Fayette County v. Jennings

5 Ill. App. 614, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 2
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedApril 2, 1880
StatusPublished

This text of 5 Ill. App. 614 (Fayette County v. Jennings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fayette County v. Jennings, 5 Ill. App. 614, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 2 (Ill. Ct. App. 1880).

Opinion

Baker, P. J.

Jesse D. Jennings, the defendant in error, was elected sheriff of Fayette county in Movember, 1874, and held the office until December, 1876. In September, 1874, the board of supervisors of said county fixed the salary of the sheriff at §1,200 per annum, and ordered that he should be allowed §800 per annum for pay of deputies. At the March term, 1878, of the board of supervisors, Jennings presented an account against the county wherein he claimed a balance due him of §1,474.65 for deputy hire. The board refused to allow the claim, and he appealed to the circuit court, where, at the September term, 1878, he recovered a judgment against the county for the full amount of his demand. During his term of office, Jennings rendered his semi-annual reports as required by law, but paid no amount whatever into the county treasury from the fees and. earnings of his office. As we understand his claim, it is that the collections made by him for fees and services were only sufficient to pay his salary or compensation of §2,400, some incidental expenses, and the sum of §125.35 on the amount paid out by him to his deputy, leaving §1,474.65 still due him for expenses of deputy, and which latter sum he insists shall be paid him by the county.

Counties are involuntary political or civil divisions of the state, created by general statutes, to aid in the administration of government. The statutes confer upon them all the powers they possess, prescribe all the duties they owe, and impose all liabilities to which they are subject. Dillon Mun. Cor. sec. 10a; Symonds v. Clay County, 71 Ill. 255. If the county is liable to pay the demand here made upon it for hire of deputy, it certainly must arise either from some provision of the Constitution, or statute imposing such liability, or from contract. Section 10 of Article 10 of the Constitution of 1870, provides that the county board shall fix the compensation of all county officers, with the amount of their necessary clerk hire, stationery, fuel, and other expenses, and that in. all cases where fees are provided for, said compensation shall be paid only out of, and shall in no instance exceed, the fees actually collected, and that compensation shall not exceed certain specified limits, and that the compensation of no officer shall be increased or diminished during his term of office, and that a,ll fees or allowances received in excess of said compensation shall be paid into the county treasury. Prior to the adoption of this constitutional provision, sheriffs and their deputies received their compensation in the shape of fees paid by those who required their services, and which fees were regulated by the State. The sheriff received no salary or other compensation from the county further than certain fees and allowances which were provided by statute to be paid by the county for services rendered either to the county or otherwise, and the liability to pay for which was by statute imposed upon the county. The sheriff took his office cum onere/ paid for his own stationery, fuel and other expenses; appointed his own deputies, and made such division of fees or other arrangement for their compensation as might be agreed upon, and received no pay from the county except for services rendered. Bryner v. Supervisors, 24 Ill. 195; Irvin v. Alexander County, 63 Ill. 528. There was no legal obligation resting upon the county to pay or compensate the deputy for services or assistance rendered by him to the sheriff, or to refund to the sheriff what he had thus paid. We do not understand the constitutional provision in question to impose any such burden upon the county.

The evil sought to be reached hy this section ten, was that in the rapid development of the State and increase of business, the fees of many of the county officers, more especially in the larger and more wealthy counties of the State, had grown out of all just proportion to the value of the abilities required and services rendered, and had become a burden upon the people, and a means of corruption and a public detriment and scandal. Various of these officers were receiving compensation, in the shape of fees, that would pay many times over and over again that paid to those occupying the highest and most laborious and responsible positions in the State, and in some instances were suspected of using these vast funds for corrupt purposes. We think it evident, considering the circumstances under which this constitutional provision was adopted, the evil which it was intended to cure, and the language used, that it was not the intention to impose thereby any additional burden of liability upon the county, and require it to pay the deputy hire or clerk hire of a sheriff in cases where the fees collected by him were insufficient to pay both such hire and the maximum compensation that he could in any event retain. The burden of the sheriff’s deputy hire, and other expenses, was already upon the sheriff, and there this section ten still left it. But to reach the evil had in view, it was simply intended that the matter of the sheriff’s compensation. and expenses should be regulated by law and by the county board; that such compensation and such expenses should still, as theretofore, not be a charge upon the county, but should be paid out of fees collected from those for whom services were performed; but that all fees collected over and above a fair and reasonable compensation for his personal services, and his necessary and actual expenses, should be paid into the county treasury.

The intention of this section ten was, that the county board should, within the limits and under the restrictions imposed thereby, fix the salary or compensation of all county officers, in whatever manner paid—-whether by salary taken from the county treasury, or by fees received from those for whom services were rendered. That the amounts so fixed should be the limit of their compensation, but that they might receive and retain in addition there ¿o the necessary and actual expenses of their office, which also should be allowed them by the county board. The clause, “ with the amount of their necessary clerk hire, stationery, fuel and other expenses,” is to be regarded as parenthetical. If the office was one of which either, the compensation or expenses constituted a, proper and legal charge upon the county, then the liability of the county to pay such compensation as fixed, or such expenses as allowed, continued. But if the office was one the emoluments of which depended' upon fees and allowances received and collected, then the compensation was left to be collected, just as theretofore, from fees, and could be paid only out of fees, and in no instance could exceed the fees actually collected.

If the office was one cum onere, one where theretofore the officer could make no proper charge against the county for clerk hire, deputy hire, stationery or other expenses, this constitutional provision still left the office an office taken cum onere, and not only the compensation, but the expenses of the office were still to be defrayed only out of the fees and perquisites by such officer received. But if such fees exceeded the amount of the compensation or salary fixed, and the amount of the actual and necessary expenses of the office, then such excess could no longer be retained, but must be paid into the county treasury.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Bryner v. Board of Supervisors
24 Ill. 195 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1860)
Irvin v. County of Alexander
63 Ill. 528 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1872)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 Ill. App. 614, 1880 Ill. App. LEXIS 2, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fayette-county-v-jennings-illappct-1880.