The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-01-04
STILL THINKS HENRICo COUNTY
TREASURER ENTITLED TO
COMMISSION.
AUDITOR IS MISTAKEN
FORMER COUNTY ATTORNEY DID
NOT INTEND TO CONVEY
IMPRESSION GATHERED
nv NM. BoUDAR.

the Board Of Supervisors Of Henrico
| county. that County Treasurer IL. G.
Hechler should be required to re-
fund to the School Board $1.o00 t.
cover excess commissions for collect
| ing and disbursing the school fund
during the last four years, the adj
Vice having been given as the ac-
! countants stated. on the strength OF
| reversal OF his opinion by Com
monwealth's Attorney Julien Dunn,
Mr.. Gum when asked last night for
! the grounds Of his reversal. said that
he was not aware that he had re-
versed his opinion.
| short while ago, he said, just
before he went out OF office, ones OF
| the Messrs. Boudar read to him the
section OF the school law bearing on
| the treasurer's commissions. which
/ Mr. HechIer IL said to have violated,
| and which was intended to indicate
/ whether, in computing commissions
for collecting and disbursing school
| funds as distinguished from ordinary
| county funds. the two funds should
be treated separately or as single
| fund.
| Mr.. Quinn said that on looking
! over the section. he remarked to Mr..
/ Boudar that that particular section
! construed Independent u the other
/ sections seemed to Indicate that the
| two funds, in the computing of COM
| missions, should be treated AS one
! and not separately. But the remark
was made casually, Mr.. Quinn ex-
| planned. and he had no idea that
/ II would be made the occasion OF
/ the accountants advising that de-
: mand be made on Mr. Hechler to re-
FUND a part OF the commissions that
! he had collected
I Mr.. Gum said further that his
/ original opinion wss made after care
( full investigation and study Of all the
Z sectors bearing on the matter. The
school laws are vague and involved.
according to Mr.. Gum. and ii Is not
/ strange that questions Of construc-
/ ton should arise.
Mfr. sutton NoncofmniJtaf.
Frank T. Sutton. the lew Common
| wealth's attorney, said that the pub
| iished report that he had given 1t as
/ his opinion that the two funds would
/ be treated separately In the matter
! III commissions. was untrue. Il have
( been busy with criminal matters
/ since ] went into Office on the first
! Of the month" said ne, land have
| not expressed an opinion on the treas
! urer's commissions one way Or an
other: neither have I looked into the
matter"
| school Board Hasa,'t Acted.
/ The School BOARD Of Henrico coun-
ty has taken no action in the premises
ar there Is anything coming to US.
we can use to advantage" snid
! County superintendent OF Schools Ar
thur d Wright
The section Of the school laws in
volsed In the controversy Is as fol-
| tows:
/ For receiving. collecting and dis
| bursting Ievies imposed for and by
counties or school districts he shall
be- entitled tn the Eame compensation
/ allowed him by law for receiving. eot~
,ecsing and dishursing county levies
and for other ordinary purposes. In
computing commissions for collect
ing and disbursins all sums levied
for county. school and district pur-
poses the amounts shall be treated as
one sum. and shall not be divided for
the purpose OF calculating the treas
urer's commissions.
In Henrico county the receipts for
school purposes are approximately
100000, while the receipts for all
other purposes are approximately a
like amount. Under the law the treas
urer gets per cent. for the first S2s.-
600 and 8 IL per cent. for the re-
mainder. II the funds are considered
seoarately the per cent. arrange
ment will apply to $50. 600. while II
:. the funds are considered as a whole
the treasurer should get per cent.
on only s25,0oo Under the latter
construction the treasurer's commits
sion would be, in round numbers. $3f5
per year less than under tho former.
Hechpsr Issues Statement
County Treasurer H. c. Heehler,
OF Henrico county. Yesterday made
reference to alleged excess commits
sions on the school fund levy.
In the course OF the statement. Mr..
Hechler says: THAT the charge that
he drew more than he was entitled to
WAS not only misleading but false.
Iif the opinion OF the Commemorative
attorney amounts to anything"
Continuing his statement. Mr.. Hech-
Ter says;
whether the county funds and the
school funds should be treated sepa-
rately or a. whole iMraharging COM
missions,
| On February is, 1908. this aues-
ton arose In the examination Of our
accounts by Boudar 4 Son and We
i h.rew7sh fts th3 apinsan rendered b.
| Mr.. Julien Gum. Commonwealth,
Attorney. and filed with their report
and this IL the authority under which
we have been working all thai
! time"
he opinion Of Nj. Gum AZ cited
I hears date Of February Is. 1908. Ii
addressed to H. B, Boudar & Sor
and il az follows:
II am in receipt OF your reauesi
that / furnish YOU my opinion or