The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-12-18

vs. Court of County Commissioners of Fillmore County. 117 Ala, 56s, the Su- preme Court decided that local law of Fillmore County, exactly similar to that of Lee County, was unconstitutional and void. as contravening Section g. Article iv of the Constitution. It decides that the fine and forfeiture fund is q State fund totally distinct from the general fund, and one over which the Commis- sioners' Court has no authority to ap- propriate or transfer money from the general fund. Such construction would be a palpsble violation of the consti- tution.'
 Under these decisions of the su- preme Court, it was unconstitutional for the Commissioners Court to transfer this Ss,e0o from the general fund to the fine and forfeiture fund, and Treas urers Slaughter and Stevens are liable, respectively, for it's illegal disburse- ment.
 The Commiaalonefs' Court.
 "In making this report, I think 1t necessary to call attention to some of the methods of the Commissioners Court in transacting the county's busi- ness.
 Tt has no legal authority to borrow money to pay warrants and pay in- terest on 1t. It's only method of rais- ing money Is by taxation. The con- stitutional limitation on county taxa ton Is 5 mills. Several years ago the Commissioners Court reduced the rate to | mills, which does not seem to raise enough money for current exc penses, but with an assessment of near ly Sc, 900, 900, mills would raise enough without illegally borrowing 1t and paying interest on 1t.
 "A reduction in the rate of taxation and then illegally paying thousands of dollars interest on borrowed money, does not reduce the amount the taXpay- CTS have to pay
 "sectlons l41e and 1417 of the Code require that claims against the county must De itsmized, sworn to, audited and allowed, at the regular terms of the Commissioners Court. Tn Lee County the court has authorized the Probate judges to pay many claims between the regular terms of the court and then audit and allow them after payment This is clearly illegal and is no pro- tection to the Treasurer in paying such claims.
 'section 1868 of the Code requires all officers receiving fees for ex officio ser vices to itemize such fees. In Lee most of the officials file their claims for the maximum amount of such ex OElGlO LttH NAthOAt AANAhtNAhb Nat~'-T They heve been allowed and paid which is not a compliance with the law.
 Tt seems that some of the contrac- tors for county convicts during Judge Renfro's administration, owe the coun- ty a balance for the hire Of county convicts. recommend that the Com nlIsstoners' Court ascertain the amount due and institute legal proceedings to collect 1t.
 "In April, 1904. Commissioner W. s. Tucker, and ex-Commissioners H. D. McGraw and J. T. Saddier were sub poenaed as witnesses for the defendant to Montgomery in the habeas corpus case of Sparks. They were paid the expenses uf the trip out of the county treasury. As decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Burgen vs Hop kins, 1OI Ala. S20, the county is not liable for such expenses For the amounts illegally collected for these expenses, including interests from dates of payment, MT Tucker owes the county S6.S1 and MT. McGraw $1.ls, and Mr. Saddler, S7.15.
 "hWen the old court house was torn down, the files and records in the vari- ous offices were packed up and moved out Since the erection of the new court house. many of them have never been restored Co the proper offices. Many of these files and records are very valuable. and recommend that they be collected and restored to their proper off1ces.
 "Respectfu1ly submitted.
 "John T. German, Examiner
 The report of Examiner German Is accompanied by a recapituiation Of amounts due by the various officials. It Is sw6re to before Probate Judge Lyons,