The free lance. (Fredericksburg, Va.) 1885-1926, 1899-11-09
u Il Legal or Net !

At meeting Of the Board of Su
pervisors recently, the custom which
has been followed for years past. OF
allowing members of the board extra
compensation for what is termed
committee service" was called IN
question by some members OF the
board, as being contrary to law and
q custom that should be abolished
We understand that for number OF
years past it has been the custom OF
the board when g contract of any
kind is let or any work is ordered to
be done, to appoint one member OF
the board committee " to see that
the work was properly done, and for
this service, though it might be for
experimenting only ten dollar )b,
he would be allowed from the county
treasury by the board fee Of ten
dollars.
This custom grew to be such an
abuse that few years ago, we are
informed, the board adopted rule
that no member should be allowed
for more than three committee ser
vices in any one year. This rule is
equivalent in effect and practice to
allowing each member of the board
thirty dollars per year extra for his
services, as this committee service is
paid for in addition to the pay pro
yided for by law.
The following are the provisions
Of the law applicable Section S4S
Of the Code provides that each mem
Der shall be allowed three dollars per
diem for the time he actually attends
the meetings of the board, provided
that he shall not be allowed for more
than ten days in any one year. Tue
object Of this section seems clearly to
limit the pay of supervisor to thirty
dollars per year.
Section SD provides that Il" No
supervisor shall become in
terested directly or indirectly in any
contract or the profits Of any contract
made by or with any officer or
person acting in behalf of the super
visors > and no supervisor shall
: become interested in any claim
against his county whether acted
upon by the board or not. The
amount embraced by any such con
tract - and the amount of any
such claim shall never be paid, or If
paid, may be recovered back with
interest by the County by action
or motion within two years"
Some OF the new members of the
present board took the position that
if committee service was to be paid
for that it must be in pursuance of q
contract" to that effect and that he
could only be paid after his " claim"
for compensation had been acted up
on by the board, and that as the law
both prohibited his contracting with
the board, and prohibiting the board
from allowing any claim and
even if allowed prohibited its pay
mont; that the board should put q
stop TO all such allowances in the
future, and made motion to rescind
an allowance of $40 previously made
in favor of Mr.. W. H. Eggborn for
committee service" while a mem
Der Of the board. The other members,
however, took the position that the
custom had been followed for long
time and that it was to the interest
OF the county that the custom should
be continued. Those members in
favor Of abolishing the rnle contend.
ed that it was not question ss to
which was best for the county, but
whether the members were receiving
money from the county which the
law said they should not receive.
The motion 10 rescind the allow.
snce and abolish the custom was de
feated by the following recorded
vote For rescinding-Atwell Som.
erville and c. B. Chiffon. Against
rescinding-A. J. Kennon, j. c. Bell
and W. 81, Eggborn.
This is matter tina: the general
public is interested in and while no
one thinks that any member of the
board is Influenced by any improper
motive, large number of persons
think that the question should be
settled in an authoritative manner.
IL it is legal for members of the board
to receive this extra compensation no
one objects to their receiving it, so
long as it is reasonable, but if It is
illegal for them to do 80 then they
should not receive it, whether it is
reasonable or not and whether they
think it to the best interests of the
county or not. 1t is the duty Of the
Board Of Supervisors like it is the
duty Of everyone else, to obey the
law whether they think the law is
wise or unwise, and If the law as st
present written does not afford the
members of the boards a sufficient
compensation the Legislature should
be requested to change it.
We are informed that Mr.. Somer-
vile and Mr.. Chiffon think they are
not entitled under the law to extra
pay for committee service and have
said they would not accept pay for
it. The other members constituting
q majority of the board seem to think
otherwise and will, we suppose, con-
tinue to draw this extra pay, unless
stopped.
We would suggest that the attorney
for the Commonwealth have test |
case made up to present the question |
to the county court for decision. He
can do this by motion before the