Evening star., 1897-03-11
TRAVELLING EXPENSES
A Decision of Great Importance to Govern
ment Officials.
The Case of Labor Commissioner
Wright Makes an Interesting Pre-
cedcnt for Future Rulings.

Bowler controller of the treasury, is one,
hitherto suppressed, of special interest to
officials of the government located in
Washington who are in the habit of spend
ing their summers elsewhere. Briefly
stated, the controller decides that an Off
Ger whose office is at the seat of govern
ment is entitled to reimbursement for
travelling expenses only when he is absent
therefrom on official business, and if, when
absent on a vacation, his official duties re-
quire his presence in Washington, the
travel from the place where he happens to
be to Washington ard return is not travel
upon official business.
The question arose in the case of 1Sr.
Carroll d. Wright, commissioner of labor.
in the consideration of vouchers amount
ing to $50 for his travelling expenses be-
tween Marblehead Neck, Mass, and Wash
ipgton, d. c. The accounts were held up
by Auditor Holcomb who inquired of Com
missioner Wright if the travel in question
was upon public business
In reply, Mr.. Wright assured the account
ing officers of the treasury that 1t was.
and in nowise t? accommodate him per
sonally. "Marblehead Neck" he said. ''is
the residence of my family during the
summer months, ard I generally spend my
vacation there, but during the past sea
son. on account of the severe and almost
fatal illness of the chief clerk, / was
obliged to make several trips to Washing
ton. l never charge the expense of travel
to and from Marblehead Neck when on
my own affairs, nor do when starting Oh
or returning from my vacation.
Il have been able during the past sum
mer to save the department a good deal
in the way of expense by being nearer the
field of some of our operations and the
place of some conferences relative to ON
cial work which would otherwise necessi-
tate special journeys from Washington. 1t
has always been matter OF very strict
observance with me to in no instance al
lou, oh, do n O. q &
partment when l was personally conve-
nienced, and l often disallow hotel charges
when the same have been entirely on ac-
count of the public service, and simply be
cause they were beyond the charges which
would be allowed for employees of the de-
partment. / have felt that the charges re-
ferred to by Mr.. Holcomb were perfectly
legitir ate and entirely proper. as every
made account of public buSi-
ness. and in no instance for my private
benefit. I should have been delighted not
to make them at ALL as they prevented the
rest which I have so long stood IN need
of, and which on account of public bust
ness I have not been able as yet to Sc
cure
The AUDITORS Report.
Auditor Holcomb referred the case to the
controller of the treasury, with the follow
ing report:
1T will be seen that Marblehead Neck
is the residence of Col. WriShtS family
generally spends his vacation there. here
is clearly presented, the question whether
or not the head Of the department or labor
is authorized to yEravel at the expense oil
the government from his temporary resi-
dencc to Washington and return to the
temporary residence when the pubic busl-
ness or his duties call him to WASHINGTON.
"The organic laW Establishing the depart
ment of labor 25 Stat. 1s9 provides as
follows: There shall be at the seat of gov
ernment a department of labor, and sec
. of the same act provides for the appoint
ment of commissioner OF labor to nave
charge of the department. Section 1t96,
Revised Statutes Is as follows: An eftces
attached to the Seat of government shall
be exercised in the District of Columbia
and not elsewhere, except as otherwise eX-
pressly provided by. law
Here, then. in Washington is located
the department Of labor, and here is the
official residence Of the head of that de-
partment. .r -t
1t is the established, practice in the ab
sence of any prohibition to authorize pay
ment of the actual expenses of any civil
officer and employe of the government
when ordered away from his usual place of
service or when his duties require his
presence away from his official residence.
I do not, however, know of case where
an officer an employe whose official
residence is in Washington has been al
lowed travelling expenses when coming
from a summer residence or a place other
taken him to Washington. / mean, OF
course. when the facts have been under
stood by the accounting officers. The rea
son seems manifest why such expenses
should not be paid. The Office place of
official residence is the place where It is
the duty of the officer to be unless his Off
cial duties have called him away. But if he
goes away for his own pleasure or recrea-
ton, and his duties necessitate his
turn, there is no Just reason that l can
conceive of why ii should be at the eX
pense of the government. 1t is his duty
to be in Washington: the law provides no
vacation for the head of the department:
he is presumed to be at his office at all
times and If not there when pressing du
ties such as Col. Wright refers to,
uuire his actual presence he should go,
bat not at public expense. If the con-
trary was the rule the government would
be at more expense for partial or inter
mittent service than when the officer re-
maired constantly in his Office. The du-
ties of the commissioner of labor may, and