The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-11-28

salaries, and aSto that county to permit
Inc Inc. o, ia Zee sysam to continue; or TO pro,
that county shdid serve without compen-
sation. We knoF, ~judicially, that the pop
sary service sh In Mon me once Of the treasurer
thereof entities it to be classified among
the counties whose treasurers were given
intimate t tihnna y ee t eould ic know I'VE. or Me that we
have authority to determine, to what class
said coanty should have been assigned. or
what the compensation should have been.
AS we find he question presented nine
ty-one of the COUNTIES were included in the
salary provisions Of the act, while one coun-
therefore,, that the act is local in the sense
that 1t applies to less. than the whole State,
and that IL has failed in the apparent pur-
pose as a general law applying through
ont the State, as to all counties whose con-
dition and wants render the Legislation
less Objectionable in this sense, that ii in
cludes so great a part of the State and
omlts SO small a fraction; than ia it had had
ted the ninety-one remaining counties.
NO LOCAL LEGISLATION.
That laws regulating the compensation
of county officers shall not be local is the
command Of the Constitution, and 1t is not
our privilege by artful construction to deny
the command, though we may believe that
the law which may fail is wise and just.
We are not to be understood as deciding
that the amendment to the Constitution of
March II, 1881, does not In another sense
than that already considered, permit legis-
lation of a local character. The provision
as amended forbids local or special laws In
relation TO fees and salaries, except that
laws may be so made as to grade the COM
pensation of officers in proportion to the
population and the necessary services re-
CURED,
'"Whil 1t would appear that the trainers
or this provision intended that the varying
differences to be found necessary in basing
compensation upon the population and the
necessary services in the several counties
or classified districts of the State should
not be Objectionable as local or special, OF
this question we do not find 1t necessary
to the present case that we should express
an opinion.
act is not Objectionable as local 1t vfo-
lates Section %, Article 4, of the Constitu-
ton. supra. That section, by. reference to
Section ~ OF the same article, requires
general laws in relation to salaries and in
providing compensation for county. officers,
and that such laws shall be of uniform OPP
GRAFTON throughout the State.
AN IMPERATIVE REQUIREMENT.
"As we have said, the act was designed
to be general, and it was essential that it
should be general, essential because its SUBJ
ject is within the enumerated cases re-
quired by the Constitution to be legislated
upon the general law; essential because the
subject is one in which all the citizens of
the State have an interest in common es-
sential because all the treasurers of the
State, as a class, whose offices are created
by the Constitution, have an interest in
common. and essential because every coun-
W, as q government subdivision OF the
commonwealth. possesses conditions COM
mon to those of every other county, and
not only supplies the same basis for con-
stitutional grading of compensation, but
its interest in the subject is common to
the interest of all.
n 4.
is the imperative requirement of the Con-
stitution that such laws shall be of uni
form operation throughout the State In
was broken by emitting to apply its pro
vision to one of a class Of the Offices in
cluded, to one Of the counties forming an
essential lement of the State and to the
interests and demands of a considerable
State.
1T is suggested that the Legislature, by
the act of Feb. 20, 1858, affirmed the consti-
the various offices of shelby county, includ-
ing the treasurer. If the legislative con-
struction of the law and the Constitution
were conclusive. this case would have no
and Interpretation Would be denied ,"q This
conclusion, however, is at such variance
from the well-established rule which CON
courts, where legislative discretion is not
involved. that we pass the suggestion with
out serious consideration. II by the sug-
SNeNtO@A OaA4oC oiA ~ lie
TO the act of 1893, as supplying the omis-
sion in the act of 1891, II is but necessary
TO intimate that the act of 1893. standing
alone is subject to every possible objection
We have found in the act Of 1891. 1t is To-
cal and special both in it's form and in its
operation, while, as we have said, the Con-
Stitutiol imperatively commands that the
subject shall receive general legislation of
uniform operation. 1t is not possible for
one void act to render valid another
void act, at least without incorporating
and carrying forward the act which had
failed of its purpose. The amendatory act
of 1888 had no greater force of effect than
the amendment of a repeal statute. 1t sim
ply amended a void act, an act which in
legal contemplation had no existence what
ever.
Counsel seek to impress us with the ar
gument that If this judgment is affirmed,
then very important parts of the fee and
salary law of 1891 viii be overturned, and
the fruition of years Of struggle between
the officeholding class and the electorate
of the State be swept away
There is no doubt that this result should
be regretted, but not more sincerely than
the disobedience OF the sacred commands
Of the Constitution, or that the judiciary
should be swerved from it's solemn duty by
popular clamor; and it would, If possible,
be more regrettable that the will of the
people could not find expression through
their chosen representatives. We feel that
that condition does not exist in his State
which can reasonably warrant any of these
fears.
"The Judgment of the Circuit Court that
the act in question, as TO county treasur-
ers, was unconstitutional, was clearly
right, and is affirmed"
---