Chandler v. Lee

• Citation: 1 Idaho 349
• Parties: D. M. Chandler, Appellant, v. Craven Lee, Respondent.
• Decision Date: 01 January 1870
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Idaho

1 Idaho 349

D. M. Chandler, Appellant, v. Craven Lee, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Idaho

January 1, 1870

STATUTES-STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.-Different acts, passed by the legislature on the same day, upon the same subject matter, will be read together as parts of the same act.

IDEM.-It is the duty of courts to execute laws according to their true intent and meaning; and that intent, when collected from the whole and every part of the act, must prevail over the literal sense of the terms, and control the strict letter of the law, when the letter would lead to possible injustice contradiction, or absurdity.

APPEAL from the Second Judicial District, Alturas County.

R. E Foote and John C. Henly, for the Appellant. J. Brumback, for the Respondent.

Opinion by LEWIS, J.;

NOGGLE C. J., and KELLY, J., concurring.

This cause was tried by the court on an agreed statement of facts. Judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appeals. In 1866, one Sayers, in pursuance of law, transcribed certain records for Alturas county, and in 1869, after sundry legislation thereon, delivered the said records to the recorder of said county, and received warrants for the sum due him therefor on the "current expense fund." The plaintiff is the owner of one of these warrants for the sum of two hundred dollars. The warrant was registered by the defendant, as treasurer of Alturas county, on "the current expense fund," and there is no money in said fund, nor any provisions of law by which there will be any with which to pay the warrant. There is money, however, in the current expense and redemption fund with which to pay it, but the treasurer refused to pay it from that fund. And plaintiff asks a peremptory mandate to compel

the defendant, as such treasurer, to pay this warrant from the current expense and redemption fund.

The legislation on this subject is as follows: At the third session an act was passed, requiring the recorder of Boise county to transcribe the records in his office properly belonging to Alturas county, and the auditor of Alturas county was required to draw a special warrant for the sum due therefor, payable out of any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated. (Laws Third Ses. 217.) At the fourth session an act was passed, fixing the sum due, and ordering the auditor of Alturas to issue his warrant therefor on the delivery of the records, to be paid out of the first moneys "which may come into the treasury of Alturas county after the passage of the act." (Laws Fourth Ses. 112.) At the fifth session, an act was passed, requiring the auditor, in the presence of the board of commissioners, to determine the amount due, and draw his warrant therefor on the treasurer of Alturas county, on the current expense fund of said county. (Laws Fifth Ses. 122.) This act was passed on the 15th of January, 1869, and on the same day an act was passed to provide for the redemption of, and manner of redeeming, outstanding warrants, etc., for Alturas county. (Laws Fifth Ses. 139.) By the provisions of this act a fund was created, called the "current expense and redemption fund."

Section 9 of said act provides that it shall be unlawful for the treasurer of Alturas to pay any warrants or claims issued or accrued prior to the passage of the act, otherwise than in accordance with its provision; and by section 11: "No warrants shall, after the passage of the act, be drawn on the general fund, forty-five per cent fund, or county courthouse and building fund, but all the current expenses (except for school purposes) shall be paid out of the current expense and redemption fund." Hence, in accordance with the literal and technical construction of the statute, the warrant is ordered to be drawn upon a fund, to wit, the "current expense fund." which has no existence. These two acts, however, were passed upon the same day, and relate to the same subject matter; hence, they are according to a well-settled rule of interpreta-

tion to be read together, as parts of the same...