such were under a differ ent administration, and could no prop | erly be considered at the present hear ling. The testimony the witness pro- posed to present dated back to 1901 MT. Denning stated that his only object was to show the average marks in the examinations for the last few years, and unless he was allowed to submit his statement in his own way he would withdraw from the hearing. MT. Dem I ing started to take his seat and was ap- 1 plauded by the audience. The objection was overruled by Judge Harrison
 MT. Deming's statistics showed that mir oif ecit examinations the average mark was S3.2. From these thirty-two appoint
 ments were made, but instead of the
 marks being considerably higher than the average. the average mark of ap- Dointee was only SAP. This was very low. as one would naturally expect a mark Of at least ST, or perhaps of 90. Under the present city administration 1 tWenty-seven were examined with an leverage passing mark of S3.9. The av- craze passing mark of the appointees from the number was a little better than before, being S57. This, however,
 was not high enough in his judgment.
 The statistics showed that out of twen- ty-five examined for sergeants October l6 1899, with an average mark of 89.4, five appointments were made, the aver
 age mark being 89. The marks of the two sergeants appointed under the pres- ent administration were 90 and 9S. Sev- teral officers had been appointed with marks as low as 70.5, but witness laid
 no strength on individual appointments. His claim was that the examination marks had not been regarded in making @s- k,-z- f.-- (. that fourteen months ago he had inves- tigated the police department. In his investigation he found three officials of the department who admitted that the old senate system of personal and rela- tive appointment still prevailed. When asked by Judge Harrison what he meant by this, witness replied: "When a vacancy occurs one member of the
 commission presents the name of man of his own political party, and unless serious objections are raised, the man is appointed. This privilege of making the appointment goes to a member of
 a different political party
 On cross examination witness stated that he had no personal knowledge of any individual appointee or the circum-
 stances of his appointment. Attorney Gum asked if the examination did not cover physical, mental and moral con- ditions of applicant. Witness said it
 did, and the passing mark was the av- craze of all three.
 MT. Gum said: "Supposing the appli- cant passed with high mental mark, but with low physical mark, the aver- age of the two coming above the aver age mark, should the man be appointed in spite of his poor physical examifa- tion? Or is it always possible to tell from the examination mark who should be appointed?' Witness stated that un- der certain circumstances a man with a low mark should receive the appoint ment in preference to man with high mark. This ended MT. Deming's evidence.
 Letter From Professor Richards. Professor c. B. Richards, who had been invited to appear, was not present, but the following letter from him was read by Judge Harrison:
 June Il, 1904.
 MT. Lynde Harrison, Chairman:
 Dear sir: In reply to the letter dated June 8, from the special committee ap- pointed by the mayor to investigate the laffairs of the police department, I have to say that you were misinformed if you were told that have made any formal charges against the department or