, 1874-04-05

CH1oAGo, April 4, 1874.
10 the Editor n Tie Chicago Tribune:
SIR: 1t il well that Messra. Dlckey l. CaulteM
took the pzecaution inform the pnbuc that their
opinion, published in this mornings TRIBUNE upon
the question Of the ealary Of Town Collector not
exparte opinion, for, without such assurance the
opinion Itself would certainly create false tp7cs-
sion llr Onahan does no: clara such merit for ala
opinion: Jet his method Of reasoning is the IS
that Of MeEsrs. Dickey Caulaed Both, in order to
make the section Of the Inv in question sustain their
views. ind 1t necessary to remodel aud ansEose the
several clauses OF the section In fact, the learned
gentlemen arrogatc the prerosatlrcs Of the Legislature
in order to make the language conform to their
opinions, which they intcrU us not ex-parte.
They admit by inference If not Iirectly, that tha
section i: framed and passed by the h9elaturo
does not sustain their opinion; and Jet are in-
formed TINT such an opinion WAS given On the merits,
aud WIS not ex-par:e opinion
District Collector shall Le allowed commission of
cent on all moneys collected BY him, TO he paid out
provides that in any where the compensation
allowed shall bo insufficient, the Town County
Board may allow IN additional compensation per
diem in lieu OF other gTtAtcr commissions. in which
said additional compensation shall be paid OF
the town county treasury, the may require.
The third clause provides further that all Of
town district treasury.
1t is a:p taking this statute it reads th.t tho
first pr0viso only ap:les when the Per cent allowed
In the first cause OF the section is not sufficient
pensation. There is power gi;cn to the Town or
County Board 70 take action whatever relation
to the compensation Of Town Collector where Tho
commissions allowed in the first clause would be
sufficient compensation, and In that the greatest
compensation tha Collector could retain under the
second provlso would he 81 800. Therefore, Tho only
where tue Collector could get 81 800 allowing
the opinion Of 31c.1rB- Dickey, Caulhtd, and Onah2
to be correct, uud be where the amount collected
s1nall that the conmssluns would not amount 10
that stn and where tho work performed by the Col
1ector is great that tile er cent will amount to
than s, ,el, that would bo the limit Of CON-
pensauon-
They have no power to give tho Collector salary
Instead Of his commissions, hut simply where such
compensation would be insufficient instead OF tncrcas
mi additional compensation. The to be paid ont
Of the Treasury IL only to be which, added to
the per cent commission ~ moneys collected By
the Collector, will mako IN the aggregate what the
Board considers sufficient compensation, which tho
Last cat.e provides Hha1 not exceed 81 ,300
Under this view * the case, tho second proyso
only that +, eco shall he the 1n2urnu1n amount
which the Collector receive mud retain aA compen-
rensauon for his SERVICES II it should
happen aftcr the additional compensation is
fixed by the Board tlAt tim commission
such STUN, than 1,ac0 then the excess Ct such
commissions and fees hla 10 paid into tho Treasury.
II this is not the correct Interpretation Of the Last
clause, then what do the words commy.ions and
" fees meant What other fees mentioned in tho
act7 What would TIC Legtslanre haic to pro-
vdc that the Collectors Should pay to the Treasurer tho
commissions tn Of 81 sou, and then to recei7o
back the CT Creater z1uount7 Under the Inter-
rretat1ou given to the statute by the opinions MeR
tioned, the 500 limitation would be wihous scnse CT
elect Q. L. PAnE1sH.