Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1905-02-15

to themselves from the funds of the
county for livery hire from June
1904 to January 1905 the following
sums:
Thomas Lindsay ....... $l66.3O
VIM. Robinson. ...... 2O3.O0
j. j. Kirkwood. ........ 1900
A total Of. .......... $545.3O
In that article the Democrat
charged that these expenditures
were unauthorized and illegal, and
asked the board to cover the moneys
so received by them back into the
county treasury.
The Hopkinton Leader, as spokes-
man for and in its defense of the
board says:
1.-THE question of the legality of
charging livery bills is an open one, at
any rate, and there are lawyers who
maintain that the supervisors of the
state are fully warranted in receiving
1t, Furthermore, there hos been no
effort on the part of the supervisors to
cover up or conceal the fact that they
collected the charge for livery used in
official work. The members of the
board stand ready to take the COM
mendstion or criticisms of the public as
they may come"
From the above it appears that
the members of the board refuse to
act upon the friendly advice ten
dered them by the Democrat, and
although admitting that their right
to this money.is an open one pro-
pose to retain that which they have
already taken, and to continue APP
propriating to themselves county
funds for their livery hire.
The leader cites no law in support
Of its statement, that the question Of
the right of the board to livery hire
is an open one, and we do not be.
lieve that there are respectable law.
yers who have given the matte,
proper consideration, who maintain
that the supervisors are fully war.
ranted in receiving livery hire"
They are not entitled to it unless i
is expressly given to them by the
statute fixing their compensation
And the statute which entities then
compensation does not either ex
pressly or by implication allow then
for livery hire. 1t fixes their com
pensation at four dollars per da
for session work. and four dollar
and fifty cents per day, exclusive G
mileage, for committee service, an,
five cents per mile for every mil
travelled in going to and from til
regular, special and adjourned ses
sion, and in going to and from tn
place of performing committee sci
vice. Not another word is said il
the statute giving the members Q
the board any other compensation o
following them for any personal ex
penses incurred. This ought to an,
does settle the question. There i
not the slightest foundation for say
ing it is an open question, as as
serted by the Leader.
The Supreme Court Of this stat,
in case which arose under a Law
which gave a sheriff mileage in ad
dition to his regular fee for serving
a warrant said.
''In the service of a warrant the Law
c0ntemplates, In all cases, q loss of tim,
FOR which two dollars are allowed snt
that there may be expenses of traoe1 TO
which mileage Is allowed. These ar,
designed as full compensation for tn,
services and ordinary expenses of th'
sheriff. They may In some cases, wher,
the particular servics is considered
without reference to the general dutiel
Of the sheriff, seem inadequate, ant
this is perhaps true Of partic,tzd, ser
oices rendered By all officers ao7tere fee
are GllooUed;; but the uesign OF the Law
10, by graduation of all fees, to max,
the entire compensation of thu office
adequate for his entire service, anC
nence the mere fact that the allowance
Tor service and mileage Is not q sniff
Gent compensation for the time giveI
and the money expended is not con
trolling"
And in a recent case the sam,
court held, that "the two dollars al
lowed for serving the warrant wa
designed to compensate the Office
for the time required and the mile
age was allowed for travelling ex
penses", and that, railway fare paic
by the officer for his own transpor
tation is an expense for which til,
allowance for mileage is made.
And in still another case decided
by the same tribunal the court says
"The plaintiff, in addition to his mile
age claimed certain sums for his Gu
fare and hotel bills; they we're properl,
disallowed. The mileage allowed b!
law Is intended to recompense for Thu
time employed add the personal expens,
of the officer"
The supervisors might, with jus
as much propriety, claim for til,
money expended by them for boart
and hotel bills, as for car fare ane
livery bills, and if they do not re.
turn the money taken by them unde
charges made for livery hire, the,
will in our opinion retain it at thei
peril.
The Leader saws:
"Lsst year was the first in which th,
board has ltemized its bills and expens
accounts in such a manner that tn
various expenses could be figured ii
dollars aud cents. Previous to thu
year 1904 the scheme of the board To-
conducting the county business out q
session was to provide each memLe
with warrant book, signed up ii
blank, and each member was privilege,
10 draw money to his own order at sucl
times and for such amounts as necessi
ties demanded. Road work, bridg
work and many other items directed b,
the supervisors were paid for direc
from these semi-personal funds an,
the vouchers returned to the cour
house in sort of lump to show for tn