State ex rel. Vaughan v. Appleby
| Decision Date | 15 December 1896 |
| Parties | The State ex rel. Vaughan et al. v. Appleby et al., Appellants |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court. -- Hon. J. T. Neville, Judge.
Affirmed.
Massey & Tatlow for appellants.
(1) The liability of the county to pay costs in criminal cases is strictly a statutory liability, and the question of justice or injustice to the parties claiming costs is not a matter for consideration here. State ex rel. v. Oliver, 116 Mo. 188; Bright v. Pike County, 69 Mo. 519; Person v. Ozark County, 82 Mo. 491. (2) Statutes providing for the collection of costs in either criminal or civil cases being in derogation of the common law, must be literally and strictly construed. Ring v. Vogel, etc Co., 46 Mo.App. 374. (3) Section 7663 is in pari materia with the other sections of the statute, creating liability on the part of the counties for costs in criminal cases, and all must be construed together. (4) By the express language of the concluding part of the fifth subdivision of section 7663 the liability of the county to pay costs in criminal cases is limited to "one fifth of the total revenue of such county for county purposes for any one year." (5) The year referred to and contemplated by section 7663 is a fiscal year, beginning the first day of June, or at the time the order was made at the May term, and ending one year thereafter and is not a calendar year. Glasco v Rowse, 43 Mo. 479; De Giverville v. Legg, 48 Mo.App. 573. (6) The order of the county court made at the May term, 1894, setting aside one fifth of the total revenue of the county for that year to the contingent fund is in form and substance a substantial compliance with the requirements of section 7663, as is the order of said court made at the May term, 1895, in relation to the apportionment of the county revenue for that year.
Watson & Pepperdine for respondents.
(1) It is the duty of a county to pay costs in criminal cases when properly charged therewith. R. S. 1889, secs. 4397, 4400. (2) A county is bound to pay its debts lawfully created. Reynolds v. Norman, 114 Mo. 513. (3) The liability of a county for criminal costs is limited only by article 10, section 12 of constitution of Missouri, and the fifth subdivision of section 7663, Revised Statutes, 1889. (4) The county court had no right to apportion and subdivide the revenue of 1894 by its order made June 7, 1895. State ex rel. v. Schell, 36 S.W. 206. (5) Section 7663 is not mandatory nor self-enforcing. (6) The year mentioned in section 7663 and section 12, article 10 of constitution is a calendar year. R. S. 1889, secs. 7663, 7605, 7629.
This is a proceeding by mandamus commenced in the circuit court of Greene county against the judges of the county court of that county to compel them to issue warrants for the payment of certain criminal costs duly certified to the court for payment.
Respondents, the judges of the county court, by return, defend their action in refusing to issue the warrants, on the ground that the part of the revenue, apportioned to the contingent fund for the years in which the liability of the county for those costs accrued, has been wholly exhausted.
The circuit court ordered a peremptory writ, and defendants appealed.
It appears from an agreed statement, upon which the case was determined by the circuit court, that the total amount of such costs is $ 2,693, of which amount $ 846.95 is included in fee bills certified and filed with the county clerk on and between the first day of June, 1894, and the thirty-first day of May, 1895, and the balance, $ 1,846.05, is for costs included in fee bills certified and filed with the county clerk on and between the first day of June, 1895, and the thirty-first day of May, 1896.
The total assessed valuation of property in Greene county for the year 1894 was $ 15,692,000, and for the year 1895 was $ 14,380,000 in round numbers.
For the year 1894 the court levied for county purposes forty-five cents on the hundred dollar valuation. It is estimated that the amount of revenue that would be realized on this valuation would be $ 60,000. Of this it apportioned to the contingent fund one fifth, $ 12,000, and added thereto the sum of $ 2,104, a part of a surplus remaining from the previous year, making a total placed to the contingent fund of $ 14,104.
For the year 1895, the court levied for county purposes fifty cents on the hundred dollars' valuation, and estimated that $ 60,000 of revenue would be realized on that levy. Of this it also apportioned one fifth, or $ 12,000 to the contingent fund, and of the revenue then on hand it placed to the credit of the same fund the sum of $ 5,775, thus making the amount to the credit of the contingent fund $ 17,775. The treasurer placed the money to the credit of the respective funds as they came into his hands.
These orders were made at or about the time the levies were made for the respective years.
Between May 24, 1894, and May 23, 1895, the treasurer paid warrants, drawn on the contingent fund, equal to the entire amount placed to its credit, and when this suit was commenced there was no money to the credit of that fund, with which to pay the cost bills. Between May, 1895, and February, 1896, the treasurer had paid out on warrants all the revenue apportioned to the contingent fund in 1895.
Certain criminal costs are payable by the county, and, when bills of such costs, duly certified, are presented to the county court, a warrant for the payment of the amount thereof should be drawn upon the treasurer. R. S., secs. 4397, 4400 and 4415.
The only limitation upon the power and duty of the county court is that declared by section 12, article 10 of the constitution which makes it unlawful for any county "to become indebted in any manner or for any purpose to an amount exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided for such year, without the assent of two thirds of the voters thereof voting at an election to be held for that purpose."
The only reason given by the county...
To continue reading
Request your trial