Evening star., 1926-04-16

4, Continned from Fourth Pagel
| Nasiticr Of the fund. as the man had
! - pDarently no relatives, and on the
! "a day of January, 1906. passed this
! 'Ga" confirming my account. direct
! ing my discharge as committee and
! au i,ori%inS me, after adjusting the
costs OF the clerk ; Office. to pay the
| balance remaining in my hands for
Il suitable headstone to be placed at
| he grave of Charles O'Neil, and upon
| ,llng in the cause the receipts for
he aid burial expenses and the said
'e2dstone that l might be discharged
...'n iurtner service.
That IS only one OF the things that
: have tried 10 do for these men. The
money belongs 10 the men who have
rarhed it, and if they can gets any
benefit ouf or 1t in their lifetime Or,
n case like this. If their money can
get any benefit. such benefit should
be given" :
Examination OF Records.
The gentleman from Texas read
the affida Wits of Ellen n. Finotti and
FIR, ak NJ. Finotti. indicating that 1
hau access TO certain hospital records.
UnQuestionably this was necessary in
The preparation OF papers to be filed
n court In order that full information
might be given TO the court, and
again we find that this is a matter
taken UP by the investigating COM
mittee two decades ago. as shown by
An interrogatory propounded to DIR.
White by Representative Wallace. a
member Of the committee, and DIR.
Whites reply, as follows:
Mr. Wallace-Were these privileges
equally afforded to othe> attorneys
and physicians who calle in the in
terest Of their soldier pa tents?
Mr.. White-We acc orded these
privileges, within rea SOL, 10 anybody
whom we are satisfied IS interested in
the welfare of the pati ents.
The letter OF the fiirector of the
Veterans Bureau To the gentleman
from Texas, dated Iarch 10, 1926,
contains the followi e paragraph:
Col. Fenning ha! been allowed by
the Supreme Court of the District OF
Columbia in practic lily every case for
which he is acting as guardian or
committee 10 per cent Of the principal
estate and on the annual income OF
the estate. as provided in section 1885
of the Code OF Law for the District OF
Columbia"
Manifestly Director Hines did not
personally obtain this information and
I assert that an examination OF the
records will show that with respect TO
very considerable portion of the
funds received from the Veterans Bu.
reau, I received a commission Of 5
per cent. this also covering and in
Guiding services as counsel and over
head expenses, such a clerical help.
Director Hines evidently relied upon
reports made by subordinates. I
stand squarely on the records on file
in the courthouse.
Auditors Schedule introduced.
The gentleman from Texas intro
duced a schedule prepared by the audi
tor Of the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict Of Columbia indicating that
had received by way OF commission.
and this including professional serv.
ices, a total Of S109,070.25. This total
includes the full amount Of commits
sion and counsel fees in cases going
back to the year 1903. and thus it will
be seen covers a period of 23 years.
The gentleman from Texas read an
affidavit of Eliza Lee, mother Of Roiey
Lee. the latter being one of my wards.
In this case the copy of my account
inserted by the gentleman from Texas
shows that the said Eliza Lee has been
obtaining from me as committee, for
her own personal support, $120 per
month. This allowance was granted by
the court on order obtained by me a nd
has been running for a long period
Of time. The income from the United
States in this case is $157.50 per
month, OF which the mother of the
ward is receiving for her own support
$12o per month. In her AFFIDAVIT the
mother contends that the estate should
be turned over to her by virtue Of her
appointment az guardian by Virginia
court, and 1t is quite apparent from
my letters filed by the gentleman from
Texas that IL the ward should be re
moved to Virginia. I would immediate
ly file my final account and ask the
court to direct that the estate be
turned over to the fduciary In Vir-
ginia The removal of this man is
matter TO be determined upon by the
Veterans Bureau and ] assert that
! have taken no step whatsoever In
opposition TO such removal,
The gentleman from Texas in his
speech calls attention to the case Of
James Roley. in which obtained an
order of court ITO pay New York
lawyer $3.50 for helping to sell prop
erty.' The records at the court
house show that services rendered in
New York included technical ancillary