Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1909-03-04
sHERIFFs SALARY BILL VETO.

Inc reasons Governor FOrC gives
for his veto of Assembiyman STILES
bill providing that counties of the
third and fourth class be permitted to
contract with the Sheriffs for the
boarding of prisoners in the jails is
of especial interest to Gloucester
county, which pays former Sheriff
Charles Wilson so cents a day for
each prisoner in the county jail, which
sum is to provide food for the prison
ers and compensate Mr.. Wilson for
his trouble In his veto the G Overnor
says: II
1T is to be presumed that it was
the intention of the Legislature in
fixing the salaries of Sheriffs in this
State, that they should perform all the
work incident to the Office of Sheriff,
prior to the passage of the act approv-i
ed March 80, 1906, for the salary fixed
in that act. In accepting Office that
is their contract with the people of
the county. 1t would seem, therefore,
that the county, if it wishes to do the
work of feeding the prisoners, simply
authorize the Sheriff, under such di-
rection as the Board of Chosen Free
holders may provide, to feed the
prisoners in the county jails, and to
make payment of the amount of the
account necessarily incurred in SO
doing. The Sheriff himself should not
be permitted under any theory to de-
rive any profit from the feeding of
the prisoners.
ssTo permit him to do so is to in
crease his salary by indirection. 1t
is his duty to see that the prisoners
are fed in so far as the service to
them of meals is concerned, under his
salary, unless he turn the county Jail
over to the Board of Chosen Free
holders, under the law which permits
him to do so, and thus relinquishes
all claim to the custody of that in
stitution. Sc long as he retains con-
troll of the jail itself his duty is to
see that the prisoners are fed, turn
ing into the county his actual expen-
diture for the actual food served,
which of course, the county should
pay. Under no pretext should the
Sheriff of any county in the face of
the statute, fixing q: salary, be per-
nitted to derive a 94sont directly or
indirectly in addition to that salary.
THE salary system adopted in 1906
is wise one and should be strictly
maintained But if the reason al
ready given was not sufficient, /
should still refuse to approve the bill
under consideration, because of it's
general character. 1t simply author
ICES the Board of Chosen Freeho1ders
of any county of the third and fourth
class in this state to contract with the
Sheriff of such county at any price
per day, which may be agreed upon
!. ,<~1l
iff for period of one year.
'"This, to my mind, is exceptionally
Objectionable. If there is to be any
contract, it should be limited to, say
twenty-five or thirty cents per day,
or whatever is a fair and reasonably
compensation for the service. The
Board of Chosen Freeholders and the
Sheriff should not be permitted to
fix any price for the board of prison
erS.
''If the statute is to be enacted at
all, it should contain some limitation
against extravaganza or favOritiSm.
In addition to the reasons already
given, | doubt the constitutionality of
this act 1t seems to me there can be
no reason suggested for permitting
Sheriffs in counties of the third and
fourth class to make contracts of this
character while prohibiting those in
other counties of the State from doing
the same. If it is advantageous for
a small county to contract with its
Sheriff to board prisoners, / can see
no reason why the Sheriff of any
county should be excluded from max
ing like contract.
''The theory of the law approved
March 80, 1905, fixing salaries, was to
prevent the Sheriff from receiving for
any service which is cast upon him
as Sheriff, anything in excess of his
salary.
For those reasons above indicated
/ return the bill without my appro-
VAL