The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-01-29


tanning over one hundred and fifty thousand IT,.
habitants all county officers shall bc paid by
salary. and the salary Of such officer and his
clerks. heretofore paid by fees, shall not ex.
cecd tho aggregate amount Of fees earned dur
ing his term and collected by or for him.
Article .. Section 10. No law shall extend the
term Of any public officer. or increase or dnin
ish his salary or cmclument', after his cleo
ton or appointment.
The salary act OF March 81, 1876, 7. l.. IL. was
ir tended to give effect to the constitutional pro-
vision relating 10 salaries. This act Of 1si6
so far as ic concerns counties OF over 10000 in.
habitants and less than oJo,Oco, has been amended
by the act OF July %, 1896, r. L. 42i
We thus have a provision in the constitution
and an act Of assembly providing that in coun.
tics containing over one hundred and fifty thou.
sand inhabitants shall I've paid by salary. Sew.
cral questions suggest themselves.
FirSt-For the purpose Of classification Of
counties under the salary act, what Is the test
by which the population OF n county Is sscer.
tanned? This IL simple question and the an.
swor TO IL is equally simple. The United States
deccnnial census Is the only standard by which
we can ascertain the population Of Lackawsnna
county. It is true that the legislature Of Penn.
sylyania could have provided some other method
Of computing the population Of the counties Of
the state so as TO carry the salary act into cf.
feet. IL could provide tricnnal enumeration,
or it could devise some other means But 1t
has not seen it TO do anything. There is there.
fort no standard to guide us except the United
States census. As was said by Mr.. Justice Stcr.
rctt in Iuzcrnc county W Clcnnon 100 Pa. 5Gi.
"Thc United States dcconnial census Is the only
official determination Of population that we now
have: and tho Inconvenience and injustice that
would necessarily arise from accepting any TN.
unofficial guide to the classification of counties
for salary purposes, cannot be well ovcr-esti.
mated. legislative and judicial appointments
ave both based on population determined by the
last preceding census" There Is no reason Cor
disagreement on this point
WHEN DOES IT ArPLY?
Sccond-Whcn did or docs the salary act ot
1870, with its supplement of 1895, go into ef
feet as TO Lackawanna county? In other words
when DID our county by law "contain" or
shave" over 100000 inhatitants? The moment
it could be said as a matter law that the county
had the required population, that moment its
| officers came under the salary law According
to the "casc stated" the first public annoucc-
| nont that the county contained 1851 inhabit.
ants was made in press bulletin from the cen.
| Is bureau, November 10, 1900. This was
| az course after the election Of plaintiff TO his
| office Of district attorney. But what did the
announcement mean? Did IL mean that tie
! population ot LaCkawanna county was 103,S}l
| on NONI'llltf W. NOtnnp OF tUc hlnn it
| meant. what everybody was bound TO know,
that the figures given represented the popuia-
| tion Of the county on the first day ot June,
| 1900, ard on no other day. The announcement
| would not he true rs to any other day. 1t will
not be amiss 10 examine the act OF congress
| providing for the taking OF the twelfth census.
| We cannot help being impressed with the fac,
| that the act provides no date for the official
| cCrifcation OF the enumeration. The one Ger.
L
| uncertainty as TO this date. Section 10 pro.
| vid,d: That the enumeration OF the population
| required by this act shall commence on the FIRST
| lav Of June, 1000 and be taken as OF
| that date"
| Section o5 authorizes the director OF the cen
| sus "to print, publish and distribute from time
20 time bulletins and reports of the preliminary
| aud other results Of the various Investigations
| required by this act"
| Section 80 provides that governors and chief
! Of municipal governments may have copies o.
the returns OF population lincluding names
etc., Of the political divisions under their con
| trol, upon payment Of the costs There are M
other provisions for publication and certifcatior
! of population
THE ANNOUNCEMENT
| II is claimed that the people did not know
| the population OF the county until the pubica
| tion of a press bulletin in the newspapers oi
| November 10. We must take this as true be
| cause it is agreed upon as a fact. Suppose i
| had been announced upon October 10? Or, sa
| on November 5, 1900, one day before election
Would that make any difference? The plantih'
| position and argument concede shat il the an
nouncemcnt had been made the day before elcc
| tion, November 5, the county officers would b
under the salary system, while, ii it had bee
made two days later, November Z, they woul
be under the fee system. Is ii possible that tw
days can make such difference! Is such a
important question to be determined by Oh
chance publication of press bulletin, unsigned
uccrtihcd, aud liable to he denied the mex
day? II is well known that the bulletins an
nouncinc the population OF the different state
| covered period of about a month. They wer
| taken up in alphabetical order and given GU
| from day TO day. II il was ever intended thi
the particular day OF the announcement shoul
have in its relation TO the November ecctio
the important and lar reaching result elaine
in this case, there would have been provisio
in the census act fixing day certain Tor 'o
hcial' certifcaton, so that there would be a III,
form rule for all the states, and that impol
tant results should not be ieopardized by acc
dent or caprice or arbitrary interference.
| IRE true solution OF the question is TO i
| found in the fact that the census was taken "a
of June !, 1900" This announcement Of \,
| Ncmber 10 was the announcement OF the fac
az it existed June ]. In this way we have
plain. certain. unvarying rule, treating all II
states alike, and tending TO conserve all inte
cSs by the application OF a consistent and un
! for principle Of Interpretation.
Tlird--It is claimed that our interpretitio
oi the law is in 4 sense retroactive and do,
, injustice TO the county officers whose statl
was fixed by tho law as it stood on November
r the day OF the election. | cannot see how il
I, possible 10 maintain such an assertion in III
= case. Long before any nominations were mat
: the census OF the United states lad been take
2 Everybody knew or ought 10 know that Il
Q census was taken on the first day OF June, 100
= and that whatever the population of IackawanI
county was on that day would govern the que
0 ton Of fees or salaries. All candidates went in
D the canvass with their eyes wide open. Son
D believed that the fee system would prevail. OF
d Crs that the salary system would come into
feet. The law has taken no advantage OF an
T. body's innocence. The reason for not giyil
Q retrospective effect TO a law in this case is c
y tircly wanting.
!. A SIMILAR CASE.
I ! have examined several authorities which /
o cidcntaly touch the question before this coul