Evening star., 1926-05-08
LEGALITY OF BOND
FEESDEFENCEDBY
FENN|NG ON STAND
Commissioner Is Witness at
Hearing Before Auditor of
District Court.
DENIES COMMISSIONS
TAKEN FROM ESTATES
Says U. S. Fidelity and Guaranty
Co. Paid Him for Services in
Guardian Case.

UudTuldH case.
Emphatic denial that he illegally
accepted % per cent commissions,
from bonding company in which hc
is bonded as committee for menta1Iv
lnconp petent persons was made to-
day by Commissioner Frederick a.
Fenning at a hearing before Herberr
l.. Davis auditor of the DistriCi
Supreme Court, which was called 10y
the latter to Investigate the matte
Mr. Fenning has testified before com
nlttees of Congress that the bondiu-
company, for which he is an ageut.
pays him % per cent on bonds writ
ten by him.
The hearing centered about the
case of Adolph Adler, q mentally in
competent war veteran. who wae
transferred from ST. Elizabeth's Hos
pItal two years ago To a hospital IT,
the Bronz. New York. Mr. Fenninc
has served as committee and today
he filed the final report preparatory
10 turning over the assets of the
estate TO julius Adler. the mans
father. who has just qualified a.
committee in the supreme Court OF
sum of $4,000. The father j. repre-
scented at the hearing by Joseph
Cans. d New York attorney. who be
gan the examination ot NJ. Fenninc
when the hearing opened
Maj. Arnold at Hearing.
Mr. FenninG was accompanied BY
his attorney, W. w Millans. who is
prepared 10 argue the legal aspects
of the bonding Company's commits
SION before the auditor, who. in
turn, will make a report to the Dis
triCt Supreme Court. The other in
terested party at the hearing is Ma
Davis G.. Arnold, national guardian
ship officer OF IN" Veterans Bureau.
Nj. Fenning took the stand ami
was sworn by Mr.. Davis. lie gave
his occupation as Il lawyer and sail
he was admitted to practice here iu
1901. Asked by Mr.. Davis if his prac-
tiCe has been quite active. the Com
missioner replied. Reasonably So
Mr.. Cans began the examination BY
stating he noticed i'm the final report
OF the Adler estate that Mr.. Fen
ming had entered S36.67 as bond
premium.
What proportion of this did you
receive personally" asked Mr.. Cans
and Mr. Fenning once more detailed
the story that he is an agent OF the
United States Fidelity and Guarant,'
Co, which pays him a commission of
IS per cent on all bonds taken out by
him and through his office. lie added
that in the Adler case such q com
mission was paid.
Explains Notary Fees.
The attorney questioned the notarisl
xxrhi iHh al fpH no
final statement, and Mr.. FenninG ey-
planned that he paid them to an en-
ploye In his office. who also received
q salary from him. He explained,
however. that she was in a position
to receive such notary fees as she was
able to earn.
NO portion Of them ever came back
to ME in any way, shape or form,
Mr.. Fenning declared.
us IL not true that the ward Cannoi
tell the difference in denomination
of money!" asked Mr.. Cans.
You won't find I paid any money
direct to the ward replied the wit
ness.
who did it go to them"
"Loo!, at the voucher" the witness
answered.
Mr.. Cans then asked Mr.. FenninG
if he knew a trustee of an estate was
profits or share in the income in any
way. Mr.. Millans arose and declared
he would not permit his silence To-
admit that such a question is propey
at this time and entered an objection
on the grounds of irrelevancy. incom.
potency and inadmissability.
Questioned on Rights.
Then has he a right to share in
the expenses or earnings Of an eS
tate?" pursued Mr.. Cans.
My opinion On that is incorporated
in the argument of counsel" replied
the witness
DO you decline to state your atti
tude?" asked Mr.. Cans.
NO. ] do not" replied Mr. Fenning
He explained that the commission he
received was for services rendered To
the bonding company and that in ac-
cepting it he was not taking anything
whatsoever from the estate. which
was required to pay a fiat fixed rate
of premium.
The New York attorney asked the
witness if he knew that a number
of surety companies. who receive q
large volume of business from one
source, give rebates, but tho Com
missioner replied: 80 far as | am
aware there is fiat fixed rate for
bonds charged by companies in the
District"
Am / to understand you to say
that you are willing to allow the com
mission credited to- the mans estate?'
asked Mr.. Cans.
Would Violate Code.
"I didn't say that" replied Mr.
F'enning but as | read the law such
a credit is prohibited because it comes
under the classification of rebates
If 1 should undertake to give that
commission back to the estate | would
be giving it to a person not having
a license and therefore would violate
the CODE
Then | construe you will keep all
commissions earned rather than al
low the money to go to the IN
competents?
II cannot. i'm my view. return &"
the estate any portion of the com
pensation paid 10y the bonding com
pany," replied MIR. Fenning. When
YOU asked me TO give the Dement'S I"
the estate can cite that in the pur
chase of clothing for these wards. he
is able to obtain a 10 per cent dis
count from the merchants"
Mr.. Cans thought that there is no
law regulating the limit to bond
premiums. but the witness disagreed,
declaring that IL both of them set out
Immediately TO obtain bonds in Wash
(Continued on Page s, Column ~