Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-09-16

the department toward an employ
ment at an annual salary of this kind
and the opinion of the attorney gen
eraf instilis matter. because il Or. Wi.
ley and his associates had understood
that the $1,000 annual salary required
them to exact from DR.. Rusby sev, n
hours a day for all the work DAVIS %
the year, then of course his employ
rient must have been known by them
to be illegal. and under the circum-
stances to be only Il cover for a diff
ferent contract of employment: but if
| They understood, as seems to have
been the case generally in the agricul-
tural department that such an en-
ployment at an annual salary might
be entered into with experts of this
kind. and only subject the experts to
an obligation to work for the depart
ment whenever called upon. with the
understanding that they had some
other vocation to which their chief
attention was given, it clearly recon-
eiled the action of DIR. Wiley with a
desire to comply with the law The
recommendation of the attorney gem
eral given to me was upon only part
| of the evidence and hence his juag-
ment was different doubtless from
what 1t would have been if he had
had the whole record before him, as I
have now. 1t seems fairly clear that
DR.. Wiley, after an examination of the
records, concluded that the employ
Tnent of DR.. Rusty at 80 day for
Laboratory werk. and $50 Il day for
court work would amount to $1,000 a
4f..s u IN
whenever they. needed him and that it
was this arrangement to which you
consented.
In Or. Keblcr's anxiety to indorse
DR.. Rusty to accept the new terms of
employment he certainly BETRAYED a
Willingness to construe the contract
of employment of DR.. Rusby at 1880 a
year in one way to reconcile ii with
the law. and IN another way to salts
fy DR. Rusby In his wish to secure 500
day and j think he ought to be rep
rimanded for his disingenuous conduct
in writing such letters as he did He
sa id that he did not intend to violate
the statute as interpreted BY the at
terney general and indeed that he did
not know exactly what the ruling was:
but whether lie did or not. the Lam
gauge of his letters does not have a
|commendab BILE tone. and suggests will
ingneSs to resort to vasion, that calls
for official reproof.
In respect to DIR. Rusby, / do not
find that he was advised at all as to
the legal difficulty that he was only
seeking for additional compensation
which he thought to be adequate.
tr,.t
bureau chiefs and heads of depart
ments te exact per diem compensation
for the employment of experts In such
cases as this is doubtful legislative
policy. Here is the pure food act
which it is of the highest importance
TO enforce and in respect to which the
interest opposed to its enforcement
are likely TO have all the money at
their command needed to secure the,
most effective expert evidence The
government ought not to be at a dis
advantage in this regard. and one
can not withhold ones sympathy with
an earnest effort by DR.. Wiley To pay
proper compensation and secure eX-
pert assistance in the enforcement of
so important statute certainly in the
beginning when the questions arising
under 1t are of capital Importance TO
the public.
If this were knowing. Wilful, de-
liberate effort to evade the statute as
construed by the attorney general,
accompanied by scheme to conceal
the evasion and violation | should
think the punishment recommended
by the personnel board, and concurred
in by the attorney general. was none
too great; but an examination of the
whole case satisfies me that n different
construction ought to he put upon
what was done; thai the evidence does
not show that DR.. Wiley WAS party
to the correspondence or the letters
upon which the chief charge is found
ed, and that his action in the matter
was only il accord with previous pre-
cedents in the department which justi-
fed him in doing what he did.
With respect to the other persons
charged, ! find an overzeal in DIR. Ke')-
Ter and DR. Bigelow which prompted
a disingenious method of squaring DR..
Rusby's desire for what he thought
was adequate compensation with the
contract which YOU and DIR. Wiley
were Hlfl1IlR u iiithc Will H1in duu
that for this DR. Kebler and DIR. Bigc-
low should be reprimanded by YOU.
SO far as DR.. Rusby is concerned
with respect to this particular con-
tract do not find him at fault For
purposes Of punishment or dismissal
can not charge him with knowledge
OF the legal difficulties involved in his
employment.
| examined the record in this case
a number of weeks ago and reached
the conclusion, which / have stated
here: but meantime, a committee OF
the house of representatives deemed
it proper to institute an investigation
into the department of agriculture.
and especially into the bureau Of
chemistry and its relation to the de-
partment generally.
1t seemed to mo under. these condi-
tions that perhaps it was wiser for
me to delay until the investigation
was completed and the report of the
committee made, The committee has
not made report although l he
lieve the evidence has been substan
TALLY closed. and will not do so until
the next session of Congress- Further