Omaha daily bee., 1911-09-16
ploynasnt of experts outside of Washing
To Understand Difference.

DlOYDent OF experts DbNSINS "a
ton
To UnderstRnd Difference.
ut is necessary fully 20 understand this
difference between the attitude Of the de-
partnent toward an employment at an an
nual salary of this kind and the opinion OF
the attorney general in this matter, because
II Or Wiley and his associates had under
stood that the Sl600 annual salary required
them to exact from Or. Rusby seven hours
q day for all the work days of the year
then of course, his employment must nave
been known by them TO be illegal and
under the circumstances to be only
cover for q different contract of employ
nnent; but IL they understood as seems
to have been the case generally in the de-
partment that such an employment at an
annual salary might be entered into with
experts of this kind, ana only subject the
experts to an obligation to work for the
department whenever called on, with the
understanding that they had some other
vocation to which their chief attention
was given. it clearly reconciled the action
Of DR.. Wiley with desire to comply with
the law.
The recommendation of the attorney
general given to me was only one part OK
the evidence and hence his judgment was
different, doubtless from what it would
have been il he had had the whole record
before him, as have now.
1T seems fairly clear that Dr. Wiley
after an examination OF the records con-
cluded that the employment OF Dr. Rusoy
at 50 a day for laboratory work and $50 a
day for court work would amount TO $500
a year II the department called On him
whenever they needed him and that It was
this arrangement to which you consented
willingness of Kebler.
I'm Dr. Kebbler's anxiety to induce Dr.
Rusby to accept the new terms OF employ
uaent he certainly betrayed willingness to
construe the contract employment OF Dr.
Rusty at $1,000 a year in one way to
reconcile 1t with the law and In another
way to satisfy DR.. Rusty in his wish TO
secure $40 day and think he ought to be
reprimanded for his disingenuous conduct
In writing such letters as he did. He SAID
that he did not intend to violate the statute
as interpreted by the attorney general and
indeed that he did not know exactly what
the ruling was; but whether he did or not
the language of his letters does not have
con1mendable tone and suggests willing
ness TO resort to evasion that calls Tor OF
fetal reproof.
In respect to DR.. Rusby, / do not find
that he was advised at all as TO the legal
difficulty and that he was only seeking for
additional compensation which he thought
adequate.
The truth is the limitations on bereau
chiefs and heads of departments to exact
per diem compensations for the employ
nent of experts in such cases as this is
doubtful legislative policy. Here is the pure
food act, which it is the highest importance
to enforce and in respect to which the in
terests opposed to its enforcement are
likely to have all the money at their COM
mand needed to secure the most effective
expert evidence. The government ought
not to be at a disadvantage in this regard
and one cannot withhold ones sympathy
with an earnest effort by DR.. Wiley to pay
proper compensation and secure expert as
sistance in the enforcement Of so important
a statute. certainly in the beginning when
the question arising under it are Of capital
importance to the public.
wiley Not = Party.
IF this were a knowing. wilful delib-
crate effort to evade the statute, as con-
strued by the attorney general accom-
panied by a scheme of evasion and viola
ton. should think the punishment recon-
mended by the personnel board and con-
CURED in by the attorney general, was
none too great. but an examination of the
whole case satisfies me that a different
construction ought to be put on what was
done; that the evidence does not show that
DIT Wiley was a party 10 the correspond
enee, or the letters upon which the chief
charge is founded, and that his action in
the matter was only in accord with
previous precendents In the department,
which justified him In doing what he did
With respect to the other persons
charged, find an over zeal in Dr. Kebler
ana DR.. Bgelow, which prompted a dis
ingenious method of squaring DR. Rusby's
desire for what he thought was adequate
compensation, with the contract, which Won