Matter of Keymer

42 N.E. 667, 148 N.Y. 219, 2 E.H. Smith 219, 1896 N.Y. LEXIS 543
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 21, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by55 cases

This text of 42 N.E. 667 (Matter of Keymer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matter of Keymer, 42 N.E. 667, 148 N.Y. 219, 2 E.H. Smith 219, 1896 N.Y. LEXIS 543 (N.Y. 1896).

Opinion

Bartlett, J.

The single question presented by this appeal is whether chapter 344, Laws of 1895, is in conflict with article 5, section 9, of the Constitution of 1894.

The relator, an honorably discharged soldier of the late civil war, applied to the defendant on the 17th day of May, 1895, for a non-competitive examination as messenger in the service of the city of Brooklyn, in pursuance of chapter 344, Laws 'of 1895, which went into effect April 18th, 1895.

The application was refused and this proceeding was instituted.

The act of 1895 is amendatory of various acts amending the original act of 1883 (Ch. 354), to regulate and improve the civil service of the state of New York.

The material portion of section one of the act of 1895 reads as follows: In grateful recognition of the services, sacrifices and sufferings of persons who served in the army or navy of the United States in the late civil war, and have been honorably discharged therefrom, they shall be certified as such by the commissioners or board of officers authorized to report names for appointment or promotion to the appointing officer or other appointing power, and when such honorably discharged soldiers and sailors of the late civil war are applicants, they shall be preferred for such appointment and promotion, and competitive examinations shall not be deemed practicable or necessary in cases where the compensation or other emolument of the office does not exceed four dollars per day, but the examination shall be such as is calculated only *222 to ascertain the merits and fitness of the applicant for the position for which he applies, and if found fitted to fill such position, the applicant’s name shall be placed on the eligible list and he shall be certified therefrom.”

The Constitution of 1894 (Art. 5, section 9) reads as follows: " Section 9. Appointments and promotions in the civil service of the state, and of all the civil divisions thereof, including cities and villages, shall be made according to merit and fitness, to be ascertained, so far as practicable, by examinations, which, so far as practicable, shall be competitive; provided, however, that honorably discharged soldiers and sailors from the army and navy of the United States in the late civil war, who are citizens and residents of this State, shall be entitled to preference in appointment and promotion, without regard to their standing on 'any*list from which such' appointment or promotion may be made. Laws shall be made to provide for the enforcement of this section.”

This section of the Constitution is clear and concise, and it would seem as if there ought to be little difficulty in understanding its meaning. Appointments and promotions in the civil service are to be made according to merit and fitness, to be ascertained, so far as practicable, by examinations, which, so far as practicable, shall be competitive.

This is all the Constitution has to say in regard to examinations. It then provides that certain described honorably discharged soldiers and sailoi-s in the late civil war shall be entitled to preference in appointment and promotion without regard to their standing on any list from which such appointment or promotion may be made.

This is the only provision made for the veterans of the civil war. It then declares that laws shall be made to provide for the enforcement of these provisions.

Three points stand out clearly in this section, viz.:

1. Merit and fitness are to be ascertained, so far as practicable, by examinations.

2. Examinations, so far as practicable, shall be competitive.

3. The honorably discharged soldiers and sailors of the civil *223 war are only entitled to preference in appointment and promotion after their names appear on the list from which appointments and promotions may be made.

It will be profitable before considering the act of 1895, in the light of these constitutional provisions, to refer briefly to the condition of civil service legislation at the time the new Constitution was framed and the proceedings in the Constitutional Convention in reference to the section we are considering.

In 1883 an act was passed to regulate and improve the civil service of the state of New York (Ch. 354); in 1884 (Ch. 410, § 4) the act of 1883 was amended by giving honorably discharged soldiers and sailors in the late war preference for appointment in the civil service over other persons of equal standing as ascertained under the act and the act amended.

In other words, this was a preference on the eligible or waiting list.

In 1886 (Ch. 29, § 1) the act of 1884 was amended by removing some of its obscurities. Chapter 464, Laws of 1887, amending chapter 312, Laws of 1884, also conferred special privileges on veterans. In 1894 (Ch. 717) the previous acts were amended by adding to the provisions already referred to, the following, viz.: But the civil service rules and laws of this state shall not apply to such persons residents of this state who served in the army or the navy of the United States in the late war and have been honorably discharged therefrom, for any position or employment, the compensation of which does not exceed four dollars a day in the public departments, and upon all public works of the state of New York, and of the several cities, counties, towns and villages thereof.”

At that time no constitutional ¡provisions stood in the way of such legislation, whatever other reasons might have been urged against it.

The Constitution of 1894 went into effect January 1st, 1895.

Shortly thereafter the act of 1894 (Ch. 717) was declared by the Special Term of the third department to be in conflict with the provisions of the . Constitution of 1894, already quoted, and, therefore, abrogated. (People ex rel. George *224 Sweeley v. Oren E. Wilson et al., Police Commissioners, etc., 12 Misc. Rep. 174; affirmed June 14th, 1895, 146 N. Y. 401, without opinion.)

Judge Hebbiok wrote so able and exhaustive an opinion at Special Term that this court, in affirming, did not deem it necessary to write.

The Constitutional Convention, familiar with the civil service legislation referred to, framed the section we have quoted and the history of its passage through that body is instructive.

As originally offered to the convention the section read: “Appointments and promotions in the civil service of the state and of the cities shall he made, so far as practicable, according to merit and fitness, to be ascertained by examinations, which, so far as practicable, shall be competitive. Laws shall be made to provide for the enforcement of this section.” (Records of the ¡New York Const. Con. p. 2438.)

It will be observed that, as introduced, this section provided for no preferred class.

The following amendment was offered and defeated (Id.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mathiasen v. Niagara County Legislature
126 Misc. 2d 937 (New York Supreme Court, 1984)
Rahill v. Bronstein
298 N.E.2d 674 (New York Court of Appeals, 1973)
Powers v. Taylor
286 A.D. 575 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1955)
Powers v. Taylor
207 Misc. 465 (New York Supreme Court, 1955)
Falcey v. Civil Service Commission
99 A.2d 658 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1953)
Bateman v. Marsh
188 Misc. 189 (New York Supreme Court, 1946)
Sokolove v. Board of Education
176 Misc. 1016 (New York Supreme Court, 1941)
Herman v. Sturgeon
293 N.W. 488 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1940)
Kay v. Board of Higher Education
173 Misc. 943 (New York Supreme Court, 1940)
Hobbs v. Hodges
5 A.2d 842 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1939)
Commonwealth Ex Rel. Graham v. Schmid
3 A.2d 701 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1938)
Matter of Neubeck v. Bard
9 N.E.2d 770 (New York Court of Appeals, 1937)
Sloat v. Board of Examiners of the Board of Education
9 N.E.2d 12 (New York Court of Appeals, 1937)
Volgenau v. Finegan
163 Misc. 554 (New York Supreme Court, 1937)
Scahill v. Drzewucki
244 A.D. 530 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1935)
Potts v. Kaplan
147 Misc. 573 (New York Supreme Court, 1933)
Marallis v. City of Chicago
182 N.E. 394 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1932)
Gianatasio v. Kaplan
142 Misc. 611 (New York Supreme Court, 1931)
Cook v. Mason
283 P. 891 (California Court of Appeal, 1929)
In re Moore
125 Misc. 607 (New York Supreme Court, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 N.E. 667, 148 N.Y. 219, 2 E.H. Smith 219, 1896 N.Y. LEXIS 543, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-keymer-ny-1896.