The Idaho world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1864-1918, 1874-01-29
DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT.

We give below the socalled points in the do
ciaion in the case of John German W. the
Board Of Commissioners of Boise county and
Ben. r. Davis. We confess we would be .
little surprised at it, if we were not incapable
of experiencing 80 childish sensation. We
shall refer to the matter again.
In the Supreme Count. Idaho Territory-John Cor
man. Appellant W.. Board OF County Commission
ers Of Boise county and Benz. I. Davis. respond
ents. .u..u
brief reasons for reversing the Judgment OF the DIS
trict Court and the action OF the Board:
FYrsk-The Board of County Commissioners 10 .
tribunal created by statute with Limited On
and quasi judicial powers, and the statute nsv!ng
furnished the rule Of evidence, or mode OF PROOF
the suicency Of the sureties it was the duty OF the
Board to approve the bond pro 1o,mo' upon .n s
thorty to adppt any other mode than that required
or provided by statute. II afterward the Board 1or
any reason. believed the bond TO be insumcent.
might proceed under section Of the act OF the 4th
session, concerning the official bonds OF omcers
by citing the bondsmen to make further )usunca-
ton. and in they were found insufficient TO cite
the Collector to show cause, on q certain Gay. why
such Office should not be vacated.
!Sec0nd-The statute requiring suretes In double
the amount OF the whole penal sum. as provided Dy
the 9Th section of the act above referred 10 gener
al In its terms and has been repealed by implication
SO far as it effects Tax Collectors by the oath section
OF the revenue act otu Se6SOus
in its provisions and applies solely to the Tax Coec
tor thus taking his in the giving OF his bond out
OF the operation of the former law. The last law
does not require sureties to justify In double the
amount Of the whole penal sum.
Third.-The order OF the Board made In 1858, re.
curing the 'ocers elect to give bonds In specified
amounts did not extend to the term Of the appellant.
aud not beyond the term Of the officers then elect.
The giving of bond in any greater sum. by the Tax
Collector. than $1,000 wholly gratutous on the
part Of the appellant. Nothing can be implied ~ the
aefia oft he q q.
Of the 9th section Of the act OF tie 5th session.
creating County Commissioners. 1t is provided that
all the proceedings Of the Board shalt be entered
records and any action not so entered OF no effect
Foarih.-There IL no power conferred upon the
Board Of Commissioners to pass upon the willful
neglect refusal OF the Tax Collector 70 perform any
Of his duties the careless and incompetent man.
ner in which Such duties are performed or the de-
faioa,on OF such officer. as by sections los and LOG
that these questions shall be tried by the proper
tribunal upon prcsentment. or indictment. and not
by the Board OF Commissioners
Fifh.-Every intent Of the Law must be construed
most strongly In favor Of the person whom the suf
frases Of the people have selected TO them in
given capacity.
Hence il follows that the action Of the Board in re.
eciing the appellants bond The order declaring the
Office of Assessor and Tax Collector vacant and the
appointment Of Ben. T. Davis 10 such Office. was
without authority Of Law and void.
II is therefore ordered that all OF said orders be
Gated aud declared void. and that the Commissioners
be instructed and required 90 approve the bond pro
fornn. rendered by the appellant German. and that
Ben. T. DAVIS be. and he il hereby required 10 turn
10 the appellant all the books papers aud effects
o! said ONCE.