Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-02-17
COUNTY WARRANTS,
Judge Cherry Dc,daS That They
Must Be Paid.
COMMISSIONERS HAVE APPEALED.
Courts Opinion In Full--Nrs' West,
an Aged Lady, Applies for
a Divorce.

Judge Cherry sustained the de-
nurrer to the answer OF the defend
ants In tho case OF John A. FEittCh vs
the Salt Lske county commissioners
this morning, directing aud COM
mandiug the Defendants to recognize
the validity OF plsintifl's warrants snd
to take such steps as may % necessary,
proper sn1 lscal to pay the sam
plaintiffs Immediately igaven Office Of
appeal to the State Supreme Court,
where the Transcript was fleJ later IN
the DAY.
Arguments were bear on both sides
yester1ay, taAing up the whole OF the
morning and afternoon. Ats O'Clock
court adjourned until t,day.
This morning Attorney J. Ii. Hurd
Tor the plaintiff. filed q demurrer to
defendants answer, on the ground
that the answer "does not state facts
sufficient to constitute u defense to
plaintiffs petition or warrant the
refusal Of the relief therein prayed
tor"
The court, ns before stated, sustained
the demurrer.
Judge Cherry in giving his opinion
this morning said:
regret that sufficient time was
not allowed to carefully consider the
| questions raised By tue pleadngs In
| the case, but at the Importantly of the
| attorneys for both edss, for obvious
reasons | will decide the matter at this
time from the best light L have, and
from mere casual consideration Of
| questions 20 ably presented by counsel
for both parties.
L will soy Ia the start that there Is
| some doubt in my mind whether or
not the plaintiff has not sued
| the wrong parties; that Is whether
| or not the county treasurer is
not the proper defendant, but
as no objection was raised
| on this point 1t Ia considered waived,
aud tue question tnen to be decided
is simply, fare the outstanding county
warrants VI 1896 for Salt Lake county
| vRlu?"
| The defendants by their answer ad.
| init all that Is alleged in the complaint
auJ defend their action by pleading
| tuch financial condition of the
| county and It's management that IL
t0liows,as claimed by defendants, that
he warrants hell by plaintiff are
| iuvalid, for The reason thnt the debt
| limit was exceeded by s93, 1876 rs in
tue year 1856, aud that therefore, toe
| plaintiff is not entitled TO the pay
| mBnt OF The said variants now In the
| county treasury.
The cl ent read from Constitution,
ticle Is, section 8, page "a; statute,
pages tl7 52A, 8 clioas 5 aud IL; slatu
laEee 520l, aecIiUn l66; statute, page
$40 section 81 euIi,or.
The Oblil a,iOus imposed by the Leg.
stature on the counties, should not he
construed TO be- uebts incurred by the
county, Tut only such oOigstio IL as
ale discretionary should be within the
constitutional prohibition.
| Ii the view Uf the deieniAnts is cor.
Iect then the functions OF tue county
would cease just as Eo1u 40 the debt
limit was TeacheJ, e.4, Ii Sl3q,U00
WAS the sum total OF Toe expenditures
OF Salt Lake county Tor the yenr 1885
Il EN- when that amount was reached
by way OF cash payments Or Ia war
iguts, then the wheels OF county gov.
eminent wCull stop. All the county
fliulHls could refuse to act rs there
would be snoi provision to pay them.
Courts would nave to suspend rs eli
Gers aud Jurors could not be uOmpelle
to serve without pay; even an election
could mos b. helu g. ir crease the IN.
debteuBess,e - the Exp n IS OF salI lee.
uOu-whicu wOulI be several thousauu
uOliart-wOuld be creating an uunu.
lhurIzsI de6t and would be- invalid
| "a Al -,
would be inviting reputation and
anarchy.
Again, II there Is 40 disliu clion be
tween an obligation imposed by law on
the cUun y, and voluntary mourning
OF "a debl by the county, then there
would be- no priority OF the creditors OF
the unity, and claim for salary OF
AN official, or expenses Incurred in
prosecuting criminal cases, etc., wOulI
not be preferred claim over claim
, lorao unity for uestrJyiIg gophers OF
Ing ish slaIrOws.
Mrn working for the county OF
furni hing supplies cannot tell the day
Z hour when the debt limit expirtt
. (as II would come as thief IN the
nignD bat relying yin the cert ficate o.
the c.eIK ~ auditor that the warrR nts
were within line dtbi limit, are entitled
| 10 me- COnhlueThtlOn, anu am lB'
ollneu to the position that tue county
is thereafter estopled from denying
tuelT liability anu OF receiving the
material OF ssryices and then seek tC
I repudiaIe the obligation by techni
(. cal bubble.
/ From the view | have expTeaseI II
, would fol- W that according to tn,
answer Il tho Gefendnnts the II, b
} NIT was not reached In the year 1896
ard Therefore the defense falls 10 ~,
! lrIund.
II is my opinion that at least part
{ not all o. The warrants held By
piaiuufi eIe not invalid and that IN,
plaintiff have the RELIEF prayed lot
AGED won un vents DiYorcc.
A peculiar and somewhat sal C II,
come ~ before Judge Biles this morn
ing Sarah A. West, upwards o 81
yesrs OILS, applied for divorce from hel
husband, Jsmss West, some twent5
ems hef junior,
The piHunn in her compliant al
q a. ..vfs