Godfrey v. Hunter

• Decision Date: 12 June 1935
• Docket Number: 14091.
• Parties: GODFREY v. HUNTER, Clerk of House of Representatives, et al.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

180 S.E. 468

176 S.C. 442

GODFREY v. HUNTER, Clerk of House of Representatives, et al.

No. 14091.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

June 12, 1935

Original petition by H. C. Godfrey for a writ of mandamus to be directed to James E. Hunter, as Clerk of the House of Representatives, and others to compel payment of amount alleged to be due petitioner as salary and compensation as a member of the House of Representatives for extraordinary session of the General Assembly.

Petition dismissed, and writ of mandamus refused.

Nicholls Wyche & Russell, of Spartanburg, for petitioner.

John M Daniel, Atty. Gen., for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Proceeding by H. C. Godfrey, petitioner, in the original jurisdiction of this court, praying for order of mandamus to require James E Hunter, clerk of the House of Representatives, to issue to petitioner a pay voucher for the sum of $310, sought to be amended for the sum of $400 on the hearing, and to require A J. Beattie, as comptroller general of the state of South Carolina, to issue to petitioner a warrant for said amount and requiring Eustace P. Miller, as treasurer of the state of South Carolina, to pay same, which petitioner alleges is due him as salary and compensation as a member of the House of Representatives for the extraordinary session of the General Assembly of the state of South Carolina, commencing on September 14, 1931, and ending September 24, 1931, in which period of time there were nine legislative days.

The appropriation bill (becoming an act upon its approval by the Governor on September 24, 1931) passed at this extraordinary session (37 St. at Large, p. 1097), provided as follows:

"That there is hereby appropriated from the State Treasury a sufficient sum of money to bear the expenses of the extraordinary session of the General Assembly convened September 14, 1931, in accordance with the following schedule: The President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, the Clerk of the Senate and the Clerk of the House shall each receive the sum of $25.00 per day for each day which the respective Houses are in session; each member of the General Assembly shall receive as an expense allowance the sum of $10.00 per day for each and every day's service rendered. All other attaches of the General Assembly, including the Engrossing Department, who have been employed at this session, shall receive a per diem for each day of service rendered at the rate of their base pay as fixed in the Appropriation Act of 1931" (section 1).

And (section 2): "There is also appropriated a sufficient sum of money to pay the mileage and stationery certificates of the members, the necessary approved accounts of both Houses and the printing for this session."

And (section 3): "That wherever in this Act the term 'per day' is used it shall be construed to mean legislative day."

Petitioner, in addition to mileage and $5 for stamps, stationery, etc., received the sum of $90 for his services as a member of the House of Representatives for this Extraordinary Session of the General Assembly.

While it is unnecessary for the purpose of this decision, it will be noted that on September 19, 1931, petitioner gave notice to the late and lamented, the Honorable J. Wilson Gibbes, then clerk, and the late and lamented, the Honorable John K. Hamblin, then Speaker of the House of Representatives, as follows: "In accepting the pay vouchers for our salary, which voucher has been drawn in accordance with an Appropriation Bill passed in Extraordinary Session beginning Monday, Sept. 14, 1931, we wish to certify that we accept this voucher as only a partial payment of the salary provided for us by the Constitution of South Carolina and in no wise do we relinquish our constitutional rights to collect the remainder of this salary as so provided."

Petitioner was a member of the Free Conference Committee on the part of the House, to whom was referred the Appropriation Bill hereinabove quoted from, and signed the Free Conference Report fixing the compensation of the members at $10 per day, although this compensation is referred to in the said bill, afterwards act, as an expense allowance, but even a casual reading thereof will disclose that it was the intent of the Legislature that the $10 per day was intended as the compensation of the members.

There is only one question in this case. Is the $400 per member for regular sessions of the General Assembly, as fixed by section 16, Civil Code of 1922 (section 2054, Code 1932), an annual salary or a per diem at $10 per day for 40 days?

So much of section 9 of article 3 of the Constitution of 1895, as refers to compensation of the members of the General Assembly, is as follows:

" Compensation of Members of.-Should the casualties of war or contagious disease render it unsafe to meet at the seat of government, then the Governor may, by proclamation, appoint a more secure and convenient place of meeting. Members of the General Assembly shall not receive any compensation for more than forty days of any one session: Provided, That this limitation shall not affect the first four sessions of the General Assembly under this Constitution."

Section 19 of the same article, is as follows: " Mileage-Increase of Per Diem-Extra Session.-Each member of the General Assembly shall receive five cents for every mile for ordinary route of travel in going to and returning from the place where its sessions are held; no General Assembly shall have the power to increase the per...