except an acknowledgment of its receipt, asking a speedy hearing and an opportunity to meet the sharges against the persons removed.

December 24 the Commission addressed a letter to the Secretary of Agriculture, stating that it was then in receipt of complaints from Senator Allen, Messrs. Herdman & Herdman, Mr. O. G. Eckstein, and Mr. Edward P. Smith with reference to the removals in question, and asking the Secretary to advise the Commission of the facts in the case. Neither the letter of Senator Allen nor those of any of the other persons named were exhibited to the Secretary of Agriculture.

December 29 the Commission received a letter from the Secretary of Agriculture acknowledging its communication of the 24th. In this letter the Secretary disclaimed any knowledge of whom the persons removed supported in the Presidential election and denied that politi cal reasons had anything to do with the removals. The Secretary invited attention to inclosed sworn statements as to the causes of removal, distinctly requesting that unless they could be kept strictly for the Commission's own use they be returned to the Secretary of Agriculture at once, and respectfully demanding that they should not be shown to any of the complainants in the case. It was further stated in the letter that other testimony as to incompetency and neglect of duty of the parties removed was expected in a few days and could be filed for inspection. The letter closes with the positive assertion that the removals, one and all, were made for neglect of duty.

January 2, 1897, the Commission received a letter from Herdman & Herdman inclosing the petition of William Holmes relative to his dis charge, and asking that they be advised as to whatever action would be taken in the matter. The petitioner set forth that he was never informed of any complaints or charges against him, and asked the Com mission to take cognizance of his case and grant him opportunity to appear and defend himself against the charges, if there were any. January 5 the Commission received a letter from Mr. W. S. White stating that he had been discharged "for neglect of duty," and that upon his request to the Department for specific charges, "pernicions political activity" was alleged. The latter also asked if he were not entitled to a hearing, and that a copy of the civil-service law be sent him.

January 8 another letter was received from Mr. White, stating that Secretary Morton had recently sent an agent to South Omaha, trying to find evidence against those removed. In this letter he again demanded an investigation by the Commission.

January 12 the Secretary of Agriculture forwarded to the Commis sion copies of additional affidavits bearing upon the conduct of Messrs. White and Zeller.

January 18 the Commission wrote to the Secretary of Agriculture. informing him that the complainants in the case had been informed of the substance of his letters, without stating by whom the affidavits were made, and returned therewith the affidavits, with the understand ing that they would be accessible to the Commission in the future, if circumstances made it necessary.

January 21 the Commission replied to Senator Allen's letter, received December 17, informing him that the Secretary of Agriculture had stated to the Commission that the removals of the persons in question were made for good reasons; that he did not know whom any of the persons supported for President, and that he did not care whom they supported, and had made no inquiry in that direction; and that the Secretary had further stated that he would furnish the Commission a

number of sworn statements, from which it would appear that the removals were due solely to the internal discipline of the service, with which the Commission has no authority to interfere. The Commission called attention to the provisions of rule 2, above quoted, and to the fact that a removal not contrary to these provisions was not within the jurisdiction of the Commission. On the same date the Commission addressed letters of similar purport to Mr. O. G. Eckstein, Messrs. Herdman & Herdman, Dr. W. S. White, Mr. Edward P. Smith, and Miss Mary Flynn.

January 29 the Commission received a letter from Dr. W. S. White, acknowledging its communication of January 21 and expressing disap pointment at having no opportunity to disprove the charges against him, stating that the manner in which the affidavits as to his removal were procured was unjust, and requesting a copy of the charges against him.

February 1, in reply to the above request of Dr. White for a copy of the charges against him, he was referred to the Secretary of Agriculture. February 6 a letter was received from Herdman & Herdman, acknowledging the receipt of the Commission's letter of January 21, reaffirming that the removals were made for political reasons, and offering proof thereof, again requesting a hearing, and protesting against an ex parte investigation.

February 8 the Commission replied to the above communication from Herdman & Herdman, requesting them to furnish affidavits covering the points in their letter, in order that the Commission might decide whether the evidence was sufficient to justify the sending of a personal representative to make an investigation. To this letter no reply has been received.

February 17 the Commission received a letter from the Secretary of Agriculture stating that he had observed in the Congressional Record of that date some correspondence relative to the removals heretofore mentioned, and referring to a letter of Dr. White of January 15, 1896, proposing that the Secretary should become a candidate for the Presi dency, and quoting the reply to that letter.

Under date of February 16 a letter was received from the Secretary of Agriculture, transmitting copies of letters as follows: Two, of the dates of February 14, 1895, and November 28, 1896, written to Dr. W. S. White, admonishing him as to the importance of closer attention to his duties. Two, of the date of December 3, 1894, addressed to Dr. Don C. Ayer, in charge of the Bureau of Animal Industry at South Omaha, Nebr., one signed by the Secretary of Agriculture and the other by Dr. Salmon. These two letters in general directed Dr. Ayer to report on the condition of the efficiency of his force, stating how many men could be dispensed with without injury to the service, and instructing him that he should know no qualification of the employees under him except fidelity to their duty, and that no man was to be retained on account of mere politics. One, of the date of December 3, 1894, addressed to Dr. W. S. Devoe, a traveling veterinarian, instructed to report as to the service at various abattoirs. This letter was to the same general effect as the two last mentioned.

This completes the files of the Commission in the case. The Commission wishes to state that these complaints are only a few of the very many which, during its entire history, have come from all parts of the country, requesting investigations; and that the Commission always investigates so far as its limited force and appropriation will allow, when offer of proof is made that the civil-service law has been violated;

but before instituting an investigation which requires the expenditure of money, the Commission desires affidavits substantiating the charges made, and it very seldom sends a personal representative unless such affidavits are furnished. So far as the Commission is aware, no claim of violation of the civil-service act has ever failed of attention and investigation.

As related to this subject, the Commission begs to state that the power and duty of removal are not affected by the civil-service act other than in cases of removal for political or religious causes. The Commission is not an appointing, or reinstating, or removing body. theless, its investigations, as shown at length in its last report, have succeeded in securing reinstatements or removals by the proper Depart ment in most of the cases in which the facts presented by it showed that the provisions of the civil-service act had not been observed.

The Commission again respectfully calls attention, as it has repeatedly done in the past, to the fact that it has authority to investigae only cases of removal in which political or religious reasons are allegei, and that it has no power, even in such investigations, to administer oaths or to summon witnesses. It does not here suggest the desira bility of such additional authority, but does wish to make clear the fact that this authority does not exist.

Attention is invited to the following extract from the thirteenth report of the Commission:

"It was predicted by those who advocated the enactment of the civilservice law, that the temptation to make unjust removals would gracually disappear with the withdrawal of the power to control appointments to positions thus made vacant. This prediction has been largely fulfilled. The civil-service act did not intend that incompetent persons should be retained in office. The authority of removal and its exercise for proper reasons are necessary for the discipline and the efficiency of the public service. The power of removal is not affected by the law or the riles further than that they provide that removals shall not be made for political or religious reasons. The results under the present system are in every respect more satisfactory than under the old system."

The file in the case is forwarded herewith, except the communication from the Commission's representative of November 16, above mentioned. When the preparation of this statement was nearly completed, a letter was received from Messrs. Herdman & Herdman, in reply to the Commission's letter of February 8, stating that the affidavits therein requested would be furnished in due course of time.

We have the honor to be, your obedient servants,

The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE,

JOHN R. PROCTER,
WILLIAM G. RICE,
JOHN B. HARLOW,
Commissioners.

Washington, D. O.

[World-Herald, Omaha, Nebr., Sunday, November 15, 1896.]

VACANCIES AT SOUTH OMAHA-SILVER ADVOCATES ARE DISMISSED FOR "NEGLECT OF WORK."

For what seems to be purely a manifestation of political spite Dr. White, chief microscopist of the Bureau of Animal Industry in South

Omaha; John Zeller, a tagger, and Miss Dalton and Miss Flynn, stenographers in the same Bureau, have been dismissed from the service by order of J. Sterling Morton, Secretary of Agriculture, for alleged neglect of work.

It was done, it is alleged, at the instance of Euclid Martin, W. D. McHugh, and Lee Spratlen, all bolters from the Democratic party and supporters of the present Administration. Those who lost their jobs were supporters of Bryan and free silver.

Dr. White has been in the Bureau of Animal Industry ever since its establishment in South Omaha, and had lived in Otoe County, Morton's home, for twenty-five years. Zeller, although a silverite, had frequently done the work of his goldbug taggers while the latter were out howling for McKinley during the campaign. The stenographers hadn't used their influence either way, but Messrs. J. J. O'Connor and John Murphy, the men who indorsed them for their positions years ago, are out-andout silver workers, and the far-reaching hatred of the bolting Democrats apparently directed this as a slap upon the indorsers.

The person held responsible in the office from which the young women were dismissed is said to be a sister of Tobe Castor.

GENTLEMEN: I inclose herewith two complaints that I trust may have attention at your hands.

Yours, truly,

ED. P. SMITH.

The UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,

Washington, D. C.

OMAHA, NEBR., November 23, 1896. GENTLEMEN: The undersigned, Mary A. Dalton, of Omaha, Nebr., would respectfully represent that on the 16th day of June, 1893, she was duly appointed to the position of assistant microscopist in the Bureau of Animal Industry at South Omaha, Nebr., at a salary of $50 per month.

She represents that immediately after being notified of such appointment she began work thereunder, and worked continuously at the required duties until September, 1893, when she was indefinitely furloughed; that afterwards, on July 2, 1894, she was reassigned to duty, and worked continuously until November 14, 1896, when, by order of the Hon. J. Sterling Morton, Secretary of Agriculture, she was discharged for alleged "neglect of duty." Your petitioner represents that at no time during the entire period of her service, has she been absent from her place of duty without leave; that she has at all times attended to her duties faithfully and to the best of her abilities; that at no time has any complaint been made of the manner in which she performed her work, nor has any person charged her with in any manner neglecting her duties. She states she has good reason to believe and does believe that the reasons for her discharge are wholly political; that she was discharged solely because she failed and refused to support certain candidates at the last election, whose election was favored by the honorable Secretary of Agriculture.

Wherefore she asks your honorable body to investigate the matters herein complained of, and if it be found that this petitioner has not

been guilty of "neglect of duty" that she be ordered reinstated in position from which she has been discharged.

Yours, very respectfully,

MARY A. DALTON.

Washington, D. U.

The UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,

OMAHA, NEBR., November 19, 1896. GENTLEMEN: The undersigned, John Zeller, of Omaha, Nebr., would respectfully represent that on June 27, 1895, he was duly appointed a tagger in the Bureau of Animal Industry at South Omaha, Nebr., at a salary of $60 per month.

He represents that immediately after being notified of such appointment he began work thereunder, and worked continuously at the required duties till November 14, 1896, when, by order of the Hon. J. Sterling Morton, Secretary of Agriculture, he was discharged for alleged "neg. lect of duty."

Your petitioner represents that at no time during the entire year 1896 has he been absent from his place of duty for any time whatever; that he has at all times attended to his duties faithfully and to the best of his ability; that at no time has any complaint been made of the manner in which he performed his work, nor has any person charged him with in any manner neglecting his duties.

He states he has good reasons to believe, and does believe, that the reasons for his discharge are wholly political; that he was discharged solely because he failed and refused to support certain candidates at the last election whose election was favored by the honorable Secretary of Agriculture.

Wherefore he asks your honorable body to investigate the matters herein complained of, and if it be found that this petitioner has not been guilty of "neglect of duty" that he be ordered reinstated in the position from which he has been discharged.

Yours, very respectfully,

JOHN ZELLER, 1923 South Tenth Street.

The UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,

Washington, D. C.

GENTLEMEN: The undersigned, Mary Flynn, of Omaha, Nebr., would respectfully represent that on June 16, 1895, she was duly appointed assistant microscopist in the Bureau of Animal Industry at South Omaha, Nebr., at a salary of $50 per month.

She represents that immediately after being notified of such appointment she began work thereunder, and worked continuously at the required duties till November 14, 1896, when, by order of the Hon. J. Sterling Morton, Secretary of Agriculture, she was discharged for alleged "neglect of duty."

Your petitioner represents that at no time during the entire year 1896 or at any other time has she been absent from her place of duty for any time whatever; that she has at all times attended to her duties faithfully and to the best of her ability; that at no time has any complaint been made of the manner in which she performed her work, nor has any person charged her with in any manner neglecting her duties.