The Monmouth inquirer., 1889-04-18
Chosen Freeholders' Meeting,
Reported Expressly for THE MONMOUTH INQUIRE,

Reported Expressly for THE MONMOUTH NoUrREz
WEDNESDAYS MEETING.
The adjourned meeting of the Board
of Chosen Freeholders of the County
of Monmouth was held at the Court
House, yesterday, Wednesday. Messrs.
Seabrook and Dunlop being absent.
Mr.. John B. Conover. of Freehold, was
introduced to the Board by Mr.. Cooper.
A petition from the Freehold Baptist
church, to use the Court House, az q
place of worship, on Sundays while
their church was being built, was pre-
sented by Mr.. J. B. Conover and
granted.
A communication was read from L B.
Battin asking that road from Fair
Haven to Red Bank be declared coun-
ty road, was laid on the table.
Counsel Conover stated that he was
ready to deliver his opinion, if the Free
holders desired to hear it.
Mr., Cooper suggested that County
Auditor Applegate be requested to be
present
County Auditor Applegate first asked
the Board to defer the reading of the
opinion, as he had statement to make.
but afterward said that he was ready to
hear the CounsePs opinion.
THE COUNSEL s OPINION
To the Board of Chosen Freeeholders OF
the County of Monmouth:
Gentlemen:-In accordance with your
request made at the March meeting of
the Board have examined the bills of
County Auditor Applegate and O. Ewing
Patterson. Esq, presented at the Febru-
ary meeting and have reached the follow
ing conclusions as to their legality.
The County Auditors bill icontains but
one item to-wit:
s.To two days and expenses going over
license books and accounts OF license
fees IN Office of County Clerk, by order
Of Board Of Freeholders, SIS per day. $50 oe
The resolution of the Board offered by
MIR. White at the previous meeting was
recorded in the following form, to wit:
Resolved, That the Auditor of the County Of
Monmouth be instructed to give monthly state
ment Of all moneys due the County from the
County Clerk"
Obviously. the first question in logi-
cal order to determine is, whether the
services charged for were part of the du'
ties of the office of Auditor of the coun-
ty of Monmouth.
If they were not, then they were extra
services and the Auditor would doubt
less be entitled, not in his official capac-
ity as Auditor, but as an individual, iii
his claim was so presented) to reasona.
BILE compensation for the same.
But if, on the other hand. these serv
) ices were within the scope of the Audi
) tors duties, as defined by the Statute,
then the Auditor would not be entitled
to extra compensation, for he is paid by
salary for his services, the language Of
the Statute being that the Auditor is en-
titled "to receive for bis services the sum
of Eight Hundred dollars per annum
. receive any other fees or compensation
whatever. Pamph. laws, 1873. p. 332.
This view is not open to controversy,
as it has been held by the Court of Err
rors and Appeals of our State in the
case of Evans vs. City of Trenton "A Zab
764) that it is we'll settled rule that q
person accepting public Office with q
fixed salary is bound to perform the du.
ties of the Office for the salary. He can
not legally claim additional compensa-
ton for the discharge of these duties,
: even though the salary may be very in.
adequate remuneration for the services.
His undertaking is to perform the duties
of his Office whatever they may be from
time to time during his continuance in
office, for the compensation stipulated. y
What duties then are eDjoined by law
upon the County Auditor?
They are specifically defined in the ac
OF March 18th, 1873, as follows, to wit:
aThat it shall be the duty of the County Audi
tor so appointed to superintend the collection o.
all dues, revenues and other claims OF the Coun
ty of Monmouth now due, payable or coliectaole
or hereafter to become due, payable or collectable
to institute and direct prosecutions against de
linquent officers of the County and for just caimi
and debts due the County, to examine carefully
and to audit and adjust all bills claims, demands
against the said county Of Monmouth and to Ger
tify the amount so adjusted or allowed by him tt
the County Collector for receipt and payment, &c
Now, while the language employed in
the above quoted Statute does not in ex
press terms require the Auditor to ''gC
over the license books and accounts of
license fees 10 the Office of the County
Clerk, /" still, I have been unable to dis
cover any possible escape from the con
clusion that the terms OF this section OF
the act are sufficiently broad and com
HKCuOuclVO w AAOiuuO ~ AL h1PAAOoSAoh saas
very service.
This construction of the Statute il
seems must be adopted after careful
examination OF at least two separate
clauses OF the same.
For instance take the clause enjoining
upon the Auditor the duty ''to institute
and direct prosecutions against delln-
quent officers of the County and for just
claims and debts due the County"
| OF course. in order to institute pros
ecution against either delinquent off
Ger or for any debt due to the County
there must first be an accurate ascer.
tainment of the fact itself either Of de-
lipquency or Indebtedness.
The imposition of the duty of prose.
cution pre-supposes the ascertainmeni
of the facts upon which it would have
to be based. The one follows the other
as surely as conclusion does prem.
ise.
There is ample authority for holding
that the express imposition Of one duty
implicitly imposes another, and it is 9
= u ~k~.~~