Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-12-02


of one political party and substituting
another"
The ruling OF Mr.. Eschbach concerning
the payment OF $500 to Mr.. Hutsel also
affects the payment of q similar sum to
him following the primary last spring
when he performed similar services under
the primary law.
Mr.. Eschbach's letter foIlowsi
"Your letter Of Nov. 20 has been re-
ceived. You submit to the State board
Of accounts for Its opinion. three In
Quiries;
81. Can the city council Of the city Of
Indianapolis pay the city clerk $500 as
member of the board Of canvassers
at is the opinion of the State board
Of accounts that the city council Of the
city OF Indianapolis cannot make such
payment and that It would be necessary
for the State board Of accounts to charge
to you any amount paid the city clerk
al q member Of the board Of canvassers.
We call your attention to chapter 234,
page es5, Of the Acts Of 1921 Quoting
from Section you wiz find the follow
ing languages
"'Such city clerk, for his services, shah
receive, In cities or the first class, a sal
airy OF three thousand dollars $4,000
a year; and such clerk shall
not receive any other compensation, fee
or perquisite whatever, except for fur
nishing certified copies Of the records
in his possession etc
''2. Can the city council Of the city
Of Indianapolis provide for the payment
of $1,000 to election commissioners for
their services as such commissioners and
- h. Of
at is the opinion Of the board Of &C
counts that the city council may provide
compensation for the two election COM
missioners, which shall be reasonable and
commensurate with the duties performed
While we may have no express statutory
Jurisdiction in this matter, We are OF the
opinion that 1900 each for the services
rendered by the two election commission
ers is too much, when we consider the
present standard Of prices and wages be-
ing paid for similar services In private
enterprises
PRUDENT BUSINESS
RULE GOOD BASIS.
at may not be part of our duties to
designate q fixed sum that we would re-
gard as reasonable and this resolves It
self into a simple business proposition
which ought to be solved by your City
Council II seems that there is but one
rule to guide official bodies in matters
of this kind and that rule is substance
Is: What would a prudent business man
pay for such services In the conduct OF
his private businessT
There Is no reason why public o1icials
or citizens performing public duties
should be paid more than like services
are compensated in private business.
81 al
pIoy attorneys to displace nominees and
substitute the names OF others, and, If
so, is 81, 400 a reasonable compensation
for such services7
at this was a matter for the attention
Of the city election commissioners and a
municipal problem, then It seems that
the corporation counsel or the city at
torney ought to have taken care of the
legal problems. II this was not a munich
pal problem, then the city election COM
missioners had no legal authority to en-
ploy attorneys for the purpose set out In
your letter. and II they had no legal au-
thority. Of course they could not provide
for the payment from public funds
"We are Of the opinion that until we
ara advised more fully as to the legal
phases Of this matter, that the city cleo
ton commissioners have no authority to
employ attorneys TO institute proceedings
for the purpose Of displacing q nominee
Of one political party and substituting
another.
"If, as we believe, the city election
commissioners had no such authority,
then Of course they have no authority
to pay such attorneys from the public
funds. II they had such authority, then
the same question arises as to the rea-
condolences Of the. amount charged and
upon this matter we should all be guided
by the same rule Of reasonableness that
applies to our answer to question No. 2.
"If the city election commissioners had
the authority to employ attorneys, we
are still Of the opinion that S2,4O0 is too
much to charge for such services rem
dered to public and Official bodies"
Upon receipt Of the letter Mr.. Bryson
held a conference with Mayor Charles w.
Jewett and Corporation Counsel Samuel
Ashby. 1t was announced that the three
matters were being referred to Mr.. Ashby
for further opinion not only as to what
the controller should do, but also whether
the mayor should sign resolutions fixing
the pay of the election commissioners ar
s., 900 and allowing City Clerk George o.
Hutsen the $500 as q member Of the board
OF canvassers, adopted by the city coun-
ell Nov. 21.