The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1910-04-28
:! ! l!!!lll T.! NJ NJ !
The Ipswich 0easlenaa Comnents
Further ON the Double SALARY of
St.t., Engineer Lee.
state Engineer Lee.

Further ON the Double Salary Of
State Engineer Lee.
Honorable Robert S. Vessey, Gov
ernor of South Dakota. Pierre South
Dakota:
MY Dear Sir: 1 have noted careful
ly the contents of your open letter of
the 5th instant in reply to mine Of the
31st ultimo in regard to the State
Engineer having been paid two sal
aries for the same period of time, to-
wit: A salary of $4,000 per annum
and expenses as state engineer, and
a per diem in the aggregate of over
81, 10000 per annum as Superinten-
dent of Capitol Construction. I have
read the opinion Of the Attorney Cen
eral which you kindly enclosed, and
to which you refer me as answer to
! my inquiry for your w opinion as
to the propriety OF a puolic servant
! drawing two salaries and e%ndeavor-
ing to fill two separate positions at
the same time; and the inference is
that his language and conclusion is
made yours.
With all due respect to you and the
high office of governor, in reply l will
say that I do not agree with you in
your conclusion as to the legality of
this act and l question the entire
transaction from a business and NOR
al point of view.
The opinion mentioned was ad-
dressed to the State Auditor Novem-
Der 18th, 1908 in reply to his inquiry
as to the propriety of issuing a war
rant for services as Superintendent
of Capitol Construction after the ac-
count had been certified to by the
Capitol Commission. The Attorney
General lays down the following
premises:
There is a restriction in the law
against public officers holding or
drawing pay for two incompatible Of
fees or positions"
BY a course of reasoning at con
siderable length which I have care
fully studied but am unable to COM
prehend, he arrives at the following
remarkable conclusion:
IT believe that there is nothing in
compatible between the two positions
so as to prevent him from drawing
pay as State Engineer and as Super
!intendent of Construction of the Capt.
toll Building"
Even granting that the State Aud
itor a within the law in issuing
warrants for this dual salary,-which
l do not concede,-my inquiry was
as to the merits of the case from the
higher position. You attempt to justi-
fly your curse by referring to the
work done by the State Engineer
while he was acting as Superinten-
dent of Capitol Construction when
|you say:
This work, requiring as it does ex-
pert knowledge of construction work,
lcould not have been done by the Or
binary Superintendent of Construc-
ton. Under his recommendation, the
Capitol Commission succeeded in hav-
ing the most up-to-date ventilating
system installed; made the change
from imitation marble to full marble
furnishings for the wainscoating, cor
ridors, and grand stairway; installed
the vacuum steam circulating system
of heating, a thorough %up-to-date
telephone system, and an electric
clock system, making the building
one of the most modern in equipment
OF any building in the United States
Had any superintendent done less
he would not have done his duty and
would have merited dismissal. Be-
cause one man does what any one of a
hundred other men of South Dakota
could and would do at the same OF
lower compensation, l see no reason
why the laws of South Dakota should
be annulled and a course contrary to
good business and moral principles
be pursued.
/ believe that the state of South
Dakota was entitled to all of the ser
lvtces Of the State engineer under his
appointment to that position. and
that he was entitled to 100000 sal
more. no matter in what work engag-
led.
| believe that it was not proper to
Iemploy this same official as Superin-
tendent of Capitol Construction or in
any other capacity at seven dollars or
even seven cents a day, and on this
I stand.
Since you so much further into the
j merits of the case than the scope OF
my inquiry contemplated, I am glad
of the opportunity to call your atten-
ton to a few,-but not all-of the
facts in reference to the question at
issue.
The State Engineer who was on a
salary of 100000 per annum and
expenses was appointed Superinten-
dent of Capitol Construction in July,
1907, at additional pay of $500 per
day. The same month an Assistant
State Engineer was appointed at a
salary of $1,5O0.OO per annum and
expenses. During the fiscal year END
ing June 80, 1909, the State Engin-
GERS office cost South Dakota $3.50.
80. During the first half of the pres
ent fiscal wear the State Engineer