Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1900-03-15

Confined from Second Page.

Confined from Second Page
notice shall ba in writing and attestesl by
the Clerk Of the Board of County Com
mssioners.''s
There is no evidence tending to show
that said letter, or so CALEB notice wa,
So attesteH. The County Clerk of the
respective ciunties is eN-officio Clerk of
the Board of County Commissioners OF
his. county. But il is well settled that
making person an ex-ofiicio officer hy
virtue af his holding another Office does
not merge the two into one.
q Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, As, note |
{; State IS. Lau.hton, 10 New. 2O5 aud !
cases there citel)
IN Denver vs.. Hobart, 10 New. 81, Den !
Yer being then Lieutenant Gov rnor
and eN-Oiiirio Warden of the State !
Prison, it was he!i that the two officers
were "a distinct a though held By dit
ferent persons, that tho duties and obi
cations Of tn one are entirely inlepen-
dent of the duties al %, i.:,'ioH> o. the
other. And so it May he sad ith re-
| sptct t. the offices of County tl-rl< AMI
! Clerk of the Board OF County C,numt>-
| sonerS.
An at.estaion by the GptInty Clerk.
simply as such Clerk i not such an at
1estatipn by the Cl"r,: of the H.,A:d Of
County Commissioners a. said statute
rrInIres. Even if lh. notice was sutfi-
cient in ali other Respects. it was not
Civ n aS the statute provides. Counsel
c"n'e:'d that sail notice having ben
J'ia e.l "a m envelope. property stamped,
dapo>Itc in the pos .ni..:o and odGre> sed
t" IT," Clerk Of Ia" Board Of County
lC'n5''i>>irhcr> of Eureka County, that
that was sufficient. But we cannot
agree with counsel II hat contention. If
the body of the l. OF be regarded as
sufficient III suhst; nee to constitute the
required notice. ytt it ngat As w, Il have
heen Deposited in the waste t,a,ket as in
the p 'stof1i - in the a5senr. pI pro-.
thas It was received by t!!r Bo.r,. of
CnljHt'- Commissioners.
The statute in this case required the
notice 10 be deposited in the poSto fl e
and I'd !.essei to the Board of County
Com SIS toner's of Eureka County. 1t
was not so addressed and no presump-
ton can be INDUCED that said Board re-
ceived it. The plaintiff is not entitled to
the benefit of any presumption again,
the defendant with respect to the re-
Quired notice until it shows that the pro-
visions Of the statute relating thereto
were strictly compiled with on the part
Of its proper officers, The statute re-
lating to the support of the poor plainly
= defines the powers vested in and the
duties imposed upon the Board of
County Commissioners OF the several
cou.ilie> and the equities liability in
. regard to the support Of the poor. If
reasonable attention is given to The stat
ute there can be no serious difficulty ca
q countered IN complying with its direc-
tons. Ths failare to give the statutory
!. notice is fatal to the plaintiffs case. The
6 notice relied upon by the plaintiff was
fatally defective in the particulars absve
\, given.
= The judgment and order from whc.
:, this appeal is taken are affirmed.
We concur:
:, Massey J.
Heiknap, j.
!, Filed March 18th, 1909.
4 EUGENE HOWELL,
Secretary of State and EN-ot1icio Clerl
of the Supreme Court.
Filed with printer for publication
March IL. 1900.