Show MILEAGE GOES glimmering the supreme court of this state babp ba finally p passed assed upon the maD mandamus damus pro ce ero dings edings begun by Self ectman curie carlo to lop pherson hereon against county clork clerk stfan too ton with a view to compel compelling liag the lat ter ler to lesue issue to hm him a warrant arrant tor for 26 in payment of a mileage claim for attend a ce upon sessions of the clusty court the opinion was formulated ty my judice minor miner and concurred in chief justice asue and sustains the ruling of ex clief justice merritt on the same same point the opinion ioD in substance to ie as follone fol lowe section page 10 first compiled laws of utah provides that the probate judge and selectmen shell each receive from their county fa 4 per day lor for each day actually employed in attending to business pertaining to the county court together with mileage at the rate of 20 cents per mile in going only from their residence to the county seat at each session of the court attended ati ended by them the duties of the county court are arc plainly defined by the statute when thee the e duties duties are performed by members of the county court and an itemized and verified claim is presented to the county court a such u eh member is entitled to such compensation as is fixed by statute for such services the statutes give each selectman 4 per pair day for each day actually employed in ate at ending the bais anesa to the be county court this plainly fixes the tae anly charge that any selectman can make or be entitled to receive for his services no provision whatever is made for expenses or traveling fees while attending to the dirties pertaining to the county court except when i the he selectmen travel to attend a session of the court and then he be is entitled to 10 recover 20 cents per ner mile going only to attend such sessions of the court and no other compensation of fees are allowed by the statute aia iuie the purpose of this statute was not only to fix but to limit the compensation ol of sach bich officers to 4 1 per day or each day dav actually employed in attending to ati the e business pertaining to the county court together with mileage at the rate of 20 cents per mile going only from the residence of the member to the county court to attend each general or special session of the county court it is made the duty of the member to attend to the bua business ness of the court at a fixed compensation per day A public officer is bound to perform the dukles drilea of his office for the compensation fixed by law and he has no right to 10 charge or receive any further compensation for his services ber vices as such officer this rule hould be rigidly enforced dinall in all departments part ments mento of the public service the statutes ot of the legislatures and the ordinances of our municipal corpora eions seldom describe wih much detail and particularity the duties annexed to public officer ceh and it requires but little ingenuity to run nice dis die be what duties may and what may not be considered strictly official and it these distinctions are much favored by couris couns of justice it may lead to great abuse it is doubtless s true that the business of the county is such as to require the attendance ot of the members ot of the court be the dates of its regular or special sessions and committees may be appointed to attend to such buch business aud and report at its regular session and such committee would be entitled to compensation for such services at the rate of 4 per day for the time actually and necessarily employed but without mileage or expense it Is true that the territorial court in bartch vs ve cutler 6 utah hold held that such committee could be allowed 4 per day together with mileage but the qu question estton of mileage was not embraced in that case in any manner and the expression together with mileage as used was mere dictum and should not have been employed it if the county court has the power to increase such statutory compensation by allowing travel mee fees or expenses while attending to the ordinary duties pertaining to the county court then it has the power to increase the per them diem allowed ay by statute to any ady SUM bum within its discretion under the rule of construction of statutes when the legislature made provision lor for mileage when traveling to attend sessions of the court it intended to exclude the allowance of mileage upon any other occasion when travel would be necessary nece esary in attending to business pertaining to the county court it is evident from the facts presented inthis case that the services charged for by the plaintiff were rendered in good faith under an honest thorah mi taken belief of his hia right to recover the same and no criticism is intended to be pissed upon his bis act in making the charge we are of the opinion that I 1 the he plaintiff is entitled to have issued to him by the defendant his warrant upon of salt lake county for the sum of that being the sum plaintiff is legally entitled to for mileage in attending sessions ot of the county court and that the defend ant pro properly perli refused to issue his warrant for the balance of the plain claim for mileage at 20 cents per mile in traveling and looking after roads bridges and public buildings as a member of the committee of the court in addition to the sum of 4 per day allowed and received by him lor for such services sei vices the application for a writ of mandate is allowed as to the claim of and denied as to the balance of plaintiffs claim |