The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1897-07-04
THE AUDITOR INCLUDED
HE WILL NOT ISSUE A WARRANT
FOR THE CLAIM.
COSTS IN THE OYSTER ENTRY SUITS
The Whole Amount involved is Nearly So, OoU
The Case Has Been in the Supreme
Court for Decision Three
Lines Already.
Times Already.

Talk about pulling eye-teeth, that Is
the merest past time to getting money
out of Father Worth's office these days.
Now Fathers nightmare is dehclt-he
lives in mortal terror of such catastro-
nhe. and rather than have it come, he
wouId doubtless stop paying out anything
whatever, except his own salary, all the
warrants in creation to the contrary not
withstandIng.
Neither warrants nor judgments nor
even Supreme Court decisions seem to
count for much with Father Worth.
There is a claim of some $1,000, created
in accordance with an act of the Legisla-
ture of 1898, which he refuses to pay,
though it has three times been before the
Supreme Court and as many times de-
,cided against him, to say nothing of the
similar decisions and judgments of the
lower courts.
There can therefore be no dispute as
to the business of the claim or uncer-
tainty as to the duty of the State Treas
urer to pay it, but he refuses to do it,
lust the same, and that in the face of the
advice of Attorney General Walser that
he should pay it.
AS a result of this condition Of af-
fairs, two suits were yesterday begun In
the Superior Court here and summons
served on two State officers-Treasufer
Worth and Auditor Aver.
The one against the Auditor is for
S4,100. and the one against the Treasurer
is fNr 500.
These suits are petitions for mandamus
compelling the Auditor to issue a warrant
for S4,100, and against the Treasurer
compelling him to pay it--also to compel
him to pay warrant, already issued, for
$780,
The two suits are brought to recover
the costs of officers-clerk and sheriff-in
the oyster suits brought by the solicitor
in Pamlieo and Carteret counties. to va
cate oyster-bed entries, under the Acts of
1893, chapter 2ST, section 4.
At the fall term, 1894, the court being
of opinion that the plaintiff was not en-
titled to recover, the plaintiff took nom
suit and Judgment was entered against
the county Of Pamlico for the costs of the
action. The county of Pamlico appealed
to the Supreme Court and on this appeal
the judgment was reversed. Thereupon
Judgment was obtained against the
State of North Carolina for the costs of
the action, $4,000, to be taxed by the
clerk.
The plaintiff excepted to this judgment
and appealed, assigning as error the part
of the judgment taxing the State with the
costs, alleging that the State is not la
BILE for the costs of its own action unsuc-
cessfully prosecuted. The Supreme Court
held that it was not an action against the
State, but by the State, and that the
State, by its own legislation, has declared
its liability for the costs to the same ex-
tent as private parties.
The Carteret county case, for 500 was
never appealed and the Auditor issued
a warrant for the amount, and also fol
the $4,000 from Pamlico.
But Treasurer Worth still refused to
pay them and asked for a rehearing OF
the case. 1t was granted, and again the
former judgments we're affirmed except
that the fee bill was taken up and the
Pamlico county bill was cut down to
$4,1OO.
Again a judgment was obtained in the
lower courts for the reduced amount
$4,1O0, but now the Auditor (Ayer) re-
fuses to issue new warrant for the
amount and the Treasurer (Worth) says
he will not pay it.
The plaintiffs in these cases are repre-
sented by Mr.. +. M. Simmons, of this
city, and Mr.. A. ID. Ward, of Newbern
The Attorney General will probably rep
resent the Treasurer and Auditor