County Classification Extended.

Pursuant to recommendation made by the Governor in his message to the Legislature of 1905, the State Commission early entered upon consideration of the wisdom of extending the operation of the Civil Service rules to counties having 100,000 or more population. After a thorough examination into the character and extent of the civil service in those counties, it formally classified the official positions in the counties of Albany, Monroe, Onondaga and Westchester. This classification was approved by the Governor and went into effect on the first day of November. The limited number of positions in the county service in the other counties referred to, and the fact that county officers in those counties are compensated in fees rather than by stated salaries, made it seem unwise to extend further the classification at that time. The appointing officers in the counties to be affected afforded the Commission every possible aid in the way of data, and for the most part welcomed the new order of things. It was put into effect without friction, serious embarrassment, or prospect of litigation, and promises to operate to the ultimate great improvement of the public service. The only previous extension of the classification was that of June 16, 1900, when Erie, Kings, New York, Queens and Richmond counties were brought under the rules.

Removal of a Municipal Commission.

Inspection of the civil service administration in the city of Troy, made in pursuance of the Commission's regulation providing for an occasional visitation of the cities of the State and an inquiry into the work of the municipal commissions, disclosed a state of affairs that demanded summary correction. By unani

mous vote of its members, and with the approval of the Governor, this Commission on April 7th removed the members of the Troy Commission, as provided by section 10 of the Civil Service law, for incompetence, inefficiency and neglect of duty, and appointed in their places Thomas F. Murnane, Stephen C. Anderson and Charles Hagen. This action was unopposed, and the new municipal commission, manifesting a diligent desire to carry out the provisions of the Civil Service law, at once set at work to straighten confused records, revise faulty rules, require observance of the law by disbursing officers, and enforce the rule of competition. The effect has been salutary, not only in the city immediately concerned, but throughout the State.

66

As the power to remove municipal civil service commissioners, granted by the statute referred to, had never been exercised, the Commission, before acting on the Troy case, carefully considered the validity of the provision in view of article 10, section 2, of the Constitution. The Commission was convinced that the State Civil Service law established in 1899 an entirely new system of general application and that the officers for its administration are the occupants of "new offices" which, according to article 10, section 2, of the Constitution, may be filled as the Legislature may direct." When the Constitution was adopted in 1894 no such office as municipal civil service commissioner existed. The earlier so-called city commissioners were merely persons employed to conduct inquiries and make examinations at the discretion of the mayor. The first municipal civil service commission in the State was created for the city of New York by the charter of 1897, after the Constitution of 1894 became effective, and for other cities by the Civil Service law of 1899. These commissioners, both in name and function as created sub

sequent to January 1, 1895, were entirely distinct from the "suitable persons" employed under earlier acts by the mayors to assist them in the administration of the Civil Service law.

The Commission was also convinced that the Civil Service law established a State administrative system which may be enforced everywhere as the Legislature may direct. The constitutional provision of article 10, section 2, safeguards local selfgovernment with respect to counties as well as cities. The administration of the civil service system in counties is delegated to the State Commission, and the Legislature might, in its discretion, likewise have devolved the administration of the city civil service upon the State officers. The Legislature in creating municipal commissioners at its discretion lost none of its power to abolish their offices or to authorize their removal by the State Commission. The civil service system was established not merely or mainly to regulate the performance of the work of government, State or local, but to check a tendency demoralizing to the community and dangerous to political liberty. The system, though doubtless intended to improve the service, was primarily adopted to prevent public office being used as a weapon of political warfare, and it is a matter of intimate concern to the people of the State at large that the offices of a city should not be used as spoils to build up or tear down a political party. The power to enforce the administration of the merit system in cities by removal of unfaithful municipal commissioners is properly reserved to the State. City rules must be approved by the State Commission, and the whole civil service system as established by the Constitution is founded on the theory that the administration of the law in the cities is not a local function. Therefore the officers of that administration are not local officers in the meaning of article 10, section 2, of the Constitution.

1

New York Investigation.

The State Commission, upon complaint of the Civil Service Reform Association, has conducted investigations in New York City (1) into alleged violation of the provisions of chapter 697, Laws of 1904, giving every incumbent of office in New York county the right to a hearing on charges previous to removal, and (2) into the general administration of the Civil Service law by the municipal commission. In the first instance, the complaint was found to be justified, and as a result, on April 7th, the aggrieved party, August Krefft, was reinstated to his position of custodian in the office of the county clerk of New York county. In the second instance, after several public hearings and the examination of many witnesses by the Commission, and after a careful scrutiny of the records of the municipal commission, the majority of the State Commission, in a report to the Governor under date of September 27th, pointed out evasions and violations of the law and rules, called attention to the need of amendments to rules and procedure to safeguard the merit system from the attacks of political and personal interests, and advised the displacement of incompetent and unfaithful subordinates. A number of the recommendations made have been acted upon, and the State Commission is confident that improvement will result to the public service of the city.

Political Assessments.

Upon the allegations contained in an affidavit of Edwin A. Doty, and upon complaint of the Civil Service Reform Association, the State Commission, on July 14th, began an investigation into an alleged violation, in the office of the Fiscal Supervisor of State Charities, of section 24 of the Civil Service law pro

.

hibiting the levying of political assessments directly or indirectly, by an official in the public service, or in a public office, upon any officer, clerk, agent or employee under the State gov ernment. The clerks in the office mentioned were examined on that day. Copies of their evidence and of Mr. Doty's affidavit were subsequently transmitted to Fiscal Supervisor Bender, and his Secretary, Herbert F. Prescott, and they were given notice that they might have an opportunity to be heard in the matter and to call witnesses in rebuttal the testimony taken. At its September meeting, when the matter was again taken up, counsel for the parties named raised a technical question as to the power of the Commission to "make investigation concerning and report upon all matters touching the enforcement and effect of the provisions of this (the Civil Service) act and the rules and regu lations prescribed thereunder" (section 6, subdivision 3, of the Civil Service law). On the 28th of the same month, when the Attorney-General, to whom had been referred the question thus raised, gave it as his opinion that the Commission was empow ered under the law to conduct the investigation, it was confronted with writs of prohibition commanding it to desist and refrain from further proceedings pending a judicial determination. The issue thus made was argued before the Appellate Division, Third Department, on December 7th, but a decision has not been handed down at this writing.*

The State Civil Service Commission is confident that the courts will sustain its authority in a case so vitally affecting the enforcement of the law committed to its charge. An adverse

*Since this report was written, on January 8, 1906, the Appellate Division has handed down a decision fully confirming the power of the Commission to investigate matters touching the enforcement and effect of the Civil Service law.