JAMES R. CLAY
|Philadelphia Inquirer - November 14, 1909|
Ford Patterson Jr. - James Clay - George Cooper -
Edmund Pike - Walter Stanton - Oscar Weaver - Albert Shaw
William Schregler - James Tatem - Edward Hartman
|Philadelphia Inquirer - January 14, 1910|
Oscar Weaver - George
W. Anderson -
James E. Tatem - Charles Whaland - Howard Smith - George Cooper
Albert Shaw - Harry Mines - Elbridge B. McClong
Philadelphia Inquirer - January 1, 1918
L. Cornog - Charles
Ellis - John Golden
Hugh Boyle - Howard Smith - James Clay - Charles Laib
Jefferson Kay - Edmund Pike - Robert Abbott
George M. Beringer - Meyers Baker
November 22, 1927
|Camden Courier-Post - February 8, 1938|
CASE PLANNED ON POLICE PENSIONS
A test suit to clarify the law governing a two-percent assessment against the pension salary of James R. Clay, retired Camden police sergeant, will be brought by the City of Camden through Firmin Michel, city counsel.
This was learned yesterday when counsel for Clay confirmed the report. Michel, after first ruling the money was illegally deducted for a period of several years, decided to oppose the writ of mandamus sought by Alex Schueneman, Jr., attorney for Clay.
John J. Crean, assistant city solicitor, stated the legal department deemed it advisable to settle the matter in the Supreme Court in an effort to clarify the law. Crean spoke in the absence of Michel, who was not available for a statement.
Under the act concerning pensions, four percent of salary is deducted and contributed to the police and firemen's pension fund. The two percent is in addition to the regular pension assessment. This amount is set aside for the pensions of widows of deceased pensioners.
Schueneman contends that inasmuch as Clay has no immediate survivor to receive a pension he should receive his pension salary without the additional two percent assessment.
"The point in question is debatable and the law is not entirely clear," said Crean." The city does not want to deprive any pensioner of his rightful amount. The law should be clarified by the court. The city legal department will oppose the writ of mandamus in the form of a test case.
Supreme Court Justice Frank T. Lloyd issued the rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue. The case will be heard later in the month by Supreme Court Justice Ralph W. E. Donges.
RETURN TO CAMDEN'S INTERESTING PEOPLE PAGE
RETURN TO DVRBS.COM HOME PAGE