The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-01-25

compensation of the new county Of
ficials came up for consideration In
the form of the case of district At
torney w. r. Lewis against the county
to collect certain fees. Mr.. Lewis and
the other county officials were repre-
sented by Attorneys w. ]. Hand and
NJ. j. Martin, and the county by its
solicitor, II. l.. Taylor, former County
Solicitor II. A. Knapp and former city
Solicitor |. II. Burns.
A jury was selected and IL was there
upon admitted that the county Is in
debted to Mr.. Lewis for fees In tho
sum of s120. Argument was then heard
on the question Of Mr.. Lewis right to
collect fees for his services. His at
torneys maintained that il would be n
clear violation of the constitution to
say that he must accept a salary rather
than fees. He was elected In Novem-
ber and the fact that the county has a
population of over $50, 900 was not an
! nounced by the census department un-
I'll some time later, therefore, to now
say that Mr.. Lewis must accept a diff
ferent form OF compensation from that
which prevailed when he was elected
would go directly counter to the con-
| stitution which declares that no office
| holders salary or emoluments can be
| changed after he has been elected.
The argument on the part OF the
county did not attack Mr.. Lewis In
| depreciation Of the constitutional pro
vision, but set forth that the fact of
the census does not apply to the date
| when ii is announced but as Of date
when it was taken and ascertained
| Ia acf In he ha-
! fore Mr.. Lewis was elected. It was
contended that when he was elected
the district attorney that the county
had population of over 10000 and
that he is therefore only entitled to the
salary allowed by the Legislature to
the district attorneys OF counties hav-
ing a population of over $50, 900.
Judge Archibald directed the jury to
return verdict of Sl20 in favor of
Mr.. Lewis and in doing so spoke as
follows:
Gentlemen Of the Jury: According 10 the plain.
tif's contention he is entitled to receive com.
pensation by fees under the act Of 1866 which
| applies to district attorneys of this county, un
| der the contention on the part OF the county Of
Lsckawanna. against whom this suit is brought
and which will have to pay whatever is due to
| the district attorney. they claim the salary act
OF 1876 went into effect this year. because this
is "a census year. the past year, and the federal
| census has ascertaned that the county had
population OF over 10000. Our Constitution III
reefs that whore counties have that population
the officers shall be paid by salary. In pursuanc,
| OF that provision a law was passed in 1875 fixing
the fees Of the various officers. il that act
applies, then the plaintiff is not entitled tc
recover; on the other hand, II it does not apply
II the former act to which have referred is The
one, and he is entitled to be paid by fees, thcr
he would be entitled TO a verdict Of $40.
That is a question of considerable moment ant
not a little intrcacy. II has been argued betor,
me at length. ! have in a measure an opinion
upon it, but would like to have the opinion
of the other judges Of the court as well as my
own, would have more confidence, and yol
would have more confidence, the community wht
are effected and the officials OF the county woulC
be better satisfied, no doubt. il the iudgmen
given is that OF all three OF the members OF TIM
court. ! have but little doubt that both m!
colleagues will be here on Saturday or Mon
day therefore | have decided to take thi
course to direct as formal matter that yor
render verdict in the plaintiffs favor for 500
but that your verdict shall be subject to
question OF law which | will reserve, whether
under the facts, which are not in dispute, ant
which have been agreed upon and put record
the plaintiff is entitled to recover, with leave
| IT the court should be OF opinion that the Law
In the case Is with the defendant rather thai
with the plaintih, that We may enter judgmen
| in favor Of the defendant, notwithstanding tn
verdict which you so render That will protec
| the rights OF all parties
Ii we fluid the plaintiff, under the law a. "
conceive il TO hc, is entitled 10 thi, verdict VIII
il will stand; ii We are convinced that he is not
then we will direct judgment {" Lc entered
notwithsta andng the verdict for the defendant
| You will, therefore, now render a verdict Il
favor OF the plaintiff for $40, subject to IN
point reserved
If Judges Edwards and Kelly hav
sufficiently recovered from their at
tack of grip to come into court Satug
day morning. the arguments will b
heard al that time. II not, il vii
; be heard Monday. An early opinion
will in all probability be handed down
that the case may be heard by tn
Superior court at an early day. Al
, effort will be made 10 have the cas-
. advanced in that court for hearing.