The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1875-02-23

purpose Of properly compensa;ing MIN TOT
these duties which he performs for the city,
in addition TO those rendered the State, the
Legislature has provided that the Judge oil
the Hastings Court may. with the consento Oh
the City Council. make allowances 10 be
cbarscablc to the city.
II is shown to us from the testimony given
before your Committee on Claims ana Saia-
rirs. that for more than twenty years the
Judge of the Hastings Court has allowed 10
the Sergeant q stated salary per month and
fee in each case before the court, which has
been paid to him out Of the city treasury. IN
addition 10 the amount accrulng to his office
from the state. 1t appears to Us. further.
that General Moore accepted his office, and
conducted it, with the idea that the same pay
and allowances would be made to him as to
bis predecessors.
1t is claimed by the minority Of the COM
mittce that he had no right to suppose that
the City Council would continue such al
lowance. and they assert that when the
Council paid the cam Of the Sergeant pre-
ceding General Moore in otfite it was under
stood that they would make no such allow
ances in the future. The majority Of your
committee are Of the opinion that such aSser-
ton is wholly unsupported either by the
facts or By justice. The facts of the case are
that the Council ordered the payment of the
allowances Of The preceding City Sergeant
some three months after Moore went out OF
office, and that when the order of the
Judge of the Hastings Court came
into the Couusi for the payment
to Moore OF his allowances for the first three
months Of his service, it was referred as
usual to the Finance Committee, which COM
miltee reported adversely to the same on the
ground that the city was not required 10y law
TO Jay the SAME. The Council, instead of
adopting the report of their committee, re-
lcrred the matter to the City Attorney De-
cclnber 8, 1872. On the 23d December, 1872,
the City Attorney rendered his report,
which WIS referred to the Finance Commit
tee, who reported it back February 10th,
1872. with the recommendation that their
previous report be adopted. But the Coun.
Gil did not adopt their report. Instead Of
adopting it they laid it on the table On
the 23d SeptembeE, 1873, their report was
again taken up, and the Council. instead of
accepting it, again laid il on the table.
General Moore entered upon the duties
Of bis office on the 1st day of July, 1872,
and it is impossible for lis to perceive what
the minority Of your committee assert, that
the Council had given him notice Of their
determination to discontinue their allow.
uucr> 10 their City Sergeant, when rs late rs
a year and Il quarter after he entered upon
the duties OF his Office they had still refused
70 adopt the report Of their committee.
We can neither perceive He justice oi such
an agreement nor the grounds on which an
allowance that has been made Tor twenty
wears should hc dl>aluWrd without previous
notice. We find still further that the City
Sergeant could perform all the duties rt-
Gliircd of him hy law 10 attend upon the
City Court hv the employment of one or at
tn" utmost two deputies : but that TO taclIi-
tate the business OF the court both General
Moore aud his predecessor employed at their
own cost three deputies, which results in IN
economy 10 the city and Il relief to the busi-
ness community, for the reason that the Ser
gcant Is enabled from such compensation TO
employ such number Of deputies tkat ju-
ric> are frequently kept but one day, where
otherwise they might be maintained for q
week.
We caunot avoid the conclusion that the
city is bound as 1n act ofju>tIce 10 pay Gen
crl Moore the FIJI allowances that have
been awarded him by the judge of the llus-
tlngs Court. but aS the Board OF Aldermen,
by 4 decided maj 1rlty, have expressed them
selves to the contrary, We ale constrained to
report that the least that should be paid
General Moore is sllary OF SO per month
instead OF Sl2j, is recommended by the
iudec OF The Hastings Court. and Il fee of
- on each felony case before the court and
wc would respectfully submit the accOmpa-
nliug resolution.
[sl9ncdI ALBERT ORDwAf,
$ III. PrLLIAM,
J. y. CURTIS.
GENERAL MoORE'> CLAIM IL ANOTHER LIGHT.
Colonel W. {. Darlington, from minority
Of the committee Of conference, presented
the following report
The committee considered Il ne matter on the
| papers formerly before your bodies. the evil
dancc of y. NJ. Lcc,and facts within the know
| lcdg" OF m,mhcrs Of the committee. This
! examination demonstrated 10 our mind, that
| the >tatut" upon which the claim rests leaves
| it, paNnlcnt optional with the City Council.
The reason for its hclr" left optional seems
10 have teen that The office might he 50 lu.
cratiyc outside this allowance as to leave it
| proper to reject it, In fac. \. NJ. Lee, the
| iumcliltc predecessor OF L. +. Moore,
| intending again to be 4 candidate
| for the same oiiic., tried to induce the
| Legislature to change the law So as to make
payment Of such cllim obligatory on the
city, but that body refused to make tic
change. Then General Moore not only had
this notice that the claim was optional from
the statute itself, but from the proceedings
of the Legislature could have seen this re-
iusal to change the law, yet he accepted The
office and took his chdnreS for the claim. 1t
also appeared that the Council was almost
unanimous when this allowance WAS
made to Mr.. Lee that no further
like claim should be allowed; this induced
Mr.. Lee to apply for change OF the law,
aud the peculiar circumstances of extra eX-
pense during his term were asserted TO have
existed TO induce the Council to pay bis
claim. II all this record was not sufficient
notice to General Moore that the payment Of
such claim was not obligatory be certainly
had sufficient notice by the refusal TO pay his
claim ior IN allowance for the first quar-
ter
This being true be might have resigned il
the office did not pay him enough to justify
him in keeping il.
Mr.. y. NJ. Lee stated to the committee
that The NET PROCEEDS OF THE OFFICE 10 nun,
dtier paying the chtre salary dnd expense
items pcrtdtntt.q 10 the SerUtceS on achlch
THIS ciutm rests, was about $4,000 each year;
that he knew no reason why it SHOULD be
less during General Moorc's term; and
though General Moore was not present,
wr learned from members of the committee
lha. the Office paid him about the same as MT.
Lee stated. Therefore. as the CITY gave Gen.
More an Office which paid ali The expenses
for the services embraced in his account, and
left him ctea' yeariy profit Of $4,000, we
think no moral or legal claim exists in bis
behalf; and rs the city has both legal and
moral claims Of sufficient amount to tax it TO