Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1917-09-19


" psyid Q shss. 2e3a oakford street. wharton
~ nS3ssfe ns3assf isgPerintendent 49,
10 William strltzel sio2 wharton street.
20 Frank surEe 1sss ssuPPsrintendent perrin l, - :,
m city Property thrickisyerj. "
'O AUert str. N'eeTseke 1877 South Twenty fourth
The letter, winch calls for instant action
not post-election investigation, SAYS in part;
could go or and give you a list of
names and addresses Of almost ali CITY
employees in the Thirty-sxth Ward who are
.sklhg an active part politically and openly
canvassing and soliciting votes ard ringing
dooroells. ! venture to say. and tc be fair
U those VINO may not be active, that the
police department in the Seventeenth Dis
trict are an elegant set Of political cam
paigh material and the policemen will
quietly tell you that they don't want to do
1t. but II is orders
Trusting that you will show the public
your sincerity by preventing these Office
holders from participating in politics
Yours respectfully,
Committee Representing Taxpayers Of
the Thirty-sixth Ward"
The charges that ward. committeeman
were drawing city salaries were taken
to the offices Of the Committee Of Seventy.
Edward l.. d. Roach secretary Of the com
mittee. was asked II the committee would
investigate them
NO, we haven't the facilities to inves-
tigate," said Mr.. Roach. But we will
prosecute If the evidence is brought to us
IN the form of dispositions. In 1911, dur
ing the Blankenburg administration, we
prosecuted 1900 cases of oficeholders in
politics, taking 1900 dispositions"
III II were shown to you that the Shern
law is being violated by ward committee
men, what course would you take?" Mr..
Roach YVES asked.
we would take It up with the Mayor"
renllp0 ~ 81 Of Il
ready are receiving aff1davits that the law
now is being violated in minor cases not so
important as those of ward committeeman
holding city positions. We will present
these afiidavts to the Mayor giving him the
opportunity to show his sincerity in warm
ing against city ofiiceholders engaging in
politics"
In case the Mayor does not act what
redress have the citizens?" he was asked
The law places responsibility for its en-
forcement upon the Mayor and his depart
ment heads. How can citizens force the
Mayor to comply with the provisions Of the
law. should he fail to do so?"
by taking the case into court However,
1t is difficult thing to obtain a favorable
decision in a matter of that kind. The
courts are likely TO leave IL with the Mayor
to decide whether or not the employe was
violating the law
"The whole question is up to the people.
If we are furnished with dispositions stat
ing that the law is being violated we stand
ready to take the cases up"
"Can the people really do anything" Mr..
Roach was asked. Are conditions any bet
ter now than they were before the reform
fight when the Shern act was passed."
Eyes, indeed" he said although office
holders are returning to political activity, IL
cannot be said that they are anxious to do
so. Proof that conditions are better now
is shown by the majorities in the wards at
election time"
That the Shern law has been effective,
| though subject to various interpretations by
| the courts, is shown by records in the Law
| Association Library. where six citations OF
| court cases involving the law were found
The first record of invocation of the law
| came in 1912, six years after its passage
according to the records This was a pro-
| ceeding by mandamus at the relation of the
| District Attorney against Acting Director
| of Wharves, Docks and Ferries Hasskarl
| and an employe of the department, William
X. John Com. ex rel Rotan vs. Hasskarl
| ct al. 81 d. r. 119 1912 The court or
| dered the dismissal of Johnson
In the same year a petition for peremp
| tory mandamus to compel Director of Pub.
| lie Works Cooke to reinstate a discharged
! employe was denied duffy VS. Cooke. 81
| d. r. 613 1912; affirmed in 239 Pa. 427)
| 1t was held that hte second section of the
! Shern law forbidding political activity OF
|
| twentieth section of the civil service act
forbidding discharge for cause, religious
| or political"
In 1918 (Chsm V. Blankenburg, % D. r
| 46 1913)) }, upon petition by a dis
| charged employe, motion to quash proceed
| ings was granted, 1t being held that the
Shern law was constitutional, but tha
| the question is collateral to, and should
not be determined in mandamus proceed
| ings for the reinstatement of civil serv'
| ice employe.
The Superior Court of Pennsylvania IL
| 1915 reversed the judgment Of the lower
| court in that the twentieth section of the
| civil service act repeals the second sec
tlon Of the Shern act. This decision was
| made in the case of a carpenter suine
for wages Crush " Philadelphia, 62 p
S. C. so (19l5)).
Last year 1t was held that the Mayor
| has no authority to dismiss policemen fol
political activity without a trial having
been held, as provided for in the Built
bill. A demurrer to a petition for man
|