The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-10-02
Office OF Attorney General,
Salt Lake Cftv- Sent. 20. I

Office OF Attorney General,
Salt Lake City, Sept. 90, 1896.
j. k. Reed, Esq, County Attorney OF
Emery County, Orangeville, Utah:
Dear Sir-I have before me your favor
OF some days ago which has been una
voldably delayed on account OF press OF
business in this Office.
You ask to be advised upon the follow
ing: Controversies have arisen in this
county between the board of commits
sieners and parties holding county war
rants Issued before January T. 1896; the
latter claiming that they should draw
the former holding that the per cent
interest was cut down to per cent in
terest by the county government bill. My
opinion has been asked and / have adj
V1Sed the cutting down of the interest
from per cent 10 . per cent, except in
cases Of certain warrants which, by order
Of the court, show on their face that
they draw per cent. This was done
about nine months ago at a session OF
the board. when a resolution was passed,
stating that all warrants issued after
that date Should have inserted on their
face the legal interest they drew. and d
great many were already in circulation
without this provision inserted on their
face"
know of no statute authorizing county
courts to issue interest bearing warrants
prior to 1896, excepting that Of chapter
81 Of the laws of 1894. which provides, in
substance, that the several counties are
authorized and empowered to issue war
rants to the amount of one-fourth of one
mill on each dollar of value of taxable
property situate in the county, said war
rants to bear interest at the rate OF per
cent per annurl from date OF issue, until
called in for payment; also provides that
said warrants shall not be issued for any
other purpose than in payment for labor
performed upon the pubic roads Wit1li1
the county so issuing them. These war
rants were made redeemable within two
from The date Of Issue 4
ton of the county. This law also pro-
videS for a. special tax, not to exceed
three-eighths OF one mill on each dollar
Of taxable property within the county
with which to redeem said warrants.
If the warrants of which you speak
were issued under and by virtue of this
items therein named. they would, as a
legal proposition. bear interest at the
rate of s per cent. and would not be af-
fected by any Law enacted subsequent
the rule more broadly, all county war
rants issued under and by virtue of tho
provisions of chapter 81 Of the laws OF
Titan of 1894. prior to June .. 1896. the
date of the taking effect of chapter 131
of the laws Of Utah of 1896, known as
the county government bill. would draw
interest as provided therein.
Section 80 OF the county government
bill, provides that If upon presentation OF
any county warrant, the same IS not paid
for want of funds it shall be registered
hand to pay the same, they shall bear 5
per cent interest per annum. This law
took effect June 3 1886, and became the
law upon this subject from that time
hence.
The provisions of this law. however,
are not retroactive, and can have no eff
feet in law, upon warrants issued prior
thereto, Notwithstanding it operates to
repeal the provisions of the law of 1884
supra.
It does not clearly appear from your
rfr~rrr 7nfI oil re- tHfl ~elr7f=
which you speak were issued under the
provisions Of chapter 81 OF the laws OF
1894. or whether q portion thereof were
issued for purposes other than those
mentioned in said chapter, to-wit: For
labCr performed upon the public roads
within the county issuing them"
The rule is we'll settled that IN the alb
sence of a statute authorizing the county
court TO issue interest bearing warrants,
there can be no liability for interest as
against the county. Counties are not Ii
able TO implied common law liability.
Their liabilities, whether grounded IN
tort or in contract, are mere creatures OF
statute, and they possess no power and
can incur no liability or obllgaton, ex-
ceDt such as are specially provided Tor
by statute. They are, in this particular,
the same as the state government OF
which they are merely a part. The state
is not liable except by its own consent,
and so the county is exempt from liabil-
ity, unles the state has given its consent
by legislative enactment
ion, therefore. that the county courts.
prior to June 5, 1896. had no power to issue
any interest bearing warrants, except
such as are provided for IN chapter 81
of the laws of 1894, supra, and il any
warrants have been issued for any otner
purpose than those mentioned in said
chapter, providing for any rate of inter-
est. the interest clause therein would Gre
ate no liability against the county
Further. that all warrants which may
have been issued pursuant TO said chapter
81 providing for 8 per cent. interest, are
a liability against the county, and that
the law Of 1896 does not operate TO avoid
or abrogate the same. neither could 1t
have the effect of reducing the rate OF
interest Of said warrants.
/ / am further of opinion that all war
rants issued by the board OF county COM
n1issioners subsequent to June .. 1886, il
not paid when presented, Will bear inter
est from date of presentation until funds
arc in the treasury to pay the same, and
this by operation of law
| have the honor to be. very respect
f,,I1v- yours. a. C. BISHOP,
Attorney General