Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1881-12-02
ACARD FROM COMMISSIONER STAT
FORD.

ED. DEMOCRAT lin the interests OF the
people OF the county and In justice TO my
self, l ask SPACE in your columns for the
following legal opinion from one among
the ablest attorneys OF Northwestern Ohio.
bearing upon the queslion OF fees and the
liability OF officers under existing laws,
both OF which deeply concern the tax
payers OF Wood county, and abont which
much has been said during the past year:
N. W. Stafford, County Commissioner:
DEAR SIR In reply TO your inquiries
as to the proper rates of compensation to be
allowed and paid to the Auditor OF your
county, aud other matters, have to say:
First-The law provides as you know,
that for certain duties the Auditor shall lie
paid by fees and shall also receive salary,
the rate OF which is specified. As 10 the
salary, that is the amount per year allowed
by the statute, Sections 1909 and 1910. 1t
cannot be diminished during the term for
which he has been elected, (Constitu.
ton, Art. 2, Sec. 20) But this prohibition
does not apply to fees or any other com
pensation than the yearly salary. The Su-
preme Court so decide in Thompson va.
Philips, 18th o. State Rep, p. CIT. He is
limited to the rates prescribed by taw at he
time The service is rendered. The same court
holds that no officer can charge any fees
for service for which no fees are provided
by law, and that where a service is requir.
ed for which no fees are specified, II must
be regarded ns gratuitous. Debolt vs. The
Trustees of Cincinnati, 7th o. y. r., p. 237 !;
Anderson vs.The Comm issioners, ct al. .,25th
y. S. H., y. 13; these decisions and the
statutes furnish plain guide for the Com
mssioners in settling theAuditor's accounts.
They should allow the salary according to
the law as il stood when the services were
performed for which fees are prescribed,
and no allowance for any other service.
For instance, section 4,506 authorizes for
filing each paper 3 cents, for recording each
100 words, Gets; section 4, ,064 authorizes the
Commissioners to allow not exceedingS5for
each district for certain services; sec.
lion 1915 provides cents per 100 words
| for recording the fees therein, etc. The
| fees 80 prescribed are all h. is entitled TO
aside from his salary. Section 1913 ex-
pressly forbids the Auditor TO charge or re-
ceive any other or further compensation
for his services than 81 prescribed. Section
| 1865 authorizes he Commissioners in Ger.
tam cases, TO increase or diminish, the fees
of the Auditor by not more than 10 per
cent, and that thereafter the rates 10 fixed
shall be the legal fees. That is as l under
stand the section TO mean. The fees so
Fl ixed will apply to the services thereafter
rendered, aud not to those already rem.
dered. The last clause of the section
also provides that this change shall not
affect the compensation of any oflicerelec
ed before the passage of that act, which
was in 1879, and of course ii could not af
feet the fees OF the present Auditor during
his present term.
Second-The Revised Statutes, section
85l, provides that no proposition of any
character, involving an expenditure oil
ST. 900 or more, shall he agreed to by the
Board unless all the members concur until
twenty days have passed after the intro
ductlon Of the proposition. understand
that no account OF the AUDITORS fees has
been rendered or settled during the present
year. II the fees when the account is rem.
dered aggregate 81 900, shall say that the
proposal to allow them comes fairly within,
the prohibition, although the amount may
have been reduced by advance payments t.
n ba lance of less than 81 900. may say
by the way, that such advances on account
of fees, except upon an itemized account
rendered and allowed, are not authorized
by law. w. A. COLLINS, Toledo.
Now, ask those interested in the vel
fare of the county, to give the above care
full consideration and examine the decision
of the Supreme Court above referred to.
involves n question OF hundreds in ou
county. l have other opinions Of the same
purport on the same question, but deem
this sufficient, and will make in addition
the following broad propositions:
lst-That il the parties interested in til,
fees mentioned in my minority report viii
agree to submit the same to the court
(Which are the Constitutional power to in
terpret our laws, in fair and just manne
10 be agreed upon, will agree and bint
myself to pay the costs of court in case tn,
Supreme Court sustains their view of tn,
case, if they on their part will agree ant
bind themselves to refund the money il
case l am sustained.
2i-I will give $500 line for any sec
tion of law in lorne in the State of Obi,
that, authorizes the Auditor to charge or on
Board to pay ten cents each for filing paper
on bitches which was charged and paid a
oui settlement with the Auditor on Tues
day, 1st.
3d. will give $500 line for any sec
tion Of law in force in the Stnte that give
our Board the right to disregard
the provisions OF Sectiun S5l O
the revised statutes mentioned above
Are not these propositions fair
It may be easier to talk Stafford down
That it is spitework, that it is for ponular
ity, that my head is not right since M,
sickness, &C., but it appears TO me tha
those intrusted with the interests and con
fidence of the people should be willing Il
submit all questions of doubt to that cour
created to interpret our laws.
am informed on good authority thai
the Auditors ofifour Of the counties bor
dering on Wood, took six cents hun
dred words for ditch work last year. VIII
must our county, heavily taxed as We are
pay more than our neighbors under til
same laws? N. w. STAFFORD, Com.
Nov. 81, 1881.
| Th0 Revised verst,,u nH tha Nav Toe