Pennsylvania Advisory Opinions January 06, 1913: AGO 35

Advisory Opinion Text

ACCOUNTS OF ELECTION EXPENSES.

Under section 7 of the Act of March 5, 1906, P. L. 78, relating to accounts of election expenses, it is unlawful for the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives to administer the oath of office to any member-elect until he has filed an account of his election expenses or a certificate under oath that his aggregate receipts or disbursements did not exceed $50. When, however, such an account or certificate has been filed, the jurisdiction of the Chief Clerk ends, and he cannot pass upon the question of the truth thereof, or refuse to administer the oath of office. If the account is false in any particular, a remedy is provided in section 9 for an audit and investigation by the Court of Quarter Sessions.

Office of the Attorney General, Hon. Thomas H. Garvin, Chief Clerk, House of Representatives, Harrisburg.

Sir.: I am in receipt of your letter of January 4th, enclosing a letter and affidavit from W. A. Mitchell, of Milford, Pike County, and asking to be advised with reference to your action, under the facts set forth in said letter and affidavit, as Chief Clerk, in the matter of administering, or refusing to administer, the oath of office to Edwin F. Peters.

It appears from the letter that Mr. Mitchell alleges that the said Edwin F. Peters, a member elect of the legislature from Pike County, has not complied with the Act of March 5, 1906, (P. L. 78), entitled.

"An act to regulate nomination and election expenses and to require accounts of nomination and election expenses to be filed, and providing penalties for the violation of this act,"

and that his non-compliance therewith appears from the enclosed affidavit. The affidavit made by Mr. Mitchell before the Prothonotary of Pike County avers that:

'The expense account of Daniel B. Olmsted, Treasurer of the Democratic County Committee of Pike County, for' the year 1912, as filed with the Clerk of Court of Quarter Sessions, in said county of Pike, shows among other receipts, contributions from Edwin F. Peters, Demo-cratic candidate for representative in the General Assembly, amounting to $159; and further, there is also on file in said clerk's office, the sworn statement of the said Edwin F. Peters, that the aggregate amount of his receipts or disbursements in connection with the election held on November 5, 1912, did not exceed the sum of $50.00."

By the 5th section of the above cited act, it is provided, inter alia, in substance, that every candidate for election and every treasurer of a political committee shall, within thirty days after every election, at which such candidate was voted for, file with the officers therein specified, a full, true and detailed account, subscribed and sworn or affirmed to, setting forth each and every sum of money contributed, received or disbursed for election expenses, etc. In the latter part of this section it is provided that:

"If the aggregate receipts or disbursements of a candidate or political committee in connection with any nomination or election shall not exceed fifty dollars, the treasurer of the committee, or candidate, shall, within thirty days after the election, certify that fact, under oath, to the officer with whom the statement is filed, as hereinafter provided."

By section 7 it is provided that:

"It shall be unlawful to administer the oath of office to any person elected to any public office until he has filed an account, as required by this act, and no such person shall enter upon the duties of his office until he has filed such account, nor shall he receive any salary for any period prior to the filing of the same."

As I understand the facts contained in the communication and affidavit enclosed with your request, the member elect, Edwin F. Peters, has, in accordance with the above quoted provision of the 5th section of the act, certified, under oath, that the aggregate of his receipts or disbursements, in connection with his election, did not exceed fifty dollars, but Mr. Mitchell contends that, in the light of the evidence contained in the account filed by the treasurer of the Democratic County Committee, this certificate of Mr. Peters seems to be untrue.

In my opinion you have no jurisdiction to pass upon this question.

Under the 7th section of the act it is your duty to refuse to administer the oath of office to any member elect until he has filed the account required by the said act of 1906, or, in lieu of -such account, has filed a certificate under oath that his aggregate receipts or disbursements did not exceed $50.00, but when the account or certificate has been filed your jurisdiction ends. If the account, or certificate in lieu thereof, is false in any particular, a remedy is provided by the 9th section of the act, for an audit and investigation by the Court of Quarter Sessions of the proper county, which is the only tribunal authorized to pass, in the first instance, upon the correctness of the account or certificate.

You are therefore advised, that the facts stated by Mr. Mitchell in his letter and affidavit are not sufficient to warrant you in declining to administer the oath of office to the said Edwin F. Peters.

Very truly yours,

JOHN G. BEII, ATTORNEY GENERAL.