Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-04-02

Work of the DOckery Commission.
To the Editor Of The Evening Star:
The Dockery commission. following the
opinions of their paid experts, who are striv-
ing to earn their handsome salaries by rec
ommending the most radical innovations in
the accounting system of the Treasury De-
partment, report in favor of abolishing the
offices of commissioner of customs and sec
ond controller in said department, and of
taking away from the first controller the
detailed examination of accounts and claims
in his offices.
The final revision required Of a controller
by the act of September 2 1859. establishing
the Treasury Department-the divided re-
sponsibility. the separate and independent
action by two high officers, known as &C.
counting ofncers-an auditor and a control
ler-each exercising important and respon-
sible duties prescribed by law, are all strick-
en- down, and a one-man power set UP in
the auditor A system which has been tried
for more than a century, and has protected
the government from fraud in a most re-
markable degree, is ruthlessly set at naught.
The experts discard as useless and un-
necessary that which Hamilton inaugurated
and specially approved. and in which none
Of his successors. none of the great Secre-
taries like Gallatin, Walker, Guthrie, Chase
or sherman, discovered anything to report
as unessenual, in the most important
function of the Treasury Department
The theory of our government is opposed
10 one-man power 1t Is peculiarly q gov
eminent Of divided responsibility This
theory was fully carried out in the account
ing system Of the Treasu Department as
iraugurated under Alexander Hamilton In
a letter addressed by Mr.. Hamilton TO the
President, in speaking OF the Office of con-
troller in the Treasury Department, he says,
The office imports the second trust in the
department" and he refers to the auditor
as the coadjutor of the controller" in the
important work assigned by law to the ac-
counting omcers. Numerous references en-
phasizing the importance and necessity of
this divided responsibility in the accounting
offcers by the separate and independent
action OF each. may be found in opinions by
able Attorneys General of the United States
and in decisions of the United States Su-
preme Court and the Court of Claims.
f. Take away from the commissioner of Gus
toms and from the first and second con-
trollers the detailed examination of &C
counts and claims. in their respective Of
fees, as now required by law, and confer
upon the auditors the sole and final duty of
passing upon the vast expenditures of the
government, and sooner or later abuses will
spring up, owing to undue bias, prejudice
or even corruption and fraud. These evils
are invited by one-man power or RESPONSE
bility. Be 1t said to the credit of the off,
Gals of the Treasury Department. who
have discharged the duties of accounting Of
fcers since the establishment of the de-
partment that their record is most credit
able, renecting honor upon their respective
ofhces. At the same time, the divided re-
sponsibility, the separate and independent
action of each officer, has operated as a
wholesome and judicious check upon the
other. 1t Is Idle to assert, as the experts
seem to insinuate, that because the final re-
vision and conclusive action upon an &C
count or claim is vested in the con-
trollers and the commissioner OF customs,
therefore. the auditors do not have any
check them hx-s
I'LL his position would not hesitate to pro-
action on the part Of a controller and re-
port 1t to the Secretary Of the Treasury or
TO the President. or Congress, il necessary
The attempt to place some sort of check
upon the exclusive authority which IL is
proposed to confer upon the auditors, by
providing for an appeal to the first control
Ter, and for report by the auditors to the
nrst controller OF their respective decisions
or construction Of the law, is lame and i'm
potent. True, dissatisfied claimant may
appeal; but as the auditors will be salts
fed, presumably, with their own decisions.
they will not be likely to recommend an APP
peal on the part Of the government. The
Secretary OF the Treasury and the control
Ter not being advised of the merits OF the
cases, cannot intelligently direct an appeal
to be taken, unless the special case should
first be called to their attention. If the au-
ditors action should be wrong, and against
the interest Of the United States, who will
secure an appeal for the government?
A reporting by the auditor OF his decisions
in matter Of law to the controller will be
merely an ex parte presentations per-