The producers news. [volume] (Plentywood, Mont.) 1918-1937, 1922-07-14
Fiicers Directed To Issue.
Warrants and Regi
]. Holds Clerk & Recorders Duties Ministslsd|
Ministerial Officers Cannot Raise Consfsg
fenses, NJ
7AYERs WILL TAKE CASE TO CoUF

q Supreme court OIL Vlie o'a'e VI
T. handed down its decision IN
i .1uood Mandamus case Mon
'E1H" |'1IT 8rd, in which it held that
~ ns of Clerk & Recorder were
! ',T Ministerial, and by inference
T. nillf nfHice of the County Treas
! y +be en- matter of paying and reg
y = w warrants, that even though
x ! @,rants mt" issued were illegal and
i 81ant ,I and the officers had full
lsns M5ao of the fraud, that these
s w would be bound to issue the
rants and to either pay or
= a. tbem, hem and issued a nandam-
,e+;ng Chairman of the Board
! and '1 Clerk & Recorder O'Grady,
|kessurer Olson to issue and pay
IA ' warrants on payment for the
] ] dle the cIassiders.
j case was one originating in
.breme court, and predicated up
1 amended classification law
hv the legislature in 1921 as a
! act for the Classification Act
i BY the legislature OF 1919,
acf was declared unconstitu-
IN the month Of February,
correcting the act to make it
1 with the constitution, and re-
Inc all classification contracts
4 INTO by the Board of County |
issoners with the several land |
rase was started in April and
IA for hearing in the latter part
/, Judge Hurley and Howard
his appeared for Mr.. Lockwood
ldwin & Wheeler of Butte and
/ { Paul appeared for D. j.
and B. K. O'Grady. Commr.
assisted Lockwood by refusing
ear and entering a default, and
because of the refusal of Mr..
10 appear that the case was
which fact Mr. Tyler was well
and fully advised. The refusal
llnr. Tyler to join in the defense
surprise as he had always pre-
Ito be in sympathy in setting
be land classification law and
BE- this graft upon the taxpay-
Sheridan county. |
lecision held that as neither the
! Recorder nor County Treas
s any discretion in the matter
Fing or paying warrants and
pt be held responsible, that
Eicers could not raise the con-
bal questions as to whether the :
'ahon law as passed by the leg J
in 1921 was constitutional;
! only person that could raise
estion was Chairman Tyler of I
Fd Of County Commissioners
\ he had not put in an answer
out Of court by default; that
the court would not consider
the law was constitutional or
at the only way that the con-
1allty Of the classification law
questioned was by an inter I
aty, that is by a taxpayers t
an injunction proceedings, r
the question directly into is S
I the legislature has the right t
"a curative act; contained an 4
n that as the county was US r
plats the classifers were en- v
pay for services rendered; and t
y 70 typewriter pages, the "
which was argument to get
/ former decision, viz, Dolin
+ 1 Major in which the same
ID that the Clerk & Recorder
I, pound to issue a warrant on
.illegally passed by the Board
y commissioners, when the
Eere allowed for sums in ex-
Iwaat was allowed by the
auditor. The Dolin case was
Stumbling block for the SUI
'urt, but it was finally avoided
~ labored argument distin-
between . the two situations,
mat the Clerk & Recorder in
! sonolVlons did actually have
y and that in others it did
.s5 the third action growing out
ana l9 classification contract,
n sne supreme court, the first
Nzf