In re Cleveland's Claim
| Decision Date | 29 April 1919 |
| Docket Number | 10458. |
| Citation | 180 P. 852,72 Okla. 279,1919 OK 139 |
| Parties | In re CLEVELAND'S CLAIM. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
It is a cardinal rule in the construction of Constitutions and statutes that the intention of the lawmakers, when ascertained, must govern, and that to ascertain the intent all the various portions of the legislative enactments upon the particular subject, including subsequent enactments should be construed together and given effect as a whole.
When it is apparent that a strict interpretation of a particular statute, construed alone, would defeat the intention of the Legislature as shown by other legislative enactments, which relate to the same subject, and which have been enacted in pursuance of and according to a general purpose in accomplishing a particular result, such construction should not be adopted.
The salaries of county officers by reason of section 415 and section 3216, Revised Laws of 1910, and chapter 161 of the Session Laws of 1913, and section 1 of chapter 194 of the Session Laws of 1915, and section 1 of chapter 201 of the Session Laws of 1917 are determined upon the federal census of 1910, and the federal census to be taken each ten years thereafter, except where a subsequent federal census has been taken under the supervision and direction of the Census Bureau of the Department of Commerce of the United States and in those counties where said subsequent federal census has been taken under the direction of the Census Bureau of the United States, and said census has been duly certified to by the Director of Census, and said certificate has been filed with the county clerk of said county and with the secretary of state. Said census then becomes the final census of said county, and the basis for determining the salaries of the county officials in said county until a subsequent federal census is taken.
Additional Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
A "federal census" may be a census of each state or territory or of a certain state or of any subdivision or portion of any state, provided it is taken by and under the direction and supervision of the Census Bureau of the United States, and approved and certified by it as the census of that state or subdivision.
Appeal from District Court, Okmulgee County; Mark L. Bozarth, Judge.
Claims before the Board of County Commissioners of Okmulgee County by Riley Cleveland, as County Judge, and by other county officers, for salaries. Cases consolidated in district court, on County Attorney's appeal from an order allowing claims, and from an affirmance of the order and a dismissal of appeal the County Attorney appeals. Affirmed in part, and in part reversed and remanded, with instructions.
Joe S. Eaton, of Okmulgee, for appellant.
Wade James, Chas. A. Dickson, G. E. Cassity, Riley Cleveland, and L. L. Cowley, all of Okmulgee, for appellees.
This controversy arose by the county officers of Okmulgee county filing their respective claims for salaries with the county commissioners of Okmulgee county for the month of December, 1918, based upon a federal census taken August 15, 1918. Said claims were duly allowed by the county commissioners, and from the order allowing said claims the county attorney appealed to the district court. There all of the cases were consolidated, and the district court affirmed the decision of the county commissioners in allowing said claims, and dismissed the appeal and directed the county commissioners to pay said claims.
From the action of the district court affirming said decision of the county commissioners, the cases, all being consolidated, are brought here on appeal as one case. The consolidated cases were tried practically upon an agreed statement of facts.
It was agreed that on the 4th day of June, 1918, there was presented to the county commissioners certain petitions requesting the taking of the census of said county as provided in section 415, Revised Laws of 1910. It is further agreed that the Census Department of the United States Government acting through the Secretary of Commerce, did take a census and enumeration thereof, and that the Census Bureau of the United States, acting through Samuel L. Rogers, Director of Census, did cause said enumeration and census to be made.
That on the 15th day of October, 1918, the Department of Commerce, through the Bureau of Census at Washington, released for immediate use the census of Okmulgee county. This census was duly certified to by Samuel L. Rogers, the director of Census Department, as the census taken as of August 15, uel L. Rogers, the Director of Census Departpartment, showing the population of Okmulgee county to be 50,345.
It was further agreed on the trial that a certified copy of census as certified by Samuel L. Rogers, showing the population to be 50,345, was filed with the county commissioners on the 22d day of November, 1918, and approved by the board of county commissioners, and a certified copy of the same was filed with the secretary of state.
This controversy arose over the question of whether the salary of the county officials should be based upon the census of 1910 or upon the last federal census as certified to by the Director of the Census Bureau of the United States Government. In determining this controversy there are many sections of the statute to be considered. The first section of the statute which is, or might be, applicable, and the one that was first enacted for the purpose of fixing of salaries since statehood, is section 415, Revised Laws 1910. Said section provides:
"Until the next federal census, or until a census shall be taken under the laws of this state, the census of Oklahoma taken by the United States government in the year nineteen hundred ten shall be the official census of the state, and all counties, municipalities and subdivisions thereof for all official purposes: Provided, that upon the petition of twenty-five per cent. of the qualified electors of any county, city or town, as shown by the vote cast for said state ticket at the last preceding general election, the board of county commissioners of said county shall cause an enumeration thereof to be made at the expense of the county, city or town, and when the same shall have been ascertained in such manner as they may direct, and the same shall be spread upon the records of the board of county commissioners and a certificate thereof filed in the office of the secretary of state, the same shall thereafter be taken as final census of said county."
This section provides that the census of 1910 should be the official census of the state, counties, and municipalities for all official purposes, which would include the fixing of salaries. Thereafter the Legislature of 1910 enacted a statute providing:
That "the salary of all county officers shall be based upon the federal census of 1910, and each additional ten years thereafter." Laws 1910, c. 69, § 33.
The 1910 Legislature fixed the salaries of all officials except the county superintendent and county commissioners. The Legislature of 1913 enacted chapter 161 of the Session Laws of 1913, being an act consolidating the office of the clerk of the district court, clerk of county court and superior court clerk, and consolidating the office of register of deeds and county clerk, and providing for deputies for said office, and fixing the salaries of said office; section 12 of said chapter being as follows:
"That in all cases where the population of the different counties is referred to in this act, it has reference to and shall be based upon the last federal census."
This act of the Legislature was amended by the Legislature of 1915 (chapter 6), being an act consolidating the same offices, and fixing the salaries to be paid for the same. Section 9 was amended to read as follows:
In regulating the number of deputies of county officers the law states as follows:
"In counties having a population of more than 60,000 as now or hereafter shown by the last federal census."
The construction of this statute was before this court in...
To continue reading
Request your trial