INVESTIGATIONS OF ALLEGED

VIOLATIONS OF THE

CIVIL-SERVICE LAW AND RULES.

POLITICAL ASSESSMENTS, ACTIVITY, AND DISCRIMINATION.

Many inquiries were made of the commission during the year as to the permissibility of competitive employees becoming active in the work of various organizations in Washington and elsewhere favoring or opposing the woman-suffrage movement. The rulings of the commission are summarized in the following extract from a minute adopted April 7, 1914:

Under section 1 of Rule I as explained and defined in the commission's politicalactivity circular, a person in the competitive classified service may join and be a member of a political association or organization and may be an adherent in his individual capacity of a political cause. The restrictions are that he must take no active part in the organization, management, or affairs of such political association, or in the advancement of such political cause; that he must not express publicly his opinions on any political subject, and that his actions or utterances in respect to such political association or political cause shall not be such as to constitute a practice of proselyting or enlisting converts to such political association or political cause, nor such as to constitute a display or demonstration of partisanship on any pending political issue which might cause public scandal or might offend persons who have relations with him in his official capacity.

In consonance with previous rulings as to participation in a similar parade and in the presentation of a petition to Congress relating to woman suffrage, the commission holds that the mere individual participation of a competitive employee in a suffrage parade would not of itself ordinarily constitute a violation of the rule, provided such participation does not become a practice on the part of any such employee. Activity in organizing such a parade or demonstration is not permissible, in analogy with the prohibition of activity in preparing for, organizing, or conducting a political meeting or rally.

In reaching the conclusion that the restrictions do not extend to mere individual participation or marching in such a parade, the commission is guided by the fact that under the regulations competitive employees are permitted to be mere members of political clubs or associations, to be present at political caucuses and mass conventions or primary meetings as mere voters, and to sign political petitions of various sorts but not to prepare or circulate them.

The commission holds that those favoring or opposing the cause of woman suffrage are subject to the same rules and restrictions regarding political activity as are applicable to the adherents or opponents of other political causes.

BRIEF OF INVESTIGATIONS.

ALABAMA.

Hartford, case of Jesse M. Riley, rural carrier.

Charge: Writing and publishing a letter calculated to injure a candidate in a political campaign.

Date of charge: September 24, 1913.

Result: A joint investigation was made by representatives of the Post Office Department and the commission, and it was found that, following a charge by the candidate in question that a conspiracy had been formed to make political use of a carriers' association of which Mr. Riley was president, this carrier had written a letter to this candidate containing criticisms of the latter which were outside the scope of the controversy between them and had given a copy of the letter to the press. The investigators recommended that he be reprimanded and suspended 15 days without pay, in which recommendation the commission concurred. The department closed the case with a reprimand and warning.

ARKANSAS.

Marianna, case of Jacob Shaul, postmaster (second class), and John R. Gay, rural carrier.

Charge: Pernicious political activity.
Date of charge: June 13, 1912.

Result: The Post Office Department forwarded to the commission correspondence concerning the political activity of the carrier, with request for recommendation as to the punishment to be imposed. It being alleged in the correspond

ence that the carrier had been coerced into his activities by the postmaster, an investigation was ordered by the commission. It was found that the carrier, with full knowledge of the prohibition of the rules as to political activity, had served as member of the credentials committee of a political county convention; that he nominated the postmaster for temporary chairman of that convention; and that he himself was nominated for permanent chairman of the county convention and acted in that capacity. He was also nominated for delegate to a congressional district convention, but declined to serve on account of his civil-service status. It appeared that all of the carrier's political activities were by direction of the postmaster. The commission requested the removal of both, but the department permitted the postmaster to serve until the expiration of his term. The carrier was removed.

Texarkana, cases of Anthony L. Ghio and William Watts, post-office clerks. Charge: Undue activity in the prosecution of their candidacy for appointment as postmaster.

Date of charge: April 28, 1913.

Result: Upon investigation by a representative of the commission it was found that an unofficial primary was held on the Texas side of the Arkansas-Texas State line for the purpose of determining the popular choice for postmaster, and at a meeting at which it was decided to hold this primary the employees named were present, announced their candidacy, and took part in the deliberations. Subsequently all the candidates met with the city executive committee and perfected arrangements for the primary, contributing their share of the expense thereof. The employees thereafter solicited votes in this primary from various employees of commercial houses, as a rule, however, merely mentioning the fact that they were candidates and handing out cards. The candidacy of both was advertised in a daily newspaper. It was charged that they importuned employees of the post office over whom they expected to exercise authority if successful, to vote for and support them, but this charge was not proved. It was found, however, that Mr. Watts had mentioned his candidacy to those of the carriers who were voters in Texas, though not insisting that they were under any obligations to vote for him. It was further found that both employees solicited the support of two of the rural carriers and asked them to use their influence with the patrons of their routes. Their action in publicly soliciting votes and in endeavoring to have carriers solicit support from patrons of their routes exceeded the limitations applicable to employees who are candidates for such positions, of which limitations both employees were aware. The commission requested that they be reprimanded and warned, which was done.

FLORIDA.

Detroit, case of M. L. Williams, fourth-class postmaster.

Charge: Candidacy for elective office and service as election officer.
Date of charge: February 2, 1914.

Result: Mr. Williams was advised that it had been reported to the commission that he was a candidate in primary and regular elections for the office of justice of the peace, and that he had served as a deputy registration officer; that his service as justice of the peace was contrary to provisions of the constitution of Florida, which debarred persons holding office under the United States from State positions; and that his service as deputy registration officer was also in violation of the constitutional provisions mentioned and of the postal laws and regulations and the civil-service rules. He promptly resigned the local offices held, in view of which the commission took no further action in the case.

GEORGIA.

Atlanta, case of U. S. Seal, assistant custodian.

Charge: Rendition of political service in connection with a political convention. Date of charge: February 20, 1912.

Result: It was found upon investigation that Mr. Seal prepared the hall selected for the convention, seeing to its heating and lighting, and that he attended the convention, and while there performed services in connection with the business of the convention for his superior officer, the custodian and collector of internal revenue. At the request of the commission, the department directed that he be reprimanded and warned against future violation of the rule.

65826°-15-10

Savannah, cases of John C. Simmons, William K. Callen, and Thomas Walker, employees in the custodian service.

Charge: Activity in a political convention.

Date of charge: February 10, 1912.

Result: It was found upon investigation that Simmons, a fireman-laborer, served about 8 years as county chairman of a political party, presided at a county convention held in Savannah February 6, 1912, and as temporary chairman at a district convention held a few days later, and that, notwithstanding a warning received on the day of that convention that his political activity was in violation of section 1 of Rule I, he attended on the following day a meeting of the State central committee of his party, of which committee he had been a member for about 10 years. It was further found that Callen attended the county convention mentioned as a delegate and was also elected temporary secretary thereof (though he performed no service as secretary, owing to the summary adjournment of the convention because of a factional fight; and that Walker, while not formally elected a delegate, was informed by others that he might be called upon to act as such if the necessity occurred, and went to the convention prepared to act, leaving when trouble commenced. The commission requested that Simmons be removed from the service; that Callen, a firemanlaborer, be suspended two months without pay; and that Walker, an unclassified laborer, be reprimanded and warned. Action was taken as requested except in the case of Callen, who was reprimanded and warned. The department reported that the political work done by them was in the interest and probably by direction and under the supervision of their then superior officer.

ILLINOIS.

Canton, case of Leslie C. Richards, railway mail clerk.

Charge: Preferring false charges of political nature against fellow employees.
Date of charge: October 14, 1913.

Result: Charges were preferred by Mr. Richards under an assumed name, to the effect that certain fellow employees in the Railway Mail Service had solicited political contributions, in violation of statute. Upon investigation by a representative of the commission these charges were found to be false, and Mr. Richards was discovered to be their author. The department removed him at the request of the commission, which also debarred him from examinations.

Dix, case of Jeff Carpenter, rural carrier.

Charge: Political activity.

Date of charge: August 22, 1913.

Result: Upon joint investigation by representatives of the department and the commission it was found that the carrier took an unduly active part in a township caucus, making nominations and an address therein; that until a short time prior to the investigation he was a county committeeman; that he had electioneered and been active at the polls on election day, and that he had been regarded as a political leader. The department removed him at the request of the commission.

Goldengate, case of Chester A. Knodell, fourth-class postmaster.
Charge: Permitting a political convention in the post office.
Date of charge: November 4, 1913.

Result: The department requested the postmaster's resignation for the above cause, whereupon the postmaster protested to the commission, alleging that the convention in question was held before he took formal charge of the post office. Upon inquiry it was found that, whatever may have been the fact as to the date upon which he formally took over the office of postmaster, he was the person in actual and responsible charge of the office at the time the convention was held. He was therefore informed that the commission found nothing in the case to warrant it in taking any action.

Shumway, case of Clarence F. Bock, rural carrier.

Charge: Use of objectionable language in criticism of voters affiliated with a political party and of a candidate of that party.

Date of charge: October 14, 1913.

Result: A joint investigation was made by representatives of the department and the commission, and it was found that this carrier had been drinking en election day and that on election night, while in company with others in a

jovial mood, had made various denunciatory remarks with reference to one of the political parties and its candidates. There was some difference of opinion as to the nature of these remarks, but it appeared that few people took them seriously. The investigators recommended that he be reprimanded, in which recommendation the commission concurred. The department decided that more severe disciplinary measures were necessary, and ordered his suspension for 15 days without pay.

Toledo, cases of Wilder E. Green, rural carrier, and Christopher C. Hamil, substitute rural carrier.

Charge: Electioneering and activity at the polls.
Date of charge: November 12, 1913.

Result: A joint investigation was made by representatives of the department and the commission, and it was found that these employees had visited a neighboring town during the campaign of 1912, taking intoxicating liquors with them, and had engaged in political work for a candidate for elective office. The investigators recommended that they be removed for this cause, and for the further reason that both employees were addicted to the excessive use of intoxicating liquors, in which recommendation the commission concurred, and action was taken accordingly.

Vergennes, cases of W. F. Young, fourth-class postmaster, and Harlen Parrish, rural carrier.

Charge: Violation of the statutes relating to political contributions.
Date of charge: July 11, 1913.

Result: Upon investigation by a post-office inspector it was found that the postmaster had received political contributions from Mr. Parrish and a former carrier amounting to $5. He explained in this connection that he had received notice from a political committee that $15 had been apportioned to the Vergennes post office as its share of the campaign expenses; that he exhibited this notice to the two carriers and asked if they desired to contribute, but did not solicit or make any demand. As to the carrier, it was found that in addition to making the political contribution to the postmaster above mentioned he had rendered unsatisfactory service and had made false charges against the postmaster. Both the postmaster and the carrier were removed, the former for receiving a political contribution, in violation of section 119 of the Criminal Code, and the latter for making such a contribution to a Federal officer or employee, in violation of section 121 of the Criminal Code, and for the other causes stated. More than three years having elapsed since the commission of the criminal offenses named, they could not be prosecuted.

INDIANA.

Little York, case of George O. Gamble, rural carrier.
Charge: Public expression of political opinions.
Date of charge: July 30, 1913.

Result: The above and other charges were investigated by a post-office inspector, whose report was forwarded by the department to the commission with request for recommendation as to the action to be taken with respect to the carrier's political activity. It was found by the inspector that on numerous occasions the carrier had engaged in political discussions in the post office and had loitered on his route to engage in such discussions, on one occasion engaging in a heated political argument heard by a number of people. The inspector recommended removal on this ground, and for the further causes of disrespectful attitude toward a patron, failure to present a neat appearance, conspiring to conceal the truth, and making false statements. The commission expressed the opinion that the political activity alone did not warrant removal, and stated that if the department, after consideration of the other charges, should decide to retain him in the service it was believed he should be reprimanded and warned for his political activity. The department, in view of all the delinquencies above stated, ordered his removal.

Scottsburg, case of Jay H. Fleenor, rural carrier.

Charge: Loitering on route to engage in political discussion.
Date of charge: October 11, 1913.

Result: This charge was investigated by a post-office inspector, whose report the department forwarded to the commission with request that a recommendation as to the action to be taken be submitted. It appeared that several days after

the November, 1912, election, the carrier offered to make a wager with a patron as to the number of States carried by one of the candidates for president and loitered on his route and discussed political matters for 5 or 10 minutes on this occasion. The commission expressed the opinion that he should be cautioned against undue political activity, which action was taken by the department.

Terre Haute, case of Elam H. Neal, collector of internal revenue.

Charge: Political discrimination in assignments of subordinates.
Date of charge: August 1, 1913.

Result: An investigation was made by a representative of the commission based upon the complaint of A. F. Geisert, a storekeeper-gauger at Lawrenceburg, Ind., that because of his political affiliations the collector of internal revenue had relieved him from duty and that the collector had been guilty of political discrimination in other cases. The results of previous investigations involving the official acts of Mr. Neal are stated in the commission's Twenty-sixth Report, at page 150, and in its Twenty-ninth Report, at page 156. As a result of the investigation based upon Mr. Geisert's recent charges the commission wrote the Secretary of the Treasury on February 7, 1914, as follows:

"This commission has the honor to transmit a report of the secretary of the sixth civil service district, dated November 29, 1913, of an investigation conducted by him at the commission's direction into a complaint of A. F. Geisert, a storekeeper-gauger at Lawrenceburg, Ind., of alleged political discrimination by Elam Ĥ. Neal, collector of internal revenue for the sixth internal-revenue district of Indiana.

"Mr. Geisert was a witness in an investigation conducted by the commission as a result of which the commission on April 28, 1909, recommended that Mr. Neal be suspended six months without pay for gross violation of the civil-service law in discriminating against subordinates because of failure to make political contributions. At the time of this investigation Mr. Geisert had no grievance against the collector, having contributed $140 in one year to the campaign fund in which Collector Neal was interested and having received satisfactory assignments. In September, 1910, he publicly and severely criticized the collector's administration of his office, charging him among other things with discrimination in assignments of storekeeper-gaugers for political reasons. The collector thereupon suspended him and told him he would not be returned to duty. Mr. Geisert then filed charges against the collector with the department, and as a result of the investigation made his transfer to the fifth internal-revenue district of Illinois was ordered on March 31, 1911. The collector of this district failed to assign him to duty, and on February 20, 1912, he was ordered transferred to his former district and collector Neal was instructed to assign him to duty as soon as such action could be taken without doing injury to other officers of his district. During this period action on the commission's recommendation that the collector be suspended had been withheld. It was at first decided to comply with the commission's request, but the case was finally dismissed with a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury to Mr. Neal, dated January 2, 1912, calling his attention to the history of the case, to the leniency shown him, and to the fact that the collector's office as then administered with his full attention to the same was a condition that must continue or his removal would follow. The collector refused to assign Mr. Geisert to duty, on the ground that subsequent to the authorization of his transfer he had indulged in further criticism, making remarks concerning the result of the investigation of his charges which in the opinion of the collector were uncalled for, out of place, and disrespectful. Mr. Geisert states that he was finally assigned to duty, in November, 1912, at the direction of President Taft. This assignment was continued until March, 1913, when the assignment was changed from day to night duty, and on October 1, 1913, after the commission's district secretary had commenced investigating the charges, Mr. Geisert's assignment was revoked.

"In view of the circumstances resulting in the department's letter to the collector of January 2, 1912, and of the instructions later given him by the President and the department, it was all the more incumbent upon the collector to observe scrupulously the spirit of the law and rules. The present investigation shows that he has laid himself open to censure for discrimination, persecution, and nepotism, but this seems to be on personal rather than political grounds. The evidence of political bias being insufficient, the matter seem