The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-01-21

uniformly upon all the members of one class
OF OF persons requiring legislation peculiar to
itself in matters covered by the law. Estate
VS.. Cooley. So MIMI, $780, This act does not
appear to operate uniformly and leaves the
very matters 1egislated upon, open practical
ly to the same extent that they now are in
the majority Of the counties under special
laws in this state. This act In effect dele
gates to small legislature in each county
power to pass special and local laws to regu-
late the affairs of their community, and thus
delegates the power to pass local legislation.
This leads US to inquire II the legislature
can delegate such authority to the commits
sioners, especially so far as It's exercise may
effect the salaries Of officers, established
under the constitution.
RULE IN BOWIE. CASE APPLIES.
Section Of this act requires the several
county officials to file monthly statements,
commencing Aug. 1, 1885, showing the names
OF the clerks and assistants and the amount
OF compensation to which each Is emitted In
the several offices over which they have
charge, which shall be acted upon allowed
ana the amount due Hereunder paid as there
In order to ascertain the compensation to
which the clerk Of the probate court is en-
tltied, or the two assistants in that office,
1t Is necessary to look at the special law of
1883, chapter IA, and to ascertain the COM
pensation to which the assistant county at
necessary to read the special law of 1889,
chapter 438, and so, to carry out the provis-
IONS IONS Of this act Of 1882 as prescribed in sec
special laws. And this act comes souareIy
within the rule laid down In the Bowe case,
ana IS a so-cal!ed general law, the meaning
and limitations Of which must be Interpreted
by special laws, and Is therefore 1fncon-
stitutionaL
PROVIDES NO Salaries
While this act undertakes to fix salaries
ana compensation Of county officials and the
clerks and assistants, it provides In section
~ mat from and after the dates herein
idad eouo,
pensatfon or emolument shall be paid out of
any county treasury 10 any officer or employe
tnereof, except as herein provided" But we
search in vain for any provision for the
payment of the salary or compensation O, the
county officers or the clerks or assistants
therein named; and. in this respect the act
provision for the payment to any of the Off
GERS named, of salary, fees or any compensa-
ton II it Is urged that the special laws
now now IN force still survive and control under
lhls act, then the act authorizes the county
commissioners Ito reduce" the compensa-
tlon which the county officials shall receive
ana TO regulate the same. and as their fees
ana compensation are in each instance now
hxed by special laws IL the commissioners
should reduce the fees they would In so do
ing nave to modify extend or repeal the
power given them in this general law. and
IL would bring this law Of 1895 squarely with
IN the rule that a general law which modi-
mes, extends or limits the provisions of spe-
ACT FULL OF FLAWS.
The last objection urged is that this act
makes no provision for the payment to the
county Of the fees collected by either the
snerin, clerk Of the district court or register
or deeds. Under special laws of this state,
officers, for the faithful discharge of their
ouCles. Snail receive fees as compensation,
as herein provided. It cannot be seriously
urged that the legislature Intended these
officers should receive salaries in addition In
the fees they now collect II the county pays
them salaries, what is there to prevent them
OF any provision OF law requiring them to
pay them to the county? If however. they
are not entitled to the fees owing to the
i ta mat they are to receive a salary from
the county, then how the county collect
ices Tor the work these officials do under
an act which provides that the fees shall
De paid to these officials as and for their
compensation? And If an attorney. indebt
ed to the clerk Of the district court for fees.
refuses to pay his bill, can the county en-
roree collection? Would he not be per-
Hltted TO claim that the county paws the
elerK salary, hence the clerk cannot collect
ices as remuneration; and If that be true.
under what law could the county compel him
to pay fees to the clerk of the district court
for its use and benefit, when the law nTo.
woes that such fees shall belong to the
clerk OF the district court? And If it is held
1h ts,a, THIS 1888 law repsais the special law
which entities these officers to collect fees
as compensation. then the county will paw
these three officials (the register of deeds
clerk OF the district court and sheriff. their
pubic free of charge. Such cannot have
been the intention of the legislature.
=, me crude character Of this act as passed.
contains. the meager and Incomplete wav IN
which 1t deals with the subject legisIated
upon as evidenced by the defects to part
OF whlch only can a passing reference be
made within the limits of this memorandum
leads me to the conclusion that 1t contra,
Venes the constitution, and should not be
sustained. "
COMMISSIONERS ARE ANGRY.
Two Of the county commissioners
were so mad when they feared of the
ruling of Judge Lewis last evening that
they could hardly contain themselves.
one of them actually went so far as IN
declare the board would pass a resoI11-
ton instructing the county auditor not
to issue warrants for the payment of
the county's share Of the salaries
drawn by the district judges. The
county, by virtue Of a special law
passed long before special legislation
was forbidden, authorized Ramsey
county to pay each district Judge 81, son
a year, or $125 a month The state
pays each judge in this judicial district
$500 Per annum. The county commits
sloner whose grievance against Judge
Lewis caused him to make this threat
said that the time had come for the
county board to examine all laws care
fully in the future before acting un-
ger them, and this law giving the
Judges an additional $500 was one of
them.
WAGNER DOESN'T KNOW.
Sheriff Wagner, when seen last
night, said 1t was too soon for him to
decide what action he would take. He
mad collected from outside parties dur
ing the year 1897 something over 81 0Oo
all Of which he had turned over to the
county treasurer except the fees COL
lected in December, which he had ten
dered, but which the county treasurer
had refused to accept, under the advice
OF the county attorney Mr.. WAGNER
said that he would consult his legal
advisers today as to the proper course
for him to take. He was Of the opinion
that under the decision Of Judge Lewis
he had cause Of action against the
county for the amount Of the fees so
turned over by him to the county.
LAMBERT IS PLEASED.
George G. Lambert, the plaintiffs at
torney in these suits, was seen at his
residence last night by Globe re-
porter, and shown a copy of the courts
decision. Mr.. Lambert was pleased
over his victory and stated that he an
tfcipated no other result in view Of the
time and careful consideration which
Judge Lewis had given to the several
points he raised at the hearing. Being
asked as to the immediate effect of
the decision on the offices affected by
it, Mr.. Lambert declined to give an
opinion at this time, but stated that.
Ill -.