The daily morning journal and courier., 1904-04-04
REFORM AND THE CHARTER
4 COMPLICATED SITUATION RE
 VEALED.

ell, Jr, to the New Haven Civil Ser vice Reform Association.
 Charles G. Morris. Esq,
 sec'y, Civil Service Reform Associa- ton, New Haven. Conn.
 Dear sir:-I have your favor of March 29th and in reply would say that I did not intend to say in my note of March 24th that our Board would at once comply with the terms of the Charter in regard to the choosing of the seere- tary of the Civil Service Board, be- cause it is not the opinion of the writer, nor of some members of the Board, that the Charter requires the Secretary of the Civil Service Board to take an ex- animation What I did say was this, that the Corporation Counsel had given us an opinion which said that the Sec retary of the Civil Service Board should be under Civil Service rules; so our Board, wishing to comply with the ideas of the legal adviser of the City, decided to reconsider our vote in choosing the Secretary and hold an examination for the position and not take the contunla- cious attitude which heretofore has at times characterized the Civil Service Board, which, after having asked for opinions from the Corporation Counsel, would not obey them just because the views expressed did not meet with the ideas of some of the members.
 Section 122 of the Charter fixes the term of office of the Secretary of the Civil Service Board as two years, and I am Of the opinion that where a sec tfon is clear in itself, as this one is, the other sections of the Charter cannot be used to defeat it's apparent meaning; neither do I understand that the Cor -poration Counsel held in his opinion that after the Secretary of the Civil Service Board has taken an examina- tion and apparently been put under Civil Service rules, he can be kept in office beyond the two years for which he is chosen.
 In my letter to you of March 24th I tried to confne myself to the point at issue, which is whether the Secretary of the Civil Service Board comes under Civil Service rules, his term of service being designated as two years, when the other sections of the Charter per- taining to Civil Service say that after one has passed an examination and re- ceived an appointment he shall not be discharged except for sufficient cause duly shown which shall not be political. This is the point which understand is now before us and I am of the opinion that after we put our Secretary under of 11a ifof in17 n the term for which he was appointed he may be retired from office for lack of reappointment This, it is true, would not be discharge but it's result would be the same, and it would deny to one the benefit of section 119 to which he is entitled after taking an examination and receiving an appointment.
 Perhaps the termination of an office for certain period is as likely to occur as loss of office from resignation or death. cannot say s'as certainly as'', neither can I say, where a section of the Charter apparently excludes a Clerk from Civil Service rules and de- nies to him the right of office during good behavior, that it does not enlarge the powers of the Board in regard to the appointing of it's Clerk. For ex- ample, I am not at all certain but what the Board of Aldermen would have the power to reconsider its action in ap- pointing it's Clerk and appoint another one leaving the discharged Clerk his right, if he has any to contest the sum- mary closing of his contract in the Court for it's breach. Section 16S might apply to such action, but it's ap- ! l,f4So IL But not so difficult to apply as it would be to the motives of the Aldermen in appointing their Clerk.
 If the Civil Service Board, after the term for which it's Secretary was chosen expires does not reappoint him, that re- quiring no action, it does not in any way violate section 163, whether the Secretary has taken an examination and thereby been promised the protec- tion of section 119 or not. It is true that in choosing a Secretary for two years, whether apparently under Civi Service rules or not, if the members dc so for any of the reasons which are for bidden by section 163, the members vot- ing in violation of this section would be amenable to it's provisions.
 It is unfortunate, but nevertheless il is true, and we might just as well look at human nature as it is and not as we would like it to be, that men and wo- men have been known to get an enemy out of office or, at least, persistently try, without any regard to who gets the place. But cannot say that this mo- tive of getting even" is'confned to pol iticians for it has been known to break out in churches and universities.
 I cannot agree that it is more difficult for one charged with violation of sec ton 163 to disprove a motive than it is for the ones accusing to prove a motive for if an action is brought under this section it is in it's nature criminal and the burden of proof would be upon tho accusers and it would be obviously more difficult for them to prove a motive than it would for one to show that ht had no motive.
 I see nothing disproportionate in my ideas in regard to removal and appoint nent, unless you mean my opinion tha, when you put a man under Civil Ser vice and lead him to believe he may keep his place during good behavior you should live up to it and not leave him to rest upon some visionary theory that no one will try to get him out.