The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-08-10

Before Hon. Judge Philips.

Ycsk.--Aeton TO recover increase Of faary under
the following resolution OF the Common Council:-
ReroveS That the salaries OF the superr tendsnt Of
sani'ary Inspection. in the City lsspectors Depart
ato and that Of the FIRST clerk In said department at
per annum, from and after the first day Of De-
eember next. G. H. RING.
The following endorsement app ears on the back
Of the resolution -
BoAsD OF AssIsrAsrs, Nov IL, ls6a.-Rsfsrrsd TO
Committee on salaries and ONCE.
Nappears that the plaintiff is ,arst clerk in the
City Inspe' tors Department, and that the above
resolution was ofered In the Board Of Assistant Al
deInen on the 18th Of November last, but did not
pass that Board until tho 9th Of December follow
ing. The Comptroller now refuses 70 pay the in
creased salary as be construes the intention to In
crease the plaintiffs salary from the lst day Of De-
cember, 1864.
in this case is, veat Is meant or intended by the
words December next" in the resolntioR2 The
defendants objected to the introduction Of the report
Of the committee to whom the resolution was refer
red, but admitted 1t for the purpose Of showing
what was the intent Of the Common Council by
whom 1t was adopted as their Judgment. In order
TO arrive at fair construction OF statute or res0
luton Sii We are to inquire first what was the OBJ
the language Of the resolution carry out that OBJ
tctf In order to answer the first question, as to
the object Of the resolution under consideration the
report OF the committee contains the following
The 6rst clerk in the City Inspectors department il
the only clerk in said department consisting Of two Blu
resus paid from the City Treasury, and much Of the Ia
Lor ano oiy evolves upon him, and your
nittee deem the present compensation inadequate to the
amount OF services rendered.
From the language, it is impossible 10 escape the
conclusion that the object Of the committee in re-
porting favorably, and that Of the Common Council
In adopting the report and passing the resolution
was to Increase the salary Of public officer whose
duties they deemed worthy Of greater compensa
ton thar was then provided. or this there can be
no question. The defendants insist that the intent
of resolution cannot be explained, unless there
be come ambiguity or obscurify calling for proof
0utside the scene. CoDcede this. Is there no OBJ
security as to whether the resolution was to take ef
feet On the LIST Of December next" after the date
Of ts presentation in the Board of Assistant Alder
men, or "next" after its adoption by the Common
Council and approval by the Maycrf The contest
between the parties in this action is q sufficient
declaration Of such doubt as to render the evil
dence aisundi-the resolution necessary. Tho
rule Of law In constituting statutes is clearly laid
down by Justice Jewett, In the case Of Tonneu us
Hall, Comstock, IA. The learned Judge then
said, lit is q sound principle that such con-
stiuction ought to be put upon statute as may
best answer the intention which the makers had In
view, and that ID sometimes to be collected from the
cause or necessity of making It, at other times from
other circumstances. Whenever the intention can
be discovered, It ought to be followed, with reason
and discretion, in its construction, although such
construction may seem contrary to its letter."
Where the intention Of parties to contract Is doubt
fol, and not readily perceived, it is to be sought
after by reference to the context, and to the MP
tive Of the contract; It must be reasonable con-
structon, and according to the subject matter and
motive q Term. Rep. 7oS; Bing. Rep. 5l9.) Sta
t1tes are to be construed according to the intention
Of the makers, II this can be ss:ertained with rea
sonable certainty, although such construction may
seem contrary to the ordinary meaning Of the letter
Of the statute a Gushing Rep. SlS; BAG. Abridg
Stat Is; Cure's case, II Go. 5; Somerset or Dg6-
ton, II Mass. Rep. 1888; Buckingham or Bell, l6
Mass. 3!8.) These cases seem to establish the law
to be, that the intent Of the makers is to deter.
mine the construction Of the statute. Il there
much dimcuity, under this rule, Of determin-
passing this resolution3 It seems to me there can
not be, and that the Comptroller in his objection is
no more bypercritical than equitable. Suppose the
Trainer Of the resolution had inserted the words and
have been any doubt that the intent Of the Com
men Council was that 1t should take effect on the
LIST day OF the month Of Decembsr next immediate
~ succeeding that cater There certainly could not
ing the intent ofthe Common Council, whether the
date appeared the face Of the resolution or was
endorsed upon it2 The endorsement Of NOV. IL,
1853 appears ON the back Of the resolution, signed
hy The Clerk Of board OF Assistants, and appears to
me TO be q conclusive In fixing the meaning and In
tent Of the word next In the resolution = II that
date immediately followed the word .'next" A
e0nCe NJ tho c1fcum&ta0ce6 c0lDg Tor the adoption
Of the resolution viii materially ed N IN arriving
at the clear intent q tbs lsglglatofE subos al
nate clerk in o department II appointed
during the pleasure Of the appointng power
The performs duties 20 onerous e. 20 call for
an insreaee Of salary, and the proper authori-
" determines upon the increase. L. It reason
able TO suppose that under these circumstances the
benefit proposed to the Clerk Il to be deferred for
year, when 81 the expiration Of that term the per-
son for whose benefit the increase Is II tended may
be removed from Office, or called by death from
the scenes Of earthly abors 1t is commended by the
defendants that It Is paying poor compliment to
the discerDment and legislative skill Of the Com.
mon Council and the Mayor, in ackno wledging the
construction claimed by the plaintiff But IL It not
more liberal to conclude that guided by principles
OF equity and common sense, they intended to give
immediate feet TO what they were convinced was
IN act Of justse to meritorous public oficer2 It
Is plain to my mind that, had they intended that
resolution OF the nature Of the one now under ad-
visement should not take effect for q whole year
after its passage, they would have 80 declared by
positive language, or by striking out the word
next, !" and Inserting the figures " 1854" II there
was any necessity for raising the salary of the
plaintiff, that necessity was immediate and It would
be paying very equivocal compliment to the fair
ness Of the Common Council to arrive ct any other
conclusion. Judgment is, therefore, rendered for
the plaintiff for $l0l 10 and costs, with the usual
allowance Of statute.
ATTEMPTED OUTRAGE ny NEaRoEs-SuuuARy