The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-12-18

shall be entitled to receive for their Serv-
ices the compensation specified in this act,
which compensation is graded in proportion
to the population and the necessary SerV-
ices required in each of said several coun-
ties, subject to the conditions herein pre-
scribed, and they shall receive no other
compensation whatever.
A FEE NOT EARNED.
"It goes without saying that the fee for
demand and levy is not earned unless an
actual demand is made followed by an
actual levy. 1t also follows from the section
that have quoted that the county treas
urer himself cannot receive this fee, even
although he actually personally performs
these services. 1t is not the intention of the
law that he shall personally perform these
services, and if he does so he does so vol
UNFAIRLY, and is not entitled to compensation
for it, IT, however, these taxes are collected
in the same way that execution is col
lected by q constable the fees are to be coll
lected by the deputy who makes the collec-
ton, and may be deducted and withheld by
him as compensation for these services: Any
other construction of the law would simply
result In preventing the collection of d great
er portion of the taxes which might be col
lected by demand and levy. AS L stated be-
fore, the law should. if possible, be so in
terpreted as to facilitate rather than to
hinder and delay the collection of taxes; and
and are not kept by the treasurer, there IS
no reason for compelling them to be paid
county. 1t is the theory of the law that
diligence in the discharge of public duties
should be punished, result which would
certainly follow any other construction OF
this law.
This question was submitted Aug. 81
1897, by the treasurer of Allen county to the
judge of the Allen Circuit Court, the Hon.
Edward O'Rourke. and upon it his opinion
was follows: Having duly submitted the
entitled to retain as his own the charges
of % cents and so cents for notifying de-
linquents and for making levies on their
property as provided by an act of the
Legislature approved March g. 1897, as APP
proved in the acts of the legislation for 1897
Page Ill; or whether said charges when re-
ceived by him belong to the county OF Allen,
and to be paid into the county treasury, l
decide that he is entitled to retain as his
own the sum of % cents, which he is au-
thorized to charge when the delinquent tax
and penalty are paid on demand; and when
levy is made, as the act provides, ne may
retain the SO cents, authorized to be charged,
as his own.
The opinion is of considerable importance
because it virtually holds that county treas
urers and, in a general way, all other county
officers, are not entitled to any fees where
actual service has not been rendered.
EXTRA COMPENSATION.
Treasurer It. L. Smith. of Hancock coun-
ty, wanted to know whether or not he was
entitled to extra compensation for serving
as a member of the County Board of Re
view, and asked Attorney General Taylor
about it. His reply was: You ask if a
county treasurer is entitled to retain the
money paid him for acting as a member of
the board of review, or can he be required
to pay it back to the county? County treas
urers are not entitled to be paid for their
time as members of the board of review,
and if such money has been paid them, I'M
der a mistaken view of the law, they can
be required to pay ii back into the county
treasury. Section q of the act of 1895 pro-
vides: The county officers named herein
shall be entitled to receive for their serv-
which compensation is graded in proportion
to the population and the necessary serv-
Ices required IN each OF said several coun-
fed and they shall receive no other COM
pensation whatever This section super
sedes the section allowing 50 per diem 10
county treasurers as members of the board
of review