The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-09-29
z. Z. Crooks, stock broker, Al West
Second South street. Telephone 81.
COUNTY COLLECTORS SALARY
An Opinion Given Out by Attorney
General Bishop.

AL OplniOn 01Ech cut Dy Attorney
General Bishop.
/ Some controversy in many of the
counties has arisen over the gates
liability for one-half of county collec-
tors salary between June 4, 1896, and
June l, 1897, at which latter date the
Office will be abolished. 1t now seems
that the Legislature failed to provide
that one-half of the collectors salary
| should be paid by the state as in the
case of the assessor, county attorney
and treasurer, all of whom render no
more services to the state than does the
collector. Autorney-General Bishop yes
terday rendered the following opinion
on the question:
Hon. Morgan Richards, jr., state aud
itor, Salt Lake City:
Dear SRI have before me your favor
of September rs, in which you submit
| the following for my opinion:
is the state liable for the half-Salary
Of a county collector from January 4.
1886, 70 June l, 1884, at which latter date
said Office of collector will be abolished
and the duties thereof from then on be
performed by the county treasurer,
who will receive the combined salaries
of the collector and treasurer, now di-
laws Of 1886; and, for the half of which
the state will be liable?
'Or, in other words, am I authorized
to audit a statement, certified to by
the county auditor and county treas
ureT, OF county warrants issued to the
attorney, treasurer and assessor, and
likewise embracing the compensation
Of the county collector, and to draw
a state warrant for one-half of the
whole anount?''
The only question involved in your
inquiry, as 1 take it, is whether the
state is liable for one-half OF the salary
of the county collector from January
4, 1896, to June l. 1897?
l beg to call your attention to section
OF chapter i24, page 1885, of the laws
Of 1896. being an act to provide for fix
ing salaries and compensation of state
and county officers. This section first
provides for the classification of coun-
ties, and fixes the maximum salary for
the county officers for each class re-
spectively, with the exception of as
SCISSOR, county attorney and treasurer,
in which cases the amounts are def
nitely fixed as and for the salaries of
such officers; then comes a proviso, as
follows: Provided, that until the LIST
day of June, 1897, at which time the
Office of county collector is abolished,
and the duties thereof are to be dis
charged by the treasurer the salaries
of collectors are definitely fixed at the
following amounts. Cob salaries to con-
tinue until June 1, 1897"
Under this classification the salaries
OF these officers IL class IL, the class to
which your inquiry refers, would be as
follows: That of collector, $650.00; that
of treasurer, $4,000. Section 8 Of said
act provides as follows: 1.-THE salaries
of county officers must be paid quar-
terly out of the contingent fund Of the
upon an order of the board of
commissioners, but one-half of
the salary of assessor, county attorney
and treasurer shall be borne by the
state and paid as provided by law"
1t will thus be observed that from
January 4, 1885, to June l. 1897 the sal
airy of county treasurer is $3.50 per year,
and under section 9 supra the state
would be liable for one-half of this
amount 1t will also be observed that
under the general classification, the
salary of treasurers coming within the
18th class is fixed at $500, and under
section g. aforesaid, beginning with
June l, 1887, and thereafter the state
fsn bp liable for one-half of that
amount. which represents the compen-
sation to that officer for the perform
ance of the duties which heretofore be-
longed to the treasurer and collector.
The question seems to have arisen
whether the state is liable for one-half
the salary provided for collector, from
January 4, 1896, to June l, 1891 The only