The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-12-18
MUCH MONEY DISBURSED
 TO LEE COUNTY OFFICIALS
 WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW

the following report -
 Said Section 1877 provides as fol- lows: Whenever the legality of any payment Is involved. he shall submit the principles of law involved to the Attorney General for his advice and opinion, and be governed thereby.
 Tn compliance with this provision, l submitted several questions to Hon. Massey Wilson. Attorney General, for opinions, and I incorporate said ques- tions and his opinions in this report, and have charged the officials, who have received illegal fees or compen- sation, or disburse5 the county's money illegally in accordance with said opin- ions and the decisions of the Supreme Court
 q do not find that there. have been any dishonest disbursements of the county's money, but large amounts have been erroneously and Illegally disbursed, through misconstruction or misinterpretation of the law.
 '1n justice to the officials, who have collected illegal fees and compensa- tion, I will state that it has been GUS tomary in Lee County to allow such fees and compensation, but this, of course, does not legalize such pay ments nor render the officials less liable to refund the amounts they have illegally received
 EEO0H&S 000&C& v OhhN%a
 q examined the books, accounts and vouchers of Hon. ". c. Robinson, ex- Probate Judge. from November 1st 1896, to November End. 1898, the date of his retirement from office. His books were correctly kept. He paid into the county treasury all mon eys collected for the county. All the fees and allowances collected from the county were correct and legal except as n~ aHa~ Commissioners Court decided to build a new court house for Lee County. On May 18th. 1896. contracts were made with A. J. Bryan & Co. for plans and specifications for said court house, and for their services in personally superin- tending the erection of same, and for this the county agreed to pay and did pay the sum of s1.0o0; and with Andrews 6 Stevens for the erection Of same. the sum of s23,o00. On Novem- Der 10th, 1896, it was decided by the Commissioners Court to issue bonds to the amount of s25,000 to pay for said court house. and on April goth. 1897, said court house was completed and accepted by the county. On November 2nd, 1896. the Commissioners Court al- lowed Judge Robinson a claim of S109 for services in building the court house, and on April 5th, 1897, he was allowed an additional claim of $750 for build ing the court house and selling the bonds.
 "A county is not liable for any fee or compensation unless expressly author ized by law, and there is no law author izing the allowance and payment of such payments as the above, and Judge Robinson owes the county this $s50, with interest thereon from the dates of payment. As to the legality of these payments. I submitted the follow ing question to the Attorney General and received the following opinion:
 Hon. Massey Wilson, Attorney
 General:
 "'Where the County of Lee built a new court house, employed a contrac- tor and architect for this purpose, and the architect personally supervised the erection of the court house, could the Commissioners Court, after its comple- tion, recognize claims of the Probate Judge for $s50 for services in building the court house and selling the bonds, and if such claims were paid, were the payments authorized?
 ";J. T. German, Examiner
 AtOFney-GeneFal's Opinion.
 "J. T. Gorman Examiner:
 "'on investigation. I find the act of December 5th. 1886 General Acts. 1sss- .7. p. 6D authorizing the Court of County Commissioners of Lee County to issue and sell bonds for the purpose of building and furnishing a new court house. Section 10 provides that said Court of County Commissioners is here by authorized to sell either themselves or through any authorized agent ap- pointed by themselves, said bonds, and to do any, and all things necessary in issuing or selling said bonds, and to appoint agents for the purpose of car. rying out the provisions of this act
 "'The Court of County Commission CTS is composed of the Judge of Pro- bate as principal judge, and four com missioners. under Section 951 of the Code; and Section ss7 provides that the Commissioners are entitled to, $2.50 | rendered. to be paid by the | County Treasurer on the certificate of the Judge of the Court
 "Tn State vs. Pollard, 59 Ala. 130, 134, Brickell, c. J., said: Those who accept public offices which require them to render service to the State, must take the office cum onere-the rendition of such services gratuitously, unless by express statutory provision compensation is fixed, and an express liability for it's payment imposed on the State
 "The Judge of Probate was mem Der of the Court of County Commis- sionerS. That body was given the au- | thority to build the court house and 1t was their duty, when undertaken, to complete the work. In Section 10, they were authorized to appoint agents in the selling of the bonds, but it could not have been the intention of the act for a member of the court to be ap- | pointed agent. The court was the prin- cipal and was under the duty of selling the bonds. The compensation of the 1 Judge of Probate, as a member of the court, was fixed by the statute; and the imposition of the other duties did not entitle him to extra compensation It Is we'll settled that ian officer de- manding fees for services rendered must point to some clear and definite provision of the statute which author | izes the demand, and the compensation can not be allowed unless it is con- | ferred by the strict construction of the language employed in the statute, 1 (Tolbert Vs. Hale County, 131 Ala. 145). . 1 "The language of the Supreme Court of the United States In Brown vs. | United States, Howard, 4S7, IS L 233, l IS pertinent here: By what course of reasoning, then, could 1t be shown that the peculiar or appropriate duties of this officer were not his duties, but were performed by him in lieu of some other agent and became therefor the ! foundation for extra compensation, thls court was unable to comprehend. And the court disallowed the claim in the l question. See, also, United States vs. King, 147 U. s. SIS, 37 L. BPS; Throop on Public Officers, Sections AT, ct seq. " Massey Wilson, Attorney General" Concerning Illegal Fees.
 Sections 4578 and 4579 of the Code | faae OF 4ndgaa of Cnnnfx