Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1896-10-01
Law Does Not Specifically Provide
Interest On County Warrants
DRAWN PRIOR 10 Iusr ), 1893
iXo'pl when IN ratment af Wtr,.
Done IN Dads IL the C,uriy
Issuing the Warran :.

were drawn, tor other Iufrofcs than
oauniy ROAD work, pilot TO juno .,
1850. rhu opinion is that interest !,
Mt lswiuily ohaigeablc against the
c.untics tor these outitanding warrants
except when drawn 1, pay Tor WORK
dons on county roads. The opinion In
iuli % ~ ioll0wi:
J. * Reed E,q., County Attorney Of
EuItty County, Ornngeyillc, Utah.
Dear sif-i have toiore inc your
favor Of some days ago which has ueeu
unavoidshly delayed on account Of the
lfeaA Of busiuesu N this ofiiee.
You ask TO be advised upon the f0l-
loving! "COnitovcfsiuH have arisen
Ia this county between the board OF
couaiy commissioners ana parties
holding county warrants issued before
January 4.b, 1900, tho latter claiming
that they should uraw 5 per cent
iniofoat NJ provided therein, tho former
nclding that tho ; per cent Interest
was cut down to o PVT cent interest ny
tho County G)vefnmsnt bill. My
opinion has been alkVd AMI | have
advised the cutting uown Of the In.
irftst from ) per cent 10 per cent,
except in cases Of certain warrants
which. by order Of the court, chow on
their lace inst they dIaw pof cent.
This wtn done about ninu months ago
A. a scsslon oil The loafd when a re,olu.
ton was passed, stating that all war;
rants ls,ugd alter that uaie should have
inserted on lnelr face the legal interest
they drew, and great many we're
altcady IN circulation without thiB
provision Unsettled on their faue.9
RuI lyiug thereto permit me 10 say
l know Of no aia,ute auth0flzibK
county couds u isfue inicr,tt.DsAripg
wbtghnls prior 70 1905, excepting tia,
u chapter NJ Of lhe Laws VI 1888,
when pfavides, IN substance, thAg the
several unite are authorized aud
empowered 10 Issue warrants 10 the
amount u vns-ioufth OF one mill on
each dollar Of value oi T. xable property
situate Ia tue county, thid warfants 10
bshr Interest III tue rate OF elsht Per
cent pet annum from dats Of lasur, IN.
tll called Ia fvf pay ment. also pfovIjer
hot sad vauanN fhall uni b,
lssusd loT any 0lbcr pufpsls
han In payment for labor perforated
up0n tho public roads within the
county NO issuing them. These war.
rants wefe made Tudeemable within
two years from toe date OF itsus at the
option OF the county. This law als1
provides Tor a special tax, moi q exceed
thfee.eights OF one mill ON each dollar
OF taxable property, with which 10 re-
deem said warrants.
~ the warrants VI which you apsAk
were Issued under anu by virtue Of
this law aud IN accordance with the
conditions therein named, they would,
40 . legal proposition, bear inIsfes. At
the rate Oi or cent, ana would moi
bu Affected by any law enacted subse.
quent 10 their Issue, or In other words,
to state the rule more broadly, nll
county warrants Issued under and by
virtue VI the ~ visions VI chapter 81
OF tho Laws OF Utah Of 1894, prlof 10
June 9th, 1896, the date u Ius taking
effect OF chapter l3l of tho LAWS oi
uiah Of lhBB, known ~ tho county
government bill, would draw Interest
~ provide therein.
beciion 80 VI the county government
bill, ptoviIts, that u upon presenI Alion
OF any county warrant, the same 1.
not paid for want OF iuuds, II shall TO
registered aud from that date, until
funds ate on hand 10 pay tue same,
they shall brAr ave pof cent Interest
per apnum. This law took effect June
5, 1906, ana became tho law upon lhl.
,utluol from that time hence.
inc provisions Of this law, however,
afc not Retrospective, and eau have
no effect IN law upon warrants Issued
prior thereto, notwithstanding n
operates 70 repeal the provisions Of the
Aw Of 1894. supra.
IL does not clearly appear from your
Inquiry, whether all OF the warrants OF |
n hich you speak were Issued under
hn provisions VI chapter 81 OF tins
avs Of 1894. or whether = pottion
hereof were isiued for purposes other
han those mentioned IN said chapter.
10 wit, "Fgr labor performed upon the
,ublic roads within the county Issuing
hem.'
The rule 10 well settled that In tho
ibfunce ~ statute authorizing tho
'0unly court TO issue Understanding
warrants, there eau DO no liability TOT
interest Ne against tho county. Coun.
lea are not liable 10 Implied common
lw liability. Their liabilities, whether
grounded ~ tort or Ia contract are
nero creatures of statute, anu thoy
lOssess No power aud cen Incur no
ABILITY or ubligatl0n, except such as
10 specially provided for by stat.
lie. They are, In this paflicu.
~, tue same NJ the htate
overnment OF which they are merely
part The stalo IL net liable sxeepl
y itH own consent, and W tho county
) exempt from liability, uplrsa the
tate has given IL consent by legisia.
I've enactment.
Answering your questions, 1 am of
piuiOp, therefore, that the county
ours, pfi0t TO June 9th, 1895 had no
over 10 Issue auy Interest beating
iatrants, except such o. are provided
" In chapter 81, o. tho laws Of 1894,
upra, anu any warrants have been
Itued ior any other purpose than those
ienlionei Ia said chapter, pr0ylIiug
" any rate OF Interest, the Interest
Iauso therein would create no liability
sainst ths county,
Further, that all warrants which
Jay have bten issued pursuant
said chapter 81, proyid.
TX for elght n6r cent interssi
10 u liability against tue county, and
lat the law OF 1896 docs not Opefate
avoid or abrOgale the same, neither
.uld u have the effect OF reducing
- rate Of ialefest OF said warrants.
l am further VI opinion, that all