The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1907-07-05
CHANGES OF SALARIES.

We notice the imminence Of law
suit In Idaho involving the increase in
salary of District Judges, made by a
statute of the late session of the Leg
lslature of that State. The bill which
passed raises the salaries of the Dis.
trict Judges from $4,000 TO $4,000 each
per annum, and raises, also, the sal.
aries of the State Auditor and the
Secretary of State.
The suit which is about to be insti-
tuted involves the construction of the
Idaho State constitution, which has a
similar provision in it to that contained
in the Utah constitution, forbiddinp
the increase of salaries during the term
for which any incumbent may have
been elected. We have noticed. how
ever, in good many cases, that no
matter what the wording of the con-
stitution may be in this respect, if a
Legislature can be induced to pass a
law increasing the salaries of Judges or
State officers, the courts always give
effect to that statute and allow the in.
creased pay, no matter what may be the
wording of the constitution. and no
matter what pains the constitution max
ers may have taken TO express clearly
their intent to provide against any in
crease of salary to take effect during
the term IN which an incumbent NAV
be serving. In Utah the question arose
both for State officers and for the Judges
In both cases the law was made to
take effect Immediately upon its pas
sage, going into effect without regard
to the constitutional inhibition against
that method of raising the salaries, and
increasing the salaries after the Off
cials had begun to serve their terms.
In Idaho it will no doubt be found the
same. The courts Will make such CON
struction as will allow Of the taking
of the increased salaries, no matter
what the wording Of the constitution
against that way Of making the in
crease may be.
1t is usual in State constitutions. TO
have provisions which are meant TO
prohibit the increase of salary to any
person holding Office after he has begun
to serve the term for which he was
elected, and to apply during that term.
1t seems. however, that no constitution
makers are ever able to hit upon the
precise form Of words which will carry
into effect their intent to prevent such
increase. The courts uniformly accord
it without regard to the wording of
the constitution; there is always some
way found to escape the effect of what
the constitution makers themselves and
the public generally have accepted as
the true meaning Of the prohibitory
clause as worded.
We have often thought that IT would
be fine thing TO have a Legislature
some time, under similar circumstances,
order decrease in the salaries of the
Judges and of the State officers, and
see whether the courts would construe
that as effective in the same way that
they have uniformly construed the
raises in salary to be effective, and TO
begin on the passage of the statutory
raise, IN the midst of term. We have
an idea that the courts would find some
way, in case Of decrease ordered
by statute, to find that statute uncon-
stitutionaL We think they would be
able to fully sense the idea that the
constitution makers had meant to pro-
vide against any change In the salary
Of an official after be had begun TO
serve his term Of Office, during that
term, AS rule, the points of the de-
cision as rendered in favor of the off.
GERS accepting the increase accorded by
the Legislature, would ht precisely a
law making a decrease IN those sal
aries. The decrease should, according
TO the arguments of the court. take !