OCR Text |
Show OHANGES OF SALARIES. We notice the imminence of a lawsuit law-suit in Idaho involving tho increase iu salary of District Judgos, made by a, statute of the late session of the Legislature Leg-islature of that State. The bill which passed raises tho salaries .of the District Dis-trict Judges from 3000 to $4000 each per annum, -and raises, also, the salaries sal-aries of the State Auditor and tho Secretary of State. The suit which is about to be instituted insti-tuted involves tho construction of tho Idaho State constitution, which has a similar provision in it to that contained in the Utah constitution, forbidding the increase of salaries during tho term for which any incumbent may have been elected. We have noticed, how-over, how-over, in a good many cases, that 110 matter what the wording of the constitution con-stitution may be in this respect, if a Legislature can bo induced to pass a law increasing the salaries of judges or State officers, the courts always give effect to that statute and allow tjic increased in-creased pa-, no matter what may bo tho wording of tho constitution, and no matter what pains the conBtitution-mak-ers may have taken to express clearly their intent to provide against any increase in-crease of salary to take effect during tho term in which an incumbent ma-be ma-be serving. In Utah the quostion arose both for Stato officers and for the Judgos. In b6th cases the law was made to take effect immediately upon its passage, pas-sage, going into effect without regard to the constitutional inhibition against that, method of raising the salaries, and increasing tho salaries affer tho officials offi-cials had begun to serve their terms. Tn Idaho it will no doubt bo found the same. The courts will make such construction con-struction as will allow of tho taking of the increased salaries, no matter what the wording of the constitution against that way of making tho increase in-crease may be. It is usual, in State constitutions, to have provisions which are meant to prohibit the increase of salary to any person holding office after he has begun to servo the term for which he ; was elected, and to apply during that term. It seems, however, that no constitution-makers constitution-makers are ever able to hit upon tho prociso form of words which will carr' into effect their intent to prevent such increase. The courts uniformly accord it without regard to the wording of tho constitution; there is always some way fouud to escape the effect of what the conslitution-makors themselves and the public generally havo accepted as the true meaning of the prohibitory clause as worded. We have often thought that it would be a fine thing lo have a Legislature some time, under similar circumstances, order a decrease iu the salaries of the Judges and of the Stato officers, and sec whether the courts would construo that as effective in tho same way that the" have uniformly construed tho raises in salary to be effective, and to begin on the passage of tho statutory raise, in the midst of a term. Wc have an idea that the courts would find some way, in case of a decrease ordered .by statute, to find that, statute unconstitutional. uncon-stitutional. Wo think they would be able to fully sense tho idea that tho constitution-makers had meant to provide, pro-vide, against any change in the salary of an official after ho had begun to serve his term of office, during that term. As a rule, the points of the decision de-cision as rendered in favor of the officers offi-cers accepting the incrcaso accordod by the Legislature, would fit precisely a law making a decrease in those salaries. sal-aries. The decrease should, according to the arcuments of the court take effect precisely as -tho incrcaso is inudo to tako effect. We doubt, however, whether any court would over so hold. At any rato wo should bo very glad to see tho experiment tried sonic time, and would commend to somo State which had in view a change in tho salaries sal-aries of tho Judges and State officers, or tho Judges alone, lot us sn', that that Stato first ordor a doorcase in the salaries. Then the courts would find, wo consider cortain, that the constitution constitu-tion forbade any such decrease. Tho courts would, we firmly believe, hold that the-salary of any Judge who had entered upon his torn! could not be decreased de-creased during that term. The reason of tho court would bo so clear, the citation of the constitution would be so apt, that tho law would then be fixed. Afterwards if any Legislature undertook to increase the salaries of Judges or of State officers under like circumstances, the ruling which held a decrease (0 be invalid, could be invoked in-voked and could bo as effectual against tho incrcaso as it had been against tho decrease. Wo believo this firmly. But at tho same time we should be glad to see the experiment tried, just to see how it would come out. |