Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1920-03-26
The County Commissioners Refute
Mr.. BarnsIey's Charges.


cation of Mr.. James N. Barnsley. published
in the last issues of the Montgomery county
papers, and has been requested by the
gentlemen attacked therein to inform the
public as to the truth or falsity Of Mr.
Barnsley's charges. AS they are Of such
a serious nature, and as the Board has in
its possession the records which show the
falsity of the charges, it feels obligated to
the people Of Montgomery county to pub
lish this statement.
Mr.. Barnsley's statement reflects upon
the integrity of the following: o. W. Roby
George G. Bradley, Samuel Riggs, of S.,
John R. Lewis, Harry M. Williams. Berry
E. Clark, Bowie F. Waters and N. Hazel
Metzger. who died in 1918. whose death
the whole county has mourned. and who
cannot now answer these CHARGES. Mr..
Barnsley may be sure, and those others
whose hands are plainly discerned above
his signature may be sure, that this attack
upon gentlemen whose integrity has never
before been questioned will result in moth
ing but discredit to the author or authors
of these charges. Not one of the above
named gentlemen has received one penny
from Montgomery county which he has not
earned, or which is not authorized by law.
The annual report Of the County Treas
urer shows all receipts and expenditures of
the fiscal year, and briefly describes the
source or nature of same. but does not
and on account of lack Of space necessarily
cannot, 60 into further details. such as Civ
ing the time in which the services for
which payment is made were rendered.
These details are. of course, shown on the
vouchers and books Of the County Com
missioners and Treasurer. which are at all
times open to inspection by the public.
The absurd charge that some of the
County Commissioners were paid for 1852
days for one years services out of posi-
BILE $40 working days was made at the
hearing in Annapolis. and the charge was
not taken seriously by those who were pres
ent who are blessed with little sense of
humor. and who knew OF the circumstances
leading up to the charge. The facts are
that the Commissioners were paid the sum
| of $3.50 each for all of their services rem
dered as members of the Board of Review
in assessment work during the years 1915.
1917 and 1918. or from June 25th, 1915, to
June 9Th. 1918. which covers period Of 68l
! days. and not 365 days. These services
/ were continued over the above period and
consisted in canvassing all of the returns
of the assessors, hearing the appeals of the
property owners, and revising the assess
ments. The duties were arduous. and some
of the Commissioners were required to
travel nearly so miles to perform their
duties as outlined above, for which services
they received the munifcent sum Of SIS
per day. The Commissioners did not &C.
cept payment for any of these services
until after the assessment was completed.
which was, as stated above, June 9th,
1918, and, Of course. these payments show
in the Treasurer's report Of that year.
The same misstatement occurs in Mr..
Barnsley' letter with respect to the amounts
paid to the Clerk and Treasurer and his
assistants. His statement that the clerical
work of the County Commissioners and
| Clerk and Treasurers Office cost the county
$9,849.98 in 1918: $9.29O86 in 1917
and $8,09l in 1915. is absolutely untrue
The proper amounts could easily have been
obtained by reference to the records of the
proper Office. These figures cannot nearly
be reached by including all of the salaries.
all Of the expenses, and all additional
clerical work during the whole period of
the reassessment The amount paid to
Berry E. Clark. in lieu Of the salary Of an
additional clerk in connection with the
reassessment, grew out of the fact that it
took place during the war period. when it
was practically impossible to procure compe-
formed these services for the Assessment
Board principally after Office hours. lat
night, and on Sundays. His services were
most satisfactory. and on the completion
Of the assessment in 1918 the Board paid
him the sum Of $3.50. which was much less
than would have been paid had an addi-
tional clerk been employed. as contem-
plated by the assessment law. With ref
erence to the $3.50 expense account. this
sum was only partial refund for amounts
expended in legitimate expenses incurred
by the Clerk and Treasurer in the discharge
Of his official duties during the year. for
which proper vouchers were filed. and
which the Clerk had advanced out Of his
personal funds.
Eliminating the expenses of the general
reassessment. which has occurred but once
in the past eight years. the amount of
salaries received by the Clerk and Treas
urer and his assistants for the years men
toned by Mr.. Barnsley are as follows -
Year ending June 30th. 1919. $3.50;
year ending June 30th. 1918. $6.450;
year ending June 30th. 1917. $3.50. 1t
will be seen from the above that all Of the
total amounts of salaries allowed by law.
which is $6.750. have not been paid out.
owing to designations or vacancies in the
Office.
The total additional expense to Mont
eomery county for additional clerical work
in the Office OF the County Commissioners
in connection with the general reassess-
ment Of property in excess Of the regular
amount Of salaries levied was $368.9O.
Montgomery county has according to the
report of the State Tax Commission. 17.345
pieces of property. or more than any other