Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1915-12-17
SALARIES OF COUNTY OFFICERS

y. -. bTlCe, COuuIy dISoihCSb oP-
peared before Judge Rice in court
Tuesday shortly after noon, to make
a return for certain county officers
showing why they had not complied
with the recommendation Of the grand
jury in filing with the county super
visor q report Of the salary, fees, etc.,
which they had received since assum-
ing their respective offices in obedi-
ence to Section 6S1 Of the code.
The attorney told the court there
were about thirty county officers who
had not made such return and that
the reason therefor was that they had
unintentionally overlooked the law.
He pointed out further that some
little time would be necessary for
the various officers to prepare a re-
port and that If given sufficient time
they. would make such return. The
solicitor agreed to excuse those Of
ficers represented by Mr. Brice on
their promise to make such return
as early as they could compile their
respective reports.
It was further pointed out that
several Of the county officers, among
them being the county commissioners
D. T.. Woods, supervisor OF regis
tration, and others, had not been in
office one year and therefore were
not required to make such return.
T. F.. Mellow, Esq, who appeared
before the court in behalf Of the clerk
Of court on the rule read q return
from the clerk prepared by that Of
ficer in which he stated that custom
has some bearing on the case since
no clerk Of court Of York county had
ever made such return. 1t was point.
ed out further that no county ofhcial
had ever appeared at the office OF the
clerk and asked to see the accounts
regarding the fees and salary of the
office.
The clerk further stated in his re-
turn to the court that an act requir-
ing clerks of court to turn over all
fees and salary exceeding $4,000 to
the county, had been repealed in 1913.
The clerks counsel read Section
681 Of the Code under which section
the presentment Of the grand jury
was made and which is as follows:
Section 6S1. Each county officer
shall be required to purchase and
keep in his office, open to public In
spection during office hours, a book
in which shall be kept an itemized
account Of all moneys received by
him, or due him, whether received
by him or due him as salary, fees or
costs, or in any other manner, as pay
to him for his services by virtue or
his office: Provided that nothing here
ho q
require any officer to demand the pay
ment of his fees and costs in advance.
At the close Of each fiscal year, each
officer shall transmit an itemized copy
of said account, under oath, to the
office Of the Supervisor. The county
in addition to other books
kept in his office, shall keep a
separate book in which he shall enter
upon his books the total amount OF
each account so furnished, opposite
the name of the officer furnishing
said account, and file the account in
his office as other County records are
kept. Provided that the provisions of
this section shall not apply to the
Of Sumter, Lexington and
Kershaw, Lancaster, Abbe-
Vile and Marlboro.
Counsel argued that since certain
tACliPI 1iohi thS pa
visions Of the act, the same Is un-
since the general as
sembly cannot make a special law
where a general law will apply. The
matter, he argued, had come UP in
and Judge Sease who pre-
sided, declared the law unconstitu-
tional.
1t was further pointed out by the
clerks attorney, that the identical
question had come up before the
supreme court in the case Of Dean
VS.. Spartanburg: Williams VS.. Ker-
shaw county; State VS.. Queen and
other cases dealing with acts of a
nature but concerning other
matters, and cited an opinion Of Mr..
Justice Gage Of the Supreme court
declaring such special laws uncon-
Solicitor Henry, representing the
state on the question, agreed that the
portion Of the act bearing on the COM
pensation of the clerk and manner
of his fees was unconstitutional but
that there was nothing in
the constitution which would excuse
any county officer from making