The Fargo forum and daily republican., 1916-11-14
CITY IS
BARRED BY.
DECISION
Cannot Collect Fee Retained
by Treasurer, Says Su-
preme Court

Under the decision of the supreme
court, Fargo win not recover $3,S47
claimed by. the municipality against
the county of Cass, the same being the
sum the city says county treasurers
/ retained for making collections of
special Improvement assessments.
TreasurerS retained / per cent of
the collections as their fee, accord
ing to the evidence, and the supreme
court decision, affirming the district
court, says the city is barred from COL
lecting from the county. The syllabus:
City Of Fargo, a municipal
corporation,
Plaintiff and Appellant
VS..
Cass County, municipal
corporation, ...
Defendant and Respondent.
Syllabus: Various county treasurers
from 1901 until 1910 retained for them
selves one per cent of all Fargo city
special assessments as a fee for COL
lection. This action is to recover of
the county this one per cent, amount
ing to $3,S47. a-.. ...
The county never received this
money as it was never placed in any
fund Of the county treasury. But the
city claims that the county treasurer
collected as the agent of the county,
and which in turn was the collecting
agent for the city under the law
whereunder the county treasurer col
lected city special assessments and
turned the same over to the city.
There is no statute expressly MAX
ing the county liable to the city for
misapplication Of such funds by the
County treasurer.
HELD: The county treasurer in
making such collections. acted under
the law designating him as the Official
to collect, and no liability Of the coun-
ty to the city arises unless the county
actually receives the money of the
city; and until the county treasurer
turns money so collected over TO the
county and credits a county fund
received city money.
t2) That any liability of the coun-
ty in such case must arise from re
ceiying city funds with no doctrine OF
agency involved. as the county is not
an agent of the city in making such
a collection; nor does its treasurer in
collecting for the city. act as an agent
of the county or city. but instead acts
only as a person designated by law
to collect for the city and for whose
shortages or defalcations the county is
not responsible to the city unless it
has received funds so misappropriated.
(3) No liability on the part of the
county can be inferred because by
statute the bonds of the county treas
urer are subject to the approval and
action of the administration board OF
the county, leaving the treasurer with
out control or supervision by the city.
The county officials involved aro
merely the official machinery desig-
mated by law for use in the raising
and accounting for revenue for state,
county, city and other purposes.
(4) The county treasurer is not en-
titled to withhold one per cent Of city
special assessments; and it Is imma-
terial that the official services OF that
official rendered to the city in collect
Ing city assessments, was Of reason.
able value of one per cent thereof.
There is no necessary relation In law
between the salary allowed and the
work required in office, and there can
be no implied authorization to retain
a fee on such grounds, where the stat
ute does not grant one.
An appeal from the district court OF
Cass county, Pollock, J.
Affirmed. Opinion of the court by
Goss, J.
Emerson HI. Smith, city attorney OF
Fargo, and Spalding & Shure, of Far
go, of counsel. attorneys for appellant
city.
Al. W. Fowler, states attorney, and
VIM. C. Green. assistant, Of Fargo, at
torneys for respondent county.