The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-08-17
WHAT WAGNER GETS
COUNTY ATTORNEY ANDERSON
PASSES ON sHERIFF,S CLAIMS
He Limits the Charges Which Mr..
WAGNER May Collect From the
County Within Certain Well De-
fined Lines, Not Nearly as Lib
eraI as the Sheriff Would Like
to Have.

County Attorney Anderson has writ
ten an opinion to the board of county
commissioners relative to the claims
him from the county
The county attorney said yesterday
in speaking Of the case that he did not
blame the sheriff for making the de-
mards, as it had been the custom Of
former sheriffs not only to make the
demands, but to get the money. The
letter from the county attorney will
probably be considered at special
meeting Of the board to be held Sat
urday.
The following is a copy of the opinion
Of the county attorney:
After careful consideration of the claims
of the sheriff of Ramsey county against said
county, covering the years 1897 and the first
seven months Of 1898, I have concluded that
the following classes of charges contained in
his bills cannot be legally allowed, to-wit
First-The charge for conveying insane to
the asylum for the reason that such claims
must be allowed by the judge Of probate and
not by county commissioners.
Second-The charge for returning sub
poenas, warrants and orders to show cause.
persons not found because there is statute
providing for such services.
Third-Charges for returning tax warrants
unsatisfed, pursuant to the decision Of the
supreme court in the case Of Chapel against
Board of County Commissioners.
Fourth-Charges for returning personal
property citations not found, there being nc
law allowing fees.
,Fffth-Charges of 81 each for bringing pris-
oners into said court for preliminary hear
ing. In other words, where a prisoner is
charged with the commission Of a crime
under a complaint coming within the juris-
diction of said court for final disposition, re-
sulting in acquittal Or conviction and SEN
tence by said court, no charge can be made
and collected by the sheriff under the stat
ute allowing 81 each "for bringing pris-
oner before any court of examination" In
Connolly against County of Dakota, 35 Mimi.
when said word exam nation" is used in
criminal proceedings sit is always applied
only to preliminary inquiry, and never to a
final trial on an Indictment" By applying
the same rule, then, it cannot be said to
apply to a final trial on such complaint.
S-xth-Charges made for bringing prisoners
into the district court, pursuant to the above
decision, and the further fact as set out In
that same case that no charges for such
services are provided for. other than as Gov
cred by the per diem charges for bailiffs in
attendance in said court
Seventh-Charges for attendance In court
with prisoners brought in for such examina-
ton, save what would amount to one bailiff
for the day. In other words charge of 50
to the number brought into the same court
cannot be sustained. Arbitrary attendance Is
attendance, and one bailiff is sufficient and
all that is in fact furnished I have noted
on the bills other and minor charges not
classified. But the above are the principal
Items and will result in an aggregate reduc-
ton Of about $1,000 or at least one half of
the total charges.
But there should be cond ton attached to
the allowance of this bill as corrected. The
sheriff's Office has been paid about $40, SEQ
under the salary law of 1895, and the sheriff
has also filed an additional claim for about
S,1CO for fees which he collected as sheriff
and paid to the county treasurer and also
one for about $500 per diem charges for
bailiffs in attendance the court and the
grand juries.
Said sum of $40, 800 should be deducted from
the total sum allowed the sheriff and the
balance only paid. This the sheriff, of
course, will be willing to accept for he will
not ask for double payment.
The result would be that the sheriff will
have received all he is legally entitled to-
save the per diem claim of Sc 600 for the
total amount of what would be allowed on
his fee bills of $22,635. Plus his claim of 81, 1O0
will nearly. if not quite. be offset by said
sum of $4,000.
You will understand that of said sum Of
$950O. portion amounting to $3.50, was
paid the two iailers and night Waterman
and matron during the first eleven months of
1897. Deducting that leaves a balance Of
S16,860 to be set off against his claims. Now
the amount of said bills OF 1921 35 that should
be allowed will be about $4,000. Add to that
the S,100 and the total is SIT 100. Hence the
result would be that little or nothing Is due
him aside from the 900 per diem claim