Hubbard v. Texas County

Decision Date16 June 1890
Citation13 S.W. 1065,101 Mo. 210
PartiesHUBBARD v. TEXAS COUNTY.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from circuit court, Texas county; C. C. BLAND, Judge.

A. H. Livingston and J. D. Young, for appellant. V. M. Hines, for respondent.

BRACE, J.

The plaintiff presented to the county court for allowance the following demand: Houston, Mo., February 14th, 1887. Texas County, in account with S. M. Hubbard, County Clerk, Dr. 1887. Feb. 4 & 5. To filing 3,319 assessment lists, at .05 each, $165.95. The county court refused to allow the demand, and the plaintiff appealed to the circuit court. On the trial in the circuit court, the court declared the law to be "that the plaintiff is not entitled to any fee for filing and preserving the assessment lists delivered to him by the assessor," and rendered judgment for the defendant, from which the plaintiff appeals to this court. By the revenue law (Rev. St. 1879, c. 145, § 6688) it is provided that the assessment lists "shall be by the assessor, after he has completed his assessor's books, filed in the office of the county clerk, and by him, after entering the filing of the same thereon, be preserved and safely kept." By section 6862 of the same chapter it is provided that "the following fees and compensation shall be allowed to the several officers and persons herein named for services rendered under the provisions of this chapter, viz.: To clerks: First. * * * For extending the tax on the assessment book, three cents for each name, to be paid by the state and county in proportion to the number of tax columns used by each. Second. For making a copy of the tax-book for the use of the collector, including certificate and seal to the same, for every hundred words and figures, ten cents, one-half to be paid by ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • American Constitution Fire Assur. Co. v. Robertson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 11, 1938
    ... ... Supreme Court, the Circuit Court of Cole County was without ... jurisdiction at a subsequent term to entertain or enter any ... order, decree or ... Mo.App. 490, 279 S.W. 195; Railroad v. Boswell, 104 ... Tenn. 529, 58 S.W. 117; Hubbard v. Texas County, 101 ... Mo. 210, 13 S.W. 1065. The statute must be strictly ... construed ... ...
  • American Const. Fire Assur. Co. v. Robertson
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 11, 1938
    ...638; King v. Riverland Levee Dist., 218 Mo. App. 490, 279 S.W. 195; Railroad v. Boswell, 104 Tenn. 529, 58 S.W. 117; Hubbard v. Texas County, 101 Mo. 210, 13 S.W. 1065. The statute must be strictly construed. State ex rel. Troll v. Brown, 146 Mo. 406. His compensation attaches as an inciden......
  • King v. Maries County
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 5, 1923
    ... ... with all the necessary machinery for its execution ... Harris v. Buffington, 28 Mo. 53; Hubbard v. Texas ... County, 101 Mo. 212 ...          F. H ... Farris and Gove & Davidson for respondent ...          (1) ... ...
  • King v. Maries County
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 5, 1923
    ...system prescribing service, and providing compensation for such service, and such compensation is necessarily exclusive. Hubbard v. Texas Co., 101 Mo. 210; Harris v. Buffington, 28 Mo. Since this controversy arose, the Legislature has by express enactment authorized any collector to employ ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT