The times., 1899-09-13
THE QUESTION OF A FEE
A District Officer Receives Com
pensation as a Notary.
The Chief Clerk of the Health De-
partment Is Given Stipend for
Aflixfng His Seal fn Perfecting the
Accounts of Other Employees I'm His
ofice-Mr. Ross Makes an Enquiry.

An interesting question has developed
in the Health Department as a result of
the conclusion of the local quarantine serv
ice which was established during the periol
that yellow fever existed at Hampton,
Va. During those days several at aches
of the District Health Department were
assigned to the quarantine service, and i'll
connection with their official duties were
required to make daily trips to Alexandria
for the purpose of examining passengers
on incoming trains. Recently these officers
submitted accounts to the Distri t Health
Officer, and these papers were in turn
transmitted to the Commissioners The
acting president of the board, MIR. Ross,
examined the statements, and found that
they included two charges of 80 cents each
made by Henry c. Mclean, the Chief
Clerk of the Health Department, for mo-
tary fees, Mr.. Mclean, in add tio1 to his
official duties, being a notary pubic. Com
missioner Ross brought the matter TO the
attention of Dr.. Woodward with a state
ment that the charges might cause some
criticism when sent TO the Treasury De-
partment. He added that it had never feea
the custom in the office of the secretary
of the Board of Commiss oners TO make
a charge for such services when rendered
to District officials in connection with
their accounts. Commissioner Ross then
put this question to DR.. Woodward: Does
Mr.. Mclean receive fees during business
hours for his services as notary public
when perfecting accounts of Distrist Of
ficials?''
In his reply to Commissioner Ross DR..
Woodward stated that the accounting OFF,
GERS of the Treasury Department have re-
Gently passed at least one account, ap-
parently without question, in which an
employe of that department claimed re-
endorsement for notaryS fee paid by
him to a fellow employe. DR.. Woodward
states that he has reason to believe that
this was in no way an exceptional cccur
renee. Continuing he stated: Consider
ing the present case without reference to
.he precedent thus established, it is evil
dent that it is no part of the duty OF the
chief clerk of the Health Department to
affix his seal as a notary public TO accounts
of other employees, for he is not required,
either by law or by any regulation or
other order of the Commissioners, to be
qualified for the performance of such work,
His commission is entirely personal and
would not lapse were he to sever his con-
nection with the Health Department There
appears, therefore, to be no reason to re-
gard his salary as the chief clerk as hay-
ing been intended to compensate him for
his services as notary public, nor any
ground upon which the District govern
ment can claim his services as such, with
out compensation, if he happens to hold
such a commission.
1.-The fees Of notaries public in the Dis
trict of Columbia are regulated by the
revised statutes, which provide that the
fee for each seal shall be so cents, the
amount charged in the present instance.
In constituting this the Court of Appeals
has said that the notary has no right to
ask more or less for his services. DR..
Woodward's report further states that
there is no evidence that the issue of the
two notariaI certificates referred to have
interfered with the performance of the
official duties of the chief clerk of the
Health Department. DR.. Woodward thinks
that Mr. Mclean hasain certain instances
been called upon to perfect accounts but
these cases have been few. 1t is further
stated that if the Commissioners are of
the opinion that such proceedings should
be discontinued MIR. Mclean will refund
the amount collected"