The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-01-10
PUTS END-TO ROW
Commission Takes Summary
Action on Civil Service Fuss.
There Will Be No Investigation
of Il. b. Garrett.

With a dizziness that indicated pre-
vious thought Mayor J. E. House and
other members of the city commission
today put an end to Commissioner w.
L. Porter's plan for an investigation of
the civil service commission in con-
nection with the charges made by Mrs.
H. n. Rhodes, chairman, against Tom
Garrett, secretary The commission
politely washed its hands of the whole
matter.
The discussion in the city commits
sion developed over the reading of
petition from Mr.. Garrett asking that
the commission order an investigation.
He asked that he be given a chance to
exonerate himself or tnat Mrs. Rhodes
have chance to prove her charges
But there will be no investigation.
Before there was any discussion Mayor
House announced his position.
There is nothing in the charter per-
hitting an investigation of any
charges made against members of the
civil service commission" he said.
Furthermore, there is nothing to base
an investigation upon except the re-
marks of a woman. (The mayor said
it much worse than this). To call an
investigation of all the talking that
has been done, would, to my mind,
simply make US ridiculous"
That opened up the ball. Commits
siOner Porter admitted that there was
nothing before the commission to in
vestigate; that Mrs. Rhodes had filed
no charges
Commissioner w G. Tandy ventured
the belief that Mrs. Rhodes was right
in her opinion ''as she sees it,
But if anyone has been hurt by all
this talk" he said, 1T appears that
relief could be found in the district
court"
Commissioner w. H WATSON de-
clared he could see no excuse for an
investigation; that there was nothing
before the commission 70 investigate.
Commissioner Porter took another
tack at the matter. He moved that
the city clerk be instructed to request
Mrs. Rhodes to file formal charges
with the commission if she had
anything to complain of. But there
was no second to the motion. There
was a moments hesitation before the
order to place the Garrett petition on
file.
Mrs. Rhodes Statement.
That closed the discussion of the
Garrett petition but following the
commission meeting Mrs. Rhodes who
was not present made the following
statement:
Every candidate taking the recent
civil service examination was told in
the beginning that in order to be more
fair the names of contestants would
not be known until the papers were
graded In spite of that fact,
after the papers were graded and
the names were known Mr.. Gar
rett took two of the papers home
and changed the grades on the
two. Furthermore. the civil service
law says two members are required for
a quorum to do business and these
grades were changed by one member
only. At every examination in the
past in which / have participated, the
commission has positively refused to
grVa n 4
told candidates there was no recourse
after the first grading. Mr.. Garrett
was one of the strongest advocates of
this rule yet he took the responsibility
of regarding these two papers himself
If the civil service examinations are
to be conducted in such a manner the
civil service law is a farce"
Mrs. Rhodes stated today that had
she been lawyer or been advised by
a lawyer she would have filed formal
charges against Garrett but that be-
fore the question was raised she had
not thought to do so.