Weekly journal-miner., 1917-08-29
RAISES |. STOPPED BY
 INJUNCTION
COURT ENJOINS I'll E SUPE E RVISORS FROM RAISING SALARIES OF THE COUNTY OFFICERS UNDER ACT OF 1917.
(From Saturdays Daily)

By virtue of a permanent injunc- ton issued in the Superior court yes terday afternoon by Judge Frank H. Lyman, the salaries of five of the of- icials of the county, which had been raised by the legislative salary act of March, 1917, were cut to the original ! figures, as provided in the salary act of 1913, and the contention of Super visor William Stephens that the 1917 salary act was unconstitutional, was upheld.
 The suit was brought by Mir. Stephens some time ago to restrain the supervisors of Yavapai county from paying the increased salaries as provided for in the new act. Two members of the board, of which Stephens is chairman, contended that the new salary law was O. k., and backed by favorable opinions from Attorney General Wiley E. Jones and also the county attorney of Yavapai county, proceeded to raise the sal aries of five of the officials as follows: County recorder from S2,400 to S2,700; county treasurer from S2,5O0 to s. GOO: county attorney from S2,500 to s ,000; county school superintendent from S1,5O0 to $2,4OO, and county assessor from S2,40O to S2,700.
 Stephens, under the belief that the new salary law was not to be applied to incumbents of the various offices, contested the payment of the higher figures, and asked the court for re- straining order, passing his action on the theory that the State constitution expressly prohibits any change being made in the salary of any county of hcial during the latter's term of office. It was held that the official, by his acceptance Of the office, had virtually contracted with the county to per- form the necessary work for the stipulated amount, and that he was in no wise entitled to have the amount of his pay changed during his period of office.
 Judge Lyman of Maricopa county was called to Prescott to hear the case and following the introduction of the action in court, the permanent injunction was issued in favor of the plaintiff, thereby having the effect of compelling the county officers who have been paid in accordance with the new salary regulations, to make a re- fund to the county treasury of the amount which they have been paid over and above the salary fixed by the law of 1913
 The court held that the new salary act was not designed to affect the pay of any of the officials holding office al the present time, and was Tn direct conflict with Section Y. Part ?, Arti- clc 4 of the State constitution, which reads as follows:
 The legislature shall never grant any extra compensation to any public officer, agent, servant or contractor. after the services shall have beeR rendered or the contract entered into, nor shall the compensation of any public officer be increased or dimin- shed during his term of office
 In many other counties of the State, the payment of salaries under the pro- visions of the 1917 act have been halted pending the outcome of the suit which had been filed in the Yav, apai court, and the decision of Judge Lyman that the 1917 act is not yet in force will cause a cessation of pay monts under that statute wherever such salary boosts have been made.
 Supervisor Stephens was represent cd in court by the firm of Norris & Norris.