Bush v. Bd. of Comm'rs

• Decision Date: 11 January 1890
• Citation: 23 N.E. 275,121 Ind. 420
• Parties: Bush et al. v. Board of Commissioners.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

121 Ind. 420

23 N.E. 275

Bush et al.

v.Board of Commissioners.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Jan. 11, 1890.

Appeal from circuit court, Hamilton county; D. Moss, Judge.

Action by James K. Bush and others against the board of commissioners of Hamilton county. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs appeal.

Thomas J. Kane and Theodore P. Davis, for appellants. William C. Christian, for appellees.

Berkshire, J.

The appellants filed a claim with the appellee on account of the publication in their newspaper of the list of allowances made by the latter at their March session, 1889. The amount of the claim was $44, and the amount allowed by the appellee was $15. From the allowance made by the appellee the appellants appealed to the circuit court, and judgment was rendered therein for the appellants for the sum of $15; and from that judgment this appeal is taken.

The controversy grows out of the construction which the parties give to sections 5765 and 6011, Rev. St. 1881. The first-named section came into force August 24, 1875, and the latter section, May 31, 1879. Section 5765 reads as follows: “The auditor of each county of the state shall be required to publish, in a newspaper of the largest circulation in his county, a statement showing all allowances made by the county commissioners at each term of their court, to whom the allowances are made, and for what purpose: provided, that the printing thereof shall not exceed five cents for each allowance.” So much of the said section 6011 as concerns this controversy reads thus: “Advertising growing out of any duty of any city, county, or township officer, executor, administrator, guardian, trustee, or assignee, except the printing of the delinquent tax-list, shall be by such officer charged up, collected, and paid over to the printer; and, when such printing is done for the county, the board of county commissioners shall allow the same, and pay it out of the county treasury, according to the rate herein fixed. The compensation for such advertising shall be as herein set froth, to-wit, for each advertisement, per square of two hundred and fifty ems, first insertion, one dollar.” The contention of the appellants is that section 6011, by implication, repeals the proviso in section 5765, and controls as to the price to be paid for the publication provided for in the former section. It is unnecessary to cite authorities to support the assertion that the rule which favors the repeal of statutes by...