The Washington times., 1915-01-28
MACKEY REPLIES TO
CHARGES BY DENT
Denies Kinnear or Masters In.
fIuenced Him to Oppose the
Fee System.

Denying that John B. Kinnear or
Samuel J. Masters influenced him to op-
pose the fec system in the office Of the
Auditor Of the District Supreme Court,
Attorney Crandal Mackey today issued
. statement concerning charges filed
with the Senate by Aucitor Louis A.
Dent.
while Ma Dents reference to me was
offensive and uncalled for and undig-
nifled. I will not hurt great cause by
tndulg1ng In personalities, though I am
Dent has a 'silt-edged good thing that
he undertakes to defend the unlimited
and uncontrolled fee system" says Mr..
Mackey in his statement. Continuing.
no says:
ION my return from New York
I was shown a clipping from the
Washington Herald quoting from d
pamphlet laid by Auditor Louis A. Dent
bS ne ir,es o make
It appear that my opposition to the fee
system In the auditors Office was due
TO the fact that was a friend Of
ss sssnss aad wSom sS
q case. l dismiss his reference to me
with the statement that I never knew
or saw the man kinnear IN my life. nor
did I ever see Masters until about
laws in Virginia. He never mentioned
the name Of Auditor Dent to me then,
j know that he was the man whose
animosity Mr.. Dent was endeavoring to
capitalize as q defense Of the fee sys-
TEN.
"The Best Answer"
''The best answer to Mr.. Dents de-
Tense Of the fee system Is to quote
from the records of Mr.. Dents office
as shown in the report Of William W.
Spalding. acting. for the House Com
mittee on the District Of Columbia.
can quote from this publication
with absolute confidence in its truth
fulness. because the facts stated
therein were never specifically denied.
opportunity to do SO. and was express
~ invited to go before the commit
tee and point out any errors in this
report.
charged for the four years preceding
the report S61.s93.as, or an average
Of $16.473.33 per year in fees. Mr..
Dent kept his own fee book and 1t is
fair to say that he did not record any
report shows that S11.74s.s0 should
be deducted as the expenses of his
office for the four years covered by
the report, and these deductions were
almost entirely prepared by Mr.. Dent
Average Compensation.
''This report shows that the average
annual compensation Of the office
after paying all expenses was
31a.s7s.97. This net income does not
include fees which Mr.. Dent claimed
were uncollectible. or alleged extra
ordinary expenses in equipping the
1facH. although this equipment Is Mr..
Ing Of his own law books and his own
furniture.
It viii be seen that the net compen-
oation that he receives AZ auditor Is
moro than twice the compensation Of
the Judges Of the Supreme Court of the
District Of Columbia, to whom he IL
subordinate. and that he receives III fees
every year $500" more than the highest
1umbia, the Chief Justice of the Court
Of Appeals. who receives 81 500 a year.
This reply Is necessarily too brief
20 state many examples of the fee sys-
tom found In Mr. Dents own office. but
. few instances will suffice to show the
public how the fee system orpresses
. those least able to bear its burden.
Increase 100 Per Cent.
In the case of William Eimbeck.
administration No. 1898. Mr.. Dents fees
were $50, notwithstanding that the
estate was insufficient to pay the fun
eral expenses Of the decedent Mr..
Dent. however, was paid his fees In
full
my experience leads me to believe
that the fees of the auditors office have
Increased about 100 per cent since Mr..
Dent went into that office; or, in other
words, that Mr.. Dents charges arc
almost twice as large as those OF his
predecessor.
. II know Of case to which Mr.. Den,
devoted less than ten minutes and
his fee was 80 This was the case OF
Dyer VS.. Harris. law No. 61.s1l.
In In Rackey vs. Hilton. equity No
'ss1: M hIm Dents fee as. was sleo % slth9Hsh Ss1
showed the account when I handed him
the papers: and the greater part OF
what he had to do was to put 1t In the
form of schedules and lengthen 1t cut
'Nr. Dents charges Of $50 a day are
purely arbitrary and fixed by him
Such q charge Is out Of all proportion
to the Gompensation Of public offiGer4
where. In addition to this charge o.
go day. he charges IS for each addi
uonal hour. He not only fxes his owl
day. but he measures his own day. and
keeps his own account of the day.
which he claims to devote to the busi
''Mr. Dents fees frequently fall OF
the estates OF widows and orphans anc
insolvents and those least able to beal
the burden Of the expense.
Purpose of the Bill.
1.-THE bill before the Senate Judiciar!
Committed does not propose to abolish
the fee system in Mr.. Dents office. bu
proposes to cover the fees received int
the public treasury and. out OF tn
same. pay to the Auditor a reasonably
salary. thereby taking away the temp
tation to charge excessive fees. II
other words the bill merely proposes t.
put the Auditors office in the same po
sition as the United States Marshal
office. and the office of the Register o
Wills. the Clerk Of the Court. and tn
Recorder of Deeds.
II challenge Mr.. Dent to stat
whether or not a majority Of the Jus
ti,eS OF the SUP. 'n,c Court OF tho LIS
trict OF Columbia are III favor OF tn
present unlimited and uncontrolled fc
system. Certainly these justices ar
familiar. with the WORKINGS of this sys
tenn and have definite opinions on tli
subject"
Mrs. Mamie r. Heth Is
Given Farewell Reception