Evening star., 1909-05-27

oe strictly in accordance with civil serv-
ice principles az / understand those prin-
ciples and facts in the case. Otherwise
1 would not favor IT,"
gineer Commissioner Judson: and at the
conclusion Of the conference Commissioner
West wrote Approved" on it and signed
his name. Noted" Commissioner Mac
farland wrote.
Mr. Macfarland's Attitude.
Regarding his attitude toward the mo-
ton. Commissioner Macfarland said:
81 could not vote for Commissioner
Judson's motion because, first. l wanted
the selection made from the best Wash
ington architects without requiring the
appointee to give up private practice. I
understand that the men in similar posi-
tions in Boston. Chicago and st. Louis
were selected in that way"
states: First. that in the judgment of
the committee. IL consistent with the reg
ulations of the District and law that
governs the work a man could be select
ed who would not be required to devote
his entire time to the office a wider field
OF choice would be obtained by the con-
sideration OF men already practicing their
profession in the city, NO suggestion as to
the particular person being made
Then, IL l was restricted to the two
mittee, Mr.. Ashford and Mr.. Won Nerta.
I preferred the latter, IL for no other
reason. because of his larger experience.
and because he was the one recommended
by all the committee.
II regret that our action could not be
unanimous. as 1t Is In ninety-nine cases
out Of hundred, but at rare intervals
questions must be decided by a majority
vote"
Advisory Committees Report.
The report Of the advisory committee
selecting Snowden Ashford for municipal
architect as first choice and George o.
Won Nerta as second choice was pre-
sented to the Commissioners during the
conference. It follows:
THE committee. composed of Mr.. Mar
shall, Capt. Oyster. Capt. Kelly and Mr.
Taylor, appointed by you to advise and
recommend to you a man to fill the po-
sitiOn Of municipal architect. recently
authorized by law, have the honor to re-
port as follows:
First. That in the Judgment Of the
committee II, consistent with the regula-
tfons Of the District and the law that gov
erns the work, a man could be selected
who would not be required to devote his
entire time to the ONCE. a wider feld of
choice would be obtained by the consider
alton Of men already practicing their
profession In the city. No suggestion as
to the particular person being made.
Two Men Recommended.
Second. II the choice Of the man shall
be confined by either law. regulations or
requirements to men who will devote
their entire time to the Office and the
work therein, after careful consideration
peared before US, the committee has de-
peared before US, the committee have de-
cided to recommend to you the names of
two men and the vote on these men are
given to you as guide as to the feelings
Of the committee In regard to them.
"Mr. Snowden Ashford received three
out Of the four votes as first choice: Mr..
Frederick A. Kendall received one vote as
first choice; Mr.. Oscar Van Nerta re-
ceived three votes. which was revised by
the change Of the dissenting vote to Mr..
Van Nerta. making his vote for second
choice unanimous.
1T having become evident in the dis
cussions of your committee that it might
be deemed inadvisable by the Engineer
Commissioner to nominate Mr.. Ashford.
the committee has indicated a second
choice