Evening star., 1915-01-26
BurIeson and Praeger Answer
Suit of George Dean, Civil
War Veteran.
DENY THE JURISDICTION
OF D. C. SUPREME COURT
Insist There Is No Warrant Of Law
for Retention of Inefficient
Employees.

Postmaster General Burleson and Otto
Praeger, postmaster of Washington, have
filed answer to the mandamus proceed
ing instituted by George Dean. veteran.
discharged from the city post office. to
compel his reinstatement under his we"
of the law exempting honorably dis
charged soldiers and sailors from being
reduced or discharged from the civil serv-
ice.
The officials question the jurisdiction OIL
the Supreme Court of the District OF
Columbia to entertain the application, on
the ground that the retention or discnarse
of employees involves the exercise OF ouds-
ment and discretion of their official duties,
and is not subject to review by the court.
Reason for Separation.
The respondents aver that Mr.. Dean
was separated from the service for the
reason that "his efficiency in any use
full capacity in connection with said
service. was then, and for some months
prior thereto had been. impaired by
reason OF old age and infirmtties. In
the exercise of their official discretion
they declare. they determined that the
his removal, and they could no longer,
in justice to their respective obliga-
tions to the government of the United
States and in the proper admlnlstra-
tion of their respective offices, retain
the plaintiff in the service.
The officials point out that Congress.
by act of February 4, 1899, prohibited
the establishment OF civil pension roll
or an honorable service roll or the ex-
emption of any Of the officers clerks
and persons in the public service from
existing laws respecting employment
in such service. Again in March. 1909.
Congress prohibited. it is stated. the
establishment of a civil pension roll or
an honorable service roll or the exemp-
ton of any of the officers. clerks and
persons in the postal service from the
existing laws respecting employment
in such service"
No System Of Rating.
II the provision of the act Of August
%. 1872. relied on by the plaintiff. ap-
plies to the employees Of the Washing
ton city post office and the officials
deny that it does. then, they claim, 1t
can only repeal the above sections
when and to the extent that the estab-
lishment Of a system Of efficiency rat
ing by the civil service commission and
the operation thereof required the re-
tention of honorably discharged SOL
diers and sailors whose ratings under
the system should be good.
Postmaster General Burleson and City
Postmaster Praeger insist that no sys-
tenn Of efficiency rating has ever been
instituted by the civil service commits
sion and accordingly no standard rat
ing has been established. There ex-
lists, therefore, they contend, no way
in which an official rating of good or
otherwise can be determined.
The court is told that at the time Mr.
Dean was removed there existed no sys-
tenn of efficiency rating. as is contem-
plated in the statute invoked by the
plaintiff. in the Post Office Department
or in the postal service Of the United
States. The only means of ascertaining
and declaring efficiency or inefficiency OF
Mr.. Dean during his employment was by
the lawful and usual discretion reposed
in the Postmaster General and the city
postmaster, it is asserted.
Not Departmental Employe.
The claim is also made that Mr.. Dean
was never an employe Of the Post ONCE
ments of the government, but was an
employe of the postal service and as such
was not comprehended under the pro-
viso Of section Of the act invoked
and is not entitled to the benefits granted
in iull force and operation at the time
of his removal from the service.
United States Attorney Laskey and
Assistant United States Attorney Arth
represent the officials.