Epps v. Duckett

• Decision Date: 16 July 1920
• Docket Number: No. 20880.,20880.
• Citation: 223 S.W. 572,284 Mo. 132
• Parties: EPPS v. DUCKETT et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

223 S.W. 572

284 Mo. 132

EPPS v. DUCKETT et al.

No. 20880.

Supreme Court of Missouri. Division No. 2.

July 16, 1920.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Texas County; L. B. Woodside, Judge.

Action by W. P. Epps against Chas. H. Duckett and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

J. C. Dyott, of Willow Springs, for appellant.

Green & Green and M. E. Morrow, all of West Plains, for respondents.

[223 S.W. 573]

WALKER, J.

This is an action for damages, brought in the circuit court of Howell county by appellant, Epps, against respondents in which it is charged that they conspired to prevent and did prevent him from obtaining the appointment as postmaster at Pomona, a small village in that county, and thereby secured the appointment of the respondent Duckett. The total amount estimated by Epps as his actual hurt by reason of this alleged conspiracy dire is the modest sum of $5,000, to which he avers should be added a penalty in twice that sum. Moved, perhaps, by that Persian proverb preserved from oblivion by the poet Saadi, that "one is oftenest best served where least known," Epps removed his cause by change of venue from his home circuit court to that of Texas county, where it was tried in November, 1916, resulting in a verdict and judgment for respondents, from which this appeal is perfected.

A statement of the facts, clothed' in phraseology befitting the importance of the theme, as Balzac said in one of his Contes, runs thus:

In 1914 appellant, Epps, and respondent Duckett were applicants, among others, for appointment to the position of postmaster at Pomona. The Post Office Department subjected the applicants to a civil service examination, the pertinence of which in the determination of their fitness for the duties of a fourth-class postmaster, measured by the inquiries made, may well be the subject of intelligent difference of opinion, but not here. The result of the inquiry showed that the appellant and respondent were among the eligibles according to the arbitrary standard fixed by the department; the former ranking higher in figures than the latter. In addition, other tests were applied, deemed essential to test the fitness of one charged with the sale of stamps and the receipt and distribution of such mail as is wont to find its way to a fourth-class office.

We are not lacking in information on this subject emanating immediately from the then superintendent of the division of postmasters' appointments, who testified at the trial. After volubly descanting generally upon the qualifications necessary to an efficient discharge of the duties of a postmaster in an office of this class, the witness, as definitive of the manner in which the wheat is winnowed from the chaff, or to mix the figure, how the true prince of efficiency may be separated from the other applicants, said:

"Our first consideration was the service and serving of patrons. We first considered No. 1, and, all things being equal, if there was nothing to create suspicion that he would not render as satisfactory and faithful service as the others, he was selected; but, if there was, we sought light from any source, it made no difference from whence it came. It frequently happened that the congressman in the district gave us a great deal of advice. We took that for what it was worth only. When an old postmaster was an applicant, we frequently went into the character of his service. We even went to the auditor, to ascertain whether his services had been satisfactory. If it was a case of an old, postmaster and other applicants, the record of the former would have a considerable bearing as to whether or not he would be considered as against the other eligibles on the list.

"If the Congressman preferred a particular individual, we would look over the whole case, and take No. 1 on the list; and if the character of the town and the business indicated that a man would be better suited than a woman, we would take No. 1 on the male list. if we preferred a man as postmaster, we usually asked for male lists. We considered that our right under the civil service rules. Where there was business of any considerable size, we preferred a man. We sought light from any source whatever—the candidate's knowledge of business, his age and general fitness, mental and otherwise. We chose the first name on the list. That man proving not as acceptable as No. 2, we took No. 2. No. 2 failing, we took No. 3. The latter failing, we would ask for a new list. If No. 3 should have charges submitted against him, reflections against his character, statements by letter, I could not say as to whether we would eliminate him and take No. 4. It would depend upon the character of the evidence. We would have to consider it as a whole, the age, experience, etc., of the various candidates; go over their papers and examinations, and the character of their answers, to judge of their business education and mental fitness. There are a good many things that enter into these matters.. Sometimes you can see personal feeling cropping out, with an evident desire to work down to some one else; and there would be charges, maybe, against all three. Then, of course, you would have to take the whole situation into consideration, and judge it from an examination of all the papers, as to which was best suited, and all three might be a pretty bad proposition. I have no doubt we have selected a good many not worth a tinker's ____.

"In the absence of complaint against an individual, we took them in the way they came. If an old postmaster was an applicant, we invariably looked up his record. If one of the applicants stood ahead, and it appeared he was not a suitable person according to the charges presented, we would pass him up and take the others on the list, according to their qualifications."

Other facts adduced consist of letters, petitions, depositions, and the oral testimony of witnesses at the trial. This mass of undigested testimony consists of more than 150 pages of matter, much of which is wholly irrelevant. Therefrom we are required to glean as best we may, for we have been furnished with no succinct statement of the facts, such relevant matter as may be found to sustain the issues made by the pleadings.

The letters are, in the main, from individuals who were patrons of the post office at Pomona ; their tenor is commendatory of the respondent Duckett, and otherwise of the appellant. Interpreted according to their terms, they but express the individual opinions of the writers and declare their preference. That such preference is for the appointment of Duckett, rather than Epps, there can be no question. But to reach the composite opinion of the writers it is necessary to take their individual expressions, and, so to speak, add them together. This process requires for its consummation the mental act of another than the writers, and is therefore not indicative of such a concert of action as will constitute a conspiracy. The construction placed upon these letters by the congressman of the district, who was a witness in the case, and to whom they were addressed, or who examined them on file in the department, is foreign to any conclusion indicating a combination on the...