Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1913-10-12

such accounts.
4. As Of whether the states attorney Of
q county can bring an action against the
auditor. to- collect fees retained by hin
which belong to the county. without be-
ing directed so to do by the board Of
Icounty commissioners, is not decided.
5. By Chap. 10, Laws Of 1907, fixing
the salary OF county auditors. the diff
ferent counties are classified witt. re-
ference to the, assessed valuation Of tho
property in the counties Of each class,
and this statute reads that no county
auditor shall receive more THAI -----
dollars for his personal services in any
one year, the amount depending on The
valuation of the property in his county.
HELD that this enactment fixes the sal
airy Of the county auditor at the sum
named as applying to the class in which
his county belongs.
6. Chap. 20, supra. was enacted to fix
the salaries Of all the county auditors
Of the state and relates to that subject
alone and provides hat all moneys re-
ceived as fees for certifying to abstracts
or deeds in excess Of tho salary as there
by limited shall be paid by the county
auditor at tile n Of each month into
the revenue fund Of the county. HELD.
lthat this requires an accounting by the
auditor. at the end Of each month, at
such fees, and tina if the amount cx-
ceeds his salary for the month It is his
duty to pay the excess into the revenue
fund of the county.
Z. Chap. 219. Laws Of 1907, was enact
ed for the purpose of enforcing the pay
ment Of taxes before the transfer Of real
property, by recurring a certificate OF
the county auditor as to the facts, before
deeds with certain exceptions, are en-
titled to record. and as an medicinal mat
ter provided for h fees 10 be collected
by the county auditor for such ccrtif-
cate and that the auditor might retain
such fee as compensation for making his
certificate. HELD that in, view Of the
fact that Chap. 20, supra, requiring such
fees to be turned into the county treas
ury, was enacted by the legislature sub
sequen to the enactment Of said Chap.
2l9, the history Of the legislation on the
subject, and other considerations set
forth in the opinion herewith, the re-
quirements Of Chap. 20 control: and cuch
fees belong to the county and it is the
duty of he county auditor to account
for the same monthly and turn am sLe,
in his hands received therefor in excess
of his salary for tho month into tho
county treasury. @ Es i
s. The provision regarding turing such
fees into the county treasury. found in
Chap. 40. is construed to require such
fees received in excess Of the salary fix
ed for the class Of counties To which any
Particular county belongs to he tureed
into the conaty treasury, and not. as
commended, that each auditor is entitled
to icsetain such fees to an an,1un cuual-
Ing the salary provided for the counties
embraced in the maximum class.
g. While in orne cases a course of
conduct indicating a common under
standing by administrative officers az to
the meaning Of a statute, when they.
have followed a usage which has been
acaniesced in by all parties concerned
for a long period Of time, MAJ be en-
titled to weight in determining it's real
legislation; on the subject and the facts
in this case, that such UNDERSTANDING
and usage or the part Of auditors on a
subject In which they are personally. In
terested and in the face Of the denial by |
appellant, that there has been such q
custom or construction Of the statute on
the part Of at least some Of the audi
tors: that, such understanding is not CON
trolling and would not justify the court
in so, holding,
10. Where the policy Of the legislature
has been to place county officials on q
salaried basis and to turn all fees into
the county treasury, such fees belong
to the county unless the statute shows
a clear and plain legislative inent 10
grant hem o the salaried officer; and
doubts should be resolved in favor Of tho
e
II. A statute which deals with, one
only will ordinarily control in
case Of conflict between it and q statute
dealing with the same subject only in
cidentally. and having some other main
IL. The county commissioners havingl
undoubtedly entertained in good faith
thao piAtcn that the fees in question he
longed to the auditor and for this reason
having refused to order suit brought toJ
recover anything due tile county, thasl
Court will not assume that when advis-
Of the aw and the duty Of the board
to make anAaAJustrnent with the auditor
thatlhe andioE will refuse OF fail. II any
thing is found due the county, to paysthe
name. o. that %in-the eventathat he dossI
9 sreflusp the board q viii aeeaact 80 ORR
s h. $500 ~ ateosRey to- hssnE saatt. th51er
hAnce 49, tla4staetsip4eatfdaaI
e sssseSosbHaag:s asshass 11ssine wsseal
1prsSnatsrAssnRen q .~naart1anus M
lie against the board to compel suchsar.
der. 1890 .3vs j ss .
syllabus by the court.)
Appeal from ~ ,ordsr 81 tha psstsicty