The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1911-09-16
Wiley is Praised
By the President
CONTINUED from FIRST Page)

CONTINUED from First Page)
'T return herewith the papers which
you have submitted to me in the mat
ter Of the report of the committee on
personnel Of the department of agri-
culture in which, after summarizing
the evidence adduced before them,
they recommended that DR.. III. H.
Rusby.. pharmacognosist in the bu-
reau of chemistry /bet dismissed from
the service; that DR.. L. F. Kebler,
chief Of the drug laboratory in the
bureau Of chemistry, be reduced from
his present position, and DR.. H w.
Wiley, chief of the bureau OF chem
istry, and DR.. w. D. Bigelow, assist
ant chief Of the bureau, be given an
opportunity to resign from the posi-
tons which they now hold in the bu-
reau of chemistry on account OF the
Irregularities In the department OF
DR.. H. H. Rusby.
"The facts shown by the papers
stated shortly are as follows:
"Dr. Rusby lived in New York and
was employed as a scientific expert In
the bureau Of chemistry to examine
ment by which he received $40 day
for laboratory work and $50 day for
attendance in court.
"On May "a, 1909, the attorney gen.
eral advised the secretary of agricul-
ture that under act OF March 4, 1907.
GA stat 12S0) no classified scientific
investigator could receive a salary to
exceed 50 a day. On May 20, 1909. an
order was issued putting him on the
roll at q salary Of SO a day when ac-
tually employed. DIR. Rusby objected
to this and applied to DIR. Kebler, chief
Of the drug laboratory. to secure diff
ferent arrangement. The matter seemed
to have been held in allegiance for some
time. Finally, as result of a confer
ence between DIR. Kebler, DR.. Bigelow
and DIR. Wiley with respect to the re-
quest OF DR.. Rusby for an increased
compensation, DR.. Wiley said he would
submit to you for your approval, an
appointment of DR.. Rusby at salary
at the rate Of $4,000 per annum on the
miscellaneous roll. DR.. Bigelow then
wrote to DR.. Rusby under date of jan
uary 81, as follows:
"Kebler and took the matter up
with DR.. Wiley today and he said he
would approve 1t If we had on record
q understanding with you 20 we could
not be held responsible for your re-
ceiving an annual salary and not de-
voting your whole time to the bureau.
told him that II you were given an
appointment az the rate Of $40
month you would agree not to receive
more than $40 day for time actually
official day of 71-2 hours. This would
be equivalent to s1-2 days a month on
the average. told him that II 1t hap
pened your work for the department
amounted on the average to less time
than that you would ask for leave Of
absence for sufficient time to bring 1t
to that basis
DIR. Rusby answered this letter and
questioned what was meant by 1t. He
said he did not understand Bigelow's
letter clearly and supposed that IL he
did not earn the entire salary he would
not expect to receive any more than
was earned.
Meantime on February DIR. Wiley
submitted to you an appointment of
DR.. Rusby at q salary at the rate OF
1900 per annum on the miscellaneous
roll He made the reduction after ex-
aiming the records and finding the
amount Of work done by DR.. Rusty
during the preceding two years. You
approved this appointment. a
After the appointment DR.. Bigelow
wrote DR.. Rusby that he thought the
present arrangement was better than
the former arrangement when he was
receiving $40 per day for laboratory
work and $50 day for court work be-
cause he said you are now assured of
getting a certain amount each month
irrespective of the time spent, and you
can so plan your work as to interfere
with your regular duties to a minimum
extent
"This did not satisfy DR.. Rusby and
he sought further information in a
letter dated March 3. 1911, as follows:
Kindly recall that on my side the
basis OF compensation Is not less than
$50 per day. At that rate only eighty
days work per year are provided for
and that is not time enough to salts
factorily perform more than the cur
vHrv 1a.x d.
for examination of interstate samples,
especially microscopic examinations or
| for attendance at court. For every
| day at court you average one day Of
preparation Is required.
The above facts lead to the in
| quiry, would not the salary named
compel me to either do very much
| more than eighty days work per year
or otherwise fail to do the necessary
amount OF work in a satisfactory man
ner?'
ION March DR.. Kebler wrote to Dr.
Rusty stating among other things the
following: Personally I am of the
opinion that your new appointment is
much better than the old. Under this
appointment you can do as little as one
DAYS work per month and you get your
salary. On the other hand II you work
five or ten days, your salary would be
the same per month. It seems to me
your own hands. am satisfied that If
you do not accept the new appointment
nothing more can be done
ION March DIR. Rusby wrote to DR.
Kessler saying that he had decided to
accept the appointment. The nub Of
the charge by the personal board was
that DR.. Wiley, DR.. Kebler. Dr. Bige-
low and DIR. Rusby In effect conspired
to put on the record a contract for a
general employment of DR.. Rusby's
services for $1,000 a year but actually
and secretly made a contract with him
by which he was only to do enough
work during the year for the $1,000 to
secure him a compensation OF $50 day
and that this was done in deliberate
and defiant violation of the law as in
terpreted by the attorney general in
the opinion already referred TO, in
which he held that congress had linn
tied the compensation Of experts to SO
day.
After you submitted to me the re-
port of the personnel of the board.
asked the attorney general to examine
"a L. y f@ int IT, erA