The Washington times., 1911-08-02
MORE STRANGE FEATURES OF
THE WILEY CASE.

I
Briefly, here are the facts:
The department needed the service
of the Remsen board, or thought it die
Wiley needed the services of DR.. q
H. Rusby.
The department paid the Remsel
board members $25 day as experts.
Wiley paid Rusby $40 day as al
expert.
1t was discovered that this methot
} of payment, in the case of the Remsel
board, was illegal, and SO the member
were put on the salary roll at $2,0O(
each a year.
Following exactly this precedent
Wiley had Rusby put on the salary
list at $1,000 a year.
In the case of the Remsen board, il
was held legal
In the. case of Rusby, it was held
illegal, and Wiley was recommended
for ''condign punishment"
The Remsen board members did not
earn, on an average, $1,000 a year un,
der the s25 per diem arrangement,
Only one of them put in enough time
to make his compensation for q year
reach that figure.
One member earned only $765 in a
whole year.
Despite this, when it was found nee
essary to put them on the salary basis,
they were all paid at the rate deter
mined by the earnings of the one who
earned $1,000.
Rusby, on the other hand, appears to
have done work enough to earn all
that was credited to him under his
81 600 salary.
But in the case of the Remsen board
it was held legal, proper, and sound
business.
In the case of Rusby, it was held il
legal, improper, and bad business.
The law for payment, and the method
of payment, was the same in one case
as in the other. The financial expert
of the Department of Agriculture was
asked:
Are the vouchers in the Rusby case
paid in the same manner as the vouch-
ers in the Remsen board case?"
Yes" was the reply, EXCEPT
THAT IN THE RUSBY CASE THEY
ARE APPROVED BY DIR. WILEY. IN
STEAD OF BY THE REFEREE OF
THE REMSEN BOARD AND THE
SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE"
1t appears that an exactly identical
procedure is legal when the Secretary
of Agriculture approves the voucher.
But it is illegal when Wiley, the au-
thorized head of the bureau having 20
do WITH BOTH TRANSACTIONS, ap-
proves the voucher
This is a strange showing that needs |
explanation. But it is not all that re-
quires illumination.
An Assistant Attorney General, in
vestigating the legality of the Remsen
board, found it illegal, according to re-
ports.
That opinion was rejected. 1t wasn't |
the kind wanted. The solicitor of the
of Agriculture was told
to try his hand at an opinion on the
same question and see if he could not
do better
He tried, and did. He decided that
the Remsen board was legal, and his
decision went" while the proper legal
officer at the Department of Justice
was turned down.
Good and useful person, thoroughly
handy, was the solicitor of the De-
oartment of Agriculture. Versatile to
4 degree.
He overruled the Department of Jus
ice in holding the Remsen board legal.
Then, when the other kind of a de-
,ision was wanted, he overruled himself
n holding the Rusby payments il
egal
And now he appears as one of the
trio of Mortified lovers of red
ape regularity, recommending that
Wiley be fired!
The country wants to know more
bout these legal and accounting gym
lastics. But there is protest from '
republican members of the Moss COM
nittee against calling Secretary Wilson
o testify.
The Secretary cannot afford to be
protected" in this way. This is no {
ime for standing on the dignity of
'abinet station: He ought to ask the
rivilege of testifying, rather than
tand on his dignity and keep away. !
THE BLACK REPJJRI lCn ONCE :