The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1913-08-22
OF Gates
BEHIND PAYMENT
OF COURT SALARIES
COMPTROLLER AND TREASURER
ACTING UNDER THE ADVICE
OF ATTORNEY GENERAL.
PROBLEM UP TO JURIsTs
Says Expenses for Tribunal Have
Been Determined by Judges Them
seives Receiving Funds for More
Than One Hundred Years.

Than One Hundred Years.
Fortified by the opinion of Attor-
lney General Gates, both Comptroller
woollen and Secretary Hickerson are
paying the expense accounts Of the
supreme court, despite the fact that
the present legislature has failed to
make an appropriation for that pur.
pose.
Many attorneys have held tina. no
money can be paid out for any rea
son, because of the constitutional
stipulation that no appropriation can
be for a period for longer than two
years, and this period expired on May
81 last. In the following opinion.
however, Gen. Gates shows why he
differs with this view:
Your inquiry in respect OF this
matter is one of those herein before
characterize as quite general. You
do not refer to any particular item or
charge, and therefore my opinion Is
addressed to the general term.
However, / am of opinion that
what may be included within this
term supreme court expenses Ii &C.
be determined by that tribunal alone,
and the absence of specific legisla-
ton restricting such determination,
and even then it is doubtful whether
it ia within the power of the general
assembly to curtail the inherent pow
er of the court over this question. As
said by the supreme court of Wis
consin,
at is a power inherent In eyerey
court of record, and especially courts
of last resort, to appoint such assist
ants (referring to the Office involved
in this easel, the court itself is the
Judge of the necessity. This prime.
pal is well settled and familiar, and
a power so essential to the expedition
and proper conducting of judicial bus
mess that it may be looked upon as
very doubtful whether the court can
be deprived of it AS power Judi
ciaI and not executive in its nature,
and one lodged in coordinate
branch of the government, separated
and Independent in its sphere OF ac-
ton from the other branches, Il must
be under the protection of the eonsti-
tutioar and therefore power which
cannot be taken from the court, and
given to either the executive M leg
islative departments, or to any officer
of either of those: departments.
And as said by the Supreme court
of South Dakota in White against
Hughes county, 8 S. D.. IL, Is, f5.:
Undoubtedly court of general
jurisdiction has inherent power to
provide the necessary means of con-
Quoting its business with convenience
and reasonable Dispatch.
at is proper TO note that the leg
lslature of this state has never at.
tempted to determine what shall be
considered expenses of the supreme
court, and in so far as | am advised.
for more than 100 years the nature
and Gxfnnt of Such oYnpncpc have
been determined alone by that court
and paid out of the treasury of the
state upon the certificate of she chief
justice or come one of the justices OF
that court.
by the code of 1858, section log
(Shannon's Code, section 1857, it is
provided the expenses of the supreme
court shall be paid out of the state
treasury, upon the warrant of the
comptroller
These provisions Of the code or
1858 are still in force. and, in my
opinion, constitute AN appropriation
law for the payment of the expenses
of the supreme court, to be determin.
ed by that tribunal There are othe
statutory provisions in this state
confirming this conclusion.
"CHAS T. GATES, JR.,
Attorney Genral"