The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-06-12
Jacge Cherry Rules They Carry
Eight Per Cent Interest.
WRIT OF MANDATE ISSUED
IN CASE OF DAGGETT AGAINST
THE COUNTY TREASURER.
Trial Court Affirmed In R. G. Wilson
vs.. Sullivan ct al.-Mrs. Lou
Hamilton Appointed Administra-
trix of the Estate of Her Deceased
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Court Orders.

In the case Of Ellsworth Daggett VS.
county Treasurer Lynch, in which the
plaintiff applied for writ of man
date to compel the treasurer to pay
certain county warrants held by the
plaintiff, Judge Cherry yesterday over
ruled the demurrer and order the writ
TO issue, directing the treasurer to pay
the warrants with per cent interest
from the date of their issuance and reg
istration in December, 1894
The warrants were issued in excess
of the county's legal debt limit, and in
1886 the legislature, by a special act,
effective June 5, 1896. validated the
warrants so issued and provided for
the payment of interest at the rate of
per cent per annum.
The county set up in its demurrer
that Mr.. Daggett was entitled to no in
terest except the amount accruing from
June 3, 1896, at 5 per cent per annum,
While the plaintiff claimed he was en-
titled to interest from the dateaof the
registration of the warrants in 1894, at
the rate of per cent per annum.
THE OPINION.
In the opinion handed down. Judge
Cherry says: The principal question
in this case is what effect the act of
1896 validating the warrants had upon
the contract respecting the accrued in
terest at the time the act took effect,
and respecting the interest accruing
subsequently. 1t would seemethat the
presumption is that the legislature
when it validated and confirmed certain
Illegal warrants knew of their exist
ence, and of their terms respecting in
tereSt, and the act being in its nature
retroactive and retrospective, it would
follow that the intent was to validate
all the warrants of that class, including
the terms under and by which they had
been delivered to the respective holders.
The contract in the warrant is an en-
tlrety; that is to pay a certain sum of
money and under certain conditions to
pay 8 per cent interest. When the leg
Islature validated this contract it re-
vIved the entire contract. and thus
made the county liable for the Slim
lated rate of interest from the date of
original registration. The registration
having been made prior to the act of
1896, the effect of the act would be to
ratlfy and confirm the action of the
county treasurer in registration.
L IS urged that the act of the iegis-
lature, known as the county govern
ment act, which went into effect on the
warrants in question and that the for
Iner act provides for the payment of ;
per cent only on all county warrants
that therefore The legislative intent was
10 limit the rate of interest TO per
cent on all county warrants. including
those in question. However. the two
acts are entirely separate, approved on
o1Hefent Gays and seem to have no ref
erence TO each other: besides one act
IS clearly retrospective, while the other
IS prospective; one act related excI11-
SlVeiy to past transaction. while the
other was TO regulate the conduct of
county officers for the future and there
fore would not affect the case at bar
We are also referred to the topinion
OF our supreme court in the case of the
r v Coal company vs. the county com
mlssloners. In that case the question
be1ore the court was to ascertain the
true debt limit of Salt Lake county for
the year 1896, and if I have correctly
Understood that opinion the court only
decided that interest on these validated
warrants previous to June 3 1896
Shou!d not constitute an Indebtedness
for that year.
1T would therefore follow from the
views herein expressed. that the de-
murrer must be overruIed on all fbe
grounds urged, including the claim that
interest should stop after Sept. 90. 1897
II a dept IS not paid when due bv the
reason OF the fault of the debtor. or
Ehere no valid tender is made. interest |
does not cease to run.
from the facts stated in the annli
catlon, 1t IS my opinion the writ should |
issue and the demurrer viii be over |
ruled