The Washington times., 1901-10-20
METHOD OF PROCEDURE LOOSE.
Comptroller DisalIows Colonel Har-
ries, Claim for Extra Pay.


The claim of G. II. Harries for two
District of Columbia Infantry, appealed
from the disallowance of the claim by
the Auditor for the War Department was
decided yesterday by the Comptroller of
the Treasury. The Auditor disa1lowed
the claim because Colonel Harries failed
to show that he was present for duty
during the period for which he claimed
extra remuneration.
This decision is confirmed by the Comp
troller. Concluding his decision Mr.. Trace
well said: IF the commanding officer of a
regiment could place himself in duty
status by merely doing work of mill
tary character, it follows that he could
return to a status of waiting orders by
ceasing to do such work, and in neither
case would the time or even the fact of
the change necessarily be known to any
other person. While l recognize his au-
thority under General Orders 1870 to
change his own status under certain cir
cumstances, cannot regard SO loose a
procedure as effectual to accomplish such
a change.
1t does not appear that Colonel Harries
took any action to place himself on duty
He contends however, that his orders re-
calling certain officers of kis regiment to
duty after having placed them on waiting
orders have been recognized Dy this Office
as valid and binding upon those officers.
1t is claimed, on the authority of the opin-
ion of the Judge Advocate General, in the
case of Captain LOCKER, that an officer not
in duty status cannot issue orders which
his subordinates are bound to obey; and
that the recognition of the validity of his
10 a
himself in status of duty
1t Is probably true, as q general rule
that an officer on waiting orders is re-
lieved of his command and has not the
full authority of his rank while not en-
duty. The position of these furloughei
regiments, however, was exceptional IL
general when an officer is relieved of~hi.i
command he is succeeded by another and
proper person to issue orders. When a
regiment Is furloughed in a body, there
is no longer any necessity for Il comma nd
ing officer in the fun meaning of the term
Some one must be responsible for the
Government property and for the per
formance of such work as may ;1e re-
quired, but it is not necessary that the
officer responsible should be actually on
duty. 1t has beeI held that a temporary
absence. not exceeding one month did
not deprive company commander of the
Increased pay formerly allowed for re-
sponsibility for the arms and property of
the company.
1T is possible for a commanding officer
to exercise some supervision over the af-
fairs of his regiment during a furlougb
period without interfering with his civil
pursuits, and in that case the exercise of
such supervision would not seem to place
him in a duty status. The power to as
sign additional officers To duty during the
furlough period is incidental to the pow
er EXPIRE ssly given to make the original
assignment before granting the furlough
and is really nothing more than an
amendment of the previous orders. The
authority. whether express or implied, to
issue orders of a certain kind, does not
of itself place an officer in a duty status
for all purposes. Neither the issuance of
such orders nor the exercise of general
supervision over the officers and men on
duty is sufficient to place him in a duty
status, though II he be properly assigned
to duty the performance of those duties
might be regarded as sufficient compd-
ance with his assignment.
''As 1t does not appear that the claim
ant actually retained or placed himself
on duty in accordance with General Or
der $780, or that he was assigned to duty
by any superior authority. l am OF the
opinion that he is not entitled to extra
pay.
The action of the Auditor disallowing
the claim is affirmed