Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-07-03
THE QUESTION OF Personal
LIABILITY.

ton to devote to the purpose. Ii we
understand the questions that have been
raised, in reference to the expenditures
of the board of trustees for 1928,
there is, or can be, no charges of fraud,
peculation or speculation on the part of
the board, as a unit, or as individuals.
With the exception of the building OF
the sewer, it is not claimed that the
money has not been judiciously expend-
ed, and it is admitted that, with this eX-
ception, the village has been benehted
by each and every item OF expenditure,
and that for such expenditures there has
been s'value received" In reference to
the sewer, we endeavored to show that
the question of extravaganza, was one
of fact, and was, as yet, open and unde-
cided. We know not-and, at the pres
ent time, have not the means of know
ing-whether or not the sewer was con-
structed of the best possible materials,
and at the proper season of the year
We do not think that we are guilty of
presumption, when we say that each
and every citizen and taxpayer of the
village is in the same position, in this
particular, as we are. One man thinks,
and honestly believes, that another kind
of sewer would have been preferable,
and that the summer season was the
only proper time in which the actual, or
any other, sewer should have been con-
structed. Others, with equal sincerity,
believe that the sewer was constructed
of the proper materials, and at the only
proper time of the year. The trustees,
in the exercise Of their best judgment,
adopted the plan which was carried out,
entered into a contract for its cOnstruc-
ton, and the work was performed when
it was. Whether or not it will answer
all that is claimed for it, is question of
fact to be hereafter determined. 1t is
sufficient now to say, that it has with
stood the spring freshets, and has not
proved unscrviceable.
The only other question raised in ref
erence to this matter, as we understand
it, has been whether the trustees, in the
expenditure of money and mourning La
bilities, had exceeded their powers, and
if so, whether they were personally liza
able to respond, in pecuniary damages
therefor, at the suit of the village. No
complaint having been made that in the
completion of the village hall, the re-
iru apI irrI,
and in the construction of the sewer, if
the sewer was properly built, the village
has not received a benefit commensurate
with the money expended, the only ques-
tion was and is Had the trustees a legal
right to make these improvements, in
excess of the tax voted and money re-
ceived from the highway tax, etc. !?
That this is so, is apparent from the
resolution, adopted at the village meet
ing, which directed the appointment of
a committee, whose sole and only duty
ii was to inquire whether the trustees
had incurred a personal pecuniary liabil-
ity by violating the provisions of ian
ordinance relating to the expenditure of
the village money; which ordinance we
published in full Tuesday morning. 1t
is to this question, and this question
alone, that we have directed our atten-
ton. We have not considered, or en-
deav0red to consider, the matters of fact
arising out of these expenditures. 1t
was not, and is not now, necessary for
us to say whether we approve or disap-
prove of the expenditures in whole or in
part, or whether we disapprove of some
and disapprove of others. Our opinion
upon this matter is of no consequence
whatever, and has no bearing upon the
question of legality or illegality. Our
only reference to facts, alleged facts or
supposed facts, was to illustrate the ar
gument. Two replies have been called
out by our article, one leading editori-
al in the GLo5e-by whom written or in
spired we cannot say-the other in a
communication addressed to us through
the columns of the same paper, by Mr.
N. p. Simons, the legal member of the
committee to which we referred. In the
few words which we have to say in re-
ply, we shall speak of both together,
and endeavor to confine ourselves to the
question under discussion. We may do
this in a rambling way" but shall en-
deavor to threat it seriously, and as a
gentleman should, and not ramble from
the only point involved.
In the outset, we may say that our
only reference to Burlington, was an il
lustration of the uniform usage and
practice, throughout the State, to ex-
pend upon highways more than the
amount of the highway tax We will
now further say, that the charter of
Burlington-n0t an ordinance-contains
clause limiting the amount of expendi-
lures certain amount. Yet, as we
have shown, the amount of the limita-
ton and taxes, etc, was exceeded by
the expenditures, and no question was
made in reference to the legality of such
expenditure. Indeed, such a clause in
a city or village charter has been ex-
pressly decided to be, not prohibitory,
only directory, and, therefore, not of
binding force. In reference to the right
of the trustees to expend money over
and above the amount raised by the
highway tax, it has been decided in
New York where the court held, as re-
ported in the 44th of Barbour, that an
absolute obligation and liability rests on
q village corporation to keep the roads
in repair without reference to the funds
in the possession of the trustees"
The aim of the two articles re-
ferred to is difficult to determine,
as each admits away the whole question,
by conceding the right of exceeding the
amount of tax in cases of emergency.
Who is to determine whether or not the
emergency has arisen, except the village
trustees? This is, also, conceded, as it
must be by any one-lawyer or layman
who has examined the subject. A
citizen or officer is not pecuniarily re-
sponsible for an error of judgment. and
4