The Indianapolis journal., 1894-01-26

law because IL was defective as TO the
typewriter IN the clerks office or the SUI
preme Court Nor DO We think the clerk
OF the Supreme Court for the purpose or
retaining fees taxed In his office could de-
feat II because il was defective as 10 CIR
cult judges. Nor do we think the Governor
could defeat It because IL was defective
as to some county officer. There Is as
little connection between the duty Of
sheriff as such and the duty of a county
recorder as there is between that OF the
Attor-1ey-gen and the typewriter in
the clerks Office. and his duties are as dis
the duties Of the Clerk OF the Supreme
Court are from those of a circuit judge.
In fact, there is no connection whatever,
as Tar as his official duties are concerned,
between a county sheriff and county
auditor, treasurer or recorder This statute
as to county sheriff is complete within it
self and capable of being executed mde-
pendent or It's provisions relating to coun-
ty, auditors, treasurers and recorders.
In arriving at conclusion" continues
the court, ''as to whether the Legislature
would probably have passed The act
independent OF the provisions relating 10
AUDITOR treasurer and recorders 1t is not
uDimportant to consider the evils which
the law was intended TO remedy. 1t is a
matter OF common notoriety OF which the
courts take notice that for many years
prior to this enactment there was a bitter
complaint against the practice OF taxing
what is known as constructive fees Penal
statistics had been passed, as well as sta
tistics infiicting forfeitureS, but il was
found on actual experience that they did
not eradicate the evil. The sum illegally
demanded and collected in the way Of con-
structive fees was large in the aggregate,
Dut the amount taxed against each indi-
vidual litigant was 50 small that IL was
cheaPer to pay than to contest It. This
clerks and sheriffS OF the State, and had
no connection whatever with the Office or
auditor, treasurer or recorder. 1t was the
purpose of the Legislature in enacting this
statute to strike effective blow at the
practice of taxing illegal and constructive
fees by placing the officers who had pre-
viously taxed them upon salary, depriv-
ing them of all fees and thus removing the
temptation to wrong doing in that direc-
ton In view of the evil to be cured and
the manifest purpose of the General AS
sembly we think it not at all improbable
that 1t would have passed this statute in
dependent OF its provisions relating to au-
ditors treasurers and recorders. Having
reached this conclusion, the rule that we
will not decide constitutional question
when not necessary to a decision OF the
not therefore inquire as TO whether the
statute Is or is not valid as to county
The title of the act Is broad enough 10
include county sheriffs. The Legislature
has declared in the act, as we have seen,
several counties of the State are graded
according to the population and the neces-
sary services 10 be performed In view of
this declaration we must assume that 1t
had before il all the necessary information
to enable 1T to fix such salaries upon a just
ana equitable basis, with view of giving
to each officer therein named a reasonable
compensation for the services performed.
ITO say that the law in this respect is
perfect" says the court in concluding this
important opinion. would, perhaps, be say
ing. too much, but If there are hardships
and inequalities in the law the remedy is
with the Legislature and not with the
courts. We are OF the opinion that the
statute, so far as it relates to county sher-
ifs, is not subject to the constitutional OBJ
jections urged against 1t, and that 1t is as
to them valid law.
ut follows from this that the Circuit
Court erred IN overruling the appellant S
demurrer to the complaint in this case.
Judgment Is, therefore, reversed. with di-
rectionS to the Circuit Court to sustain the
APPELLANTS demurrer to the cOnDlainf