Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-05-24
HEYDRICK'S OPINION.
He Holds That tho Allegheny County OFF,
GERS Take Their Salaries Under Special
Acts Which Have Not Been Spec;ficaIy
R.nealad Inv Genora1 Act

He Holds That tho Allegheny County OFF,
GERS Take Their Salaries Under Special
Acts Which Have Not Been Spec;fcaI v
Repealed by General Act.
Here is the opinion by Justice Heydrick
that has caused all the stir. He hasn't been
on the bench very long, but the decision
shows he is a worthy successor of the late
Judge Clark:
By an act relating to Allegheny county,
approved May /, 1861, the salary of the
Treasurer of that county was fixed at s, COO
per annum, and by a supplementary act
approved March II, $50, it was increased $500
Unless, therefore, these acts have been
repealed, the salary of that office is now
81. 500 per annum and the learned Court below
erred in entering judgment i'll his favor for
the amount Of the larger salary claimed
under the general acts of 1876 and 1883. Ii
is however, contended that the act of
the 3l>t of March, 1876, intended to carry
into effect section of article "A of the
Constitution repealed the special act OF 1861
and Its supplement-. 1t is a rule of interDre-
tatiOn as old as the common law, and fol-
lowed in an unbroken line OF decisions in
this State, that q general affirmative statute
will not repeal aprevious particular statute
upon the same subject though the pro-
visions OF the former be different from those
of the latter. The act of 1876 is affirmative
and bears no evidence of ar intent to repeal
compensation of officers in particular couu-
ties 1t is also general in the sense that
the act o: 23d of May, ls74, classifying cities
according to their population, was held in
Wheeler versus the city, a Pennsylvania,
33S, to be general.
Can't Bank on the Legislatures Intention,
To say that the county of Allegheny was
the only county to which the thirteenth Sec
tion could apply, and that therefore the
Legislature mad that county in mind and
framed the section in reference to it, proves
too much. Wherever the intent is to legis-
late Tor a particular county the resultant
legislation contravenes the seventh section
of the third article OF the Constitution. no
matter how carefully that intent may be
Pennsylvania 25s: Scowden's appeal, 81
Pennsylvania 422-Dut there is no
evidence here of an intent to
provide specially for Allegheny county by
the thirteenth section. The act Is an at
tempt at least, at classified ton upon the
basis of population and if sustainable it is
so, and only so, because other counties may
come into the several classes provided for
Hence it must not be assumed to have been
enacted for the then present and with refer
ence to certain counties, the names of
which were cunningly suppressed, but for
all time, and with reference to future
changes of the Observation-Disclosures versus
the city SUPRA Now, If other counties shall
come into the class provided for by section
IL with special laws, in some of them fixing
the salaries of their officers in accordance
with local circums ,ances, and without such
laws in Others, it will hardly be conteEded
that the special laws will be ipso facto and
by operation of the act of 1876 repealed.
And vet as To such counties the act will nee
essar1iy have every effect that it would have
had if they had been within the class when
the act WAS passed, and certainly it could
not have repeating effect in one county O;
the class that it could not have in any other.
Arriving at n Legal Conclusion.
1t is urged that the Constitution contem-
plates general and uniform regulation of
the compensation of county Offices. If this
be so it is because of the provisions Of the