Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

the legislature uses the expression "the country," it is natural to suppose that they mean the country for which they are legislating.1

The word is used also to signify a jury, as in the expressions, "trial by the country," "conclusion to the country," "puts himself upon the country," etc.

COUNTIES.

See CORONER, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COUNTY SEAT, COUNTY WARRANTS, OFFICERS OF MUNICIPALITIES, SHERIFF.

[blocks in formation]

(a) Generally, 350.

(b) Boundaries, 352.

(c) Legal Results of Change of Bounda ries, 353.

(d) Over Contracts, 356.

4. Liabilities of Counties, 359.
(a) Generally, 359.

(b) For Contracts, 359.
(c) For Bonds, 360.

(d) Upon Warrants, 362.
(e) For Beneficial Uses, 363.
(f) For Torts, 364.

(g) For Services, 366.

(h) For Acts and Negligence of Officers, etc., 367.

(i) For Acts of Mobs, 368.

5. Remedies for enforcing Liability, 369.

6. Venue, 370.

7. Presentation of Claims for Allowance, 370.

8. Audit of Claims, 371.

9. Enforcement of Judgment, Execu-
tion, Mandamus, Garnishment,
372.

(e) Over County Funds and Debts, 356.
(f) Subscriptions to Railroad Stocks, 10. County Officers.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

See CORONER, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Officers OF MUNICIPALITIES, SHERIFF.

1. County defined and described. (a) Definitions. One of the civil divisions of a country for judicial and political purposes. A local subdivision of a State created by the sovereign power of that State, of its own will, without the particular solicitation, consent, or concurrent action of the people who inhabit it. A local organization, which, for the purpose of civil administration, is invested with a few functions of corporate existence.3

(b) The Derivation of the term comitatus, or county, according to Blackstone, is from Comes, the count of the Franks, the name. of the officer to whom its government was intrusted. The Saxon

1. Mansell v. Israel, 3 Bibb (Ky.), 514. "But the second ground assumed we apprehend clearly brings the plaintiff within the exception which prevents the statute from running against a person without the country. We cannot suppose, as was contended in the argument, that the expression 'the country' should be construed to mean the United States, and not this State."

See also ACROss, Beyond, INDIAN. 2. Black. Com. 113.

3. Hamilton County v. Mighels, 7 Ohio St. 109.

The term county, and people of the county, may be used interchangeably. St. Louis Co. v. Griswold, 58 Mo. 175.

Counties are political divisions of the State, and are organized as a part of the machinery of the government, for the performance of functions of a public nature. Barton County v. Walser, 47 Mo. 189; Maury County v. Lewis Co., I Swan (Tenn.), 236; Laramie County v. Albany County, 92 U. S. 307; Granger v. Pulaski Co., 26 Ark. 37.

name was shire, and the comes was called earl or alderman. In England the administration of affairs was intrusted to a deputy called in Latin vice comes, and, in English, sheriff, shrieve, or shirereeve, signifying the officer of the shire.1

(c) Divisions of Counties. In England a county was divided. into an indefinite number of hundreds, which were again subdivided into tithings, or towns. In some counties, there were intermediate divisions made up of three or four hundreds, called lathes in Kent, and rapes in Sussex. Where a county was composed of three of these lathes or rapes, they were called trithings, which by an easy corruption became ridings.1

County Palatine was a term applied to certain counties in England, Chester, Lancaster, and Durham, and two other counties. which were abolished as counties Palatine in the time of the Tudors. The name palatine was derived from a palatio, because the owners of such counties had therein jura regalia as fully as the king himself. They appointed judges, pardoned felonies, and all writs and indictments ran in their name.

2

Division in the United States. — Counties are divided into an indefinite number of townships or towns.

Cities, boroughs, and villages, which are incorporated towns, with greater or less municipal powers, are, generally speaking, subdivisions of the township; but in some instances a city may be geographically co-terminous with a county, as is the case, for instance, with New York and Philadelphia. In such cases, the county autonomy is preserved, though certain of the county officers may have municipal duties imposed on them by the legislature.

(d) Civil Functions of Counties. Upon the county, has been generally imposed the administration of justice through the county courts; and, as a branch of such administration of justice, the disposition of decedents' estates, certain police regulations, and the protection of the public peace; building and repair of roads and bridges, care of the poor, and the care of certain classes of prisoners; the levying and collection of certain taxes. Certain shares in these functions and duties have been relegated in different proportions at different times by the legislature to towns, townships, boroughs, villages, and cities.

In New England the original functions of the county were very limited, being generally such as appertained to the duties of the county court there the town was the original unit of government, and in it was vested the greater part of local government and administration.3 In the Southern and Middle States the county

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

was and is the unit of government, while the two systems have met and modified cach other in the Western States.

2. Corporate or Political Existence and its Incidents. — (a) Organization or Creation of Counties. - The creation of counties is an act of the sovereign power of the State, and is not based on the particular solicitation, consent, or concurrent action of the people who inhabit them. As a general rule, the power of the legislature, in the division of the State into counties, is absolute, and it may alter, modify, or destroy them as the public good may require.2 (b) Powers of a County as a Corporation. 1. Generally. - A county is a political subdivision of the State, and may be said to act as a corporation with specific powers, through its officers as agents, whose duties are not only pointed out by law, but the mode of performing them laid down with accuracy and precision.3 It is a public corporation, created by the mere will of the legislature, at whose pleasure, without constitutional prescriptions, its boundaries may be changed, or the county divided.4

In some States they are definitely recognized by the legislature and the courts as public corporations.5

3.

Local Government in Illinois. By Albert Shaw. J. H. U. Studies. Ist series. No. Institutional Beginnings in a Western State. By Prof. Jesse Macy. J. H. U. Studies. 2d series. No. 7.

1. Coles v. Mad. Co., 1 Breese (Ill.), 115; Hamilton Co. v. Mighels, 7 Ohio St. 109. The county organization as distinguished from the State and the town is discussed in the case of People v. Stout, 23 Barb. (N. Y.) 338.

2. Public corporations, such as counties, are not within the principle that renders laws impairing the obligation of contracts unconstitutional. People v. Power, 25 Ill.

187.

Counties are the creatures of the legislative will. They are vested with certain corporate powers, in order to enable them to perform the duties required of them as part of the machinery of the State; and inasmuch as all their powers are derived from the legislature, the latter may enlarge, modify, or diminish them at any time. They cannot sustain their privilege or their existence upon any thing like a contract between them and the State, because there is not, and cannot be, any thing like reciprocity of stipulation, and their objects and duties are utterly incompatible with every thing in the nature of a compact. Hence the legislature may, unless prohibited by the constitution of a State or the organic law of a Territory, enlarge and diminish the area of a county whenever the public convenience or necessity requires, and make provision for the divis ion of property belonging to it, and for

the apportionment of its liabilities. But where it does not make any such provision, the general rule is, that the old county owns all the public property within the new limits, and is responsible for the debts contracted by it before the act organizing the new county, without any claim for contribution. Laramie Co. v. Albany Co., 92 U. S. 307; Chambers Co. v. Lee Co., 55 Ala. 534; Marengo Co. v. Coleman, 55 Ala. 605; Askew v. Hale Co., 54 Ala. 639; State v. Williams, 29 La. Ann. 779; Carrituck Co. v. Dare Co., 79 N. C. 565.

3. Shawnee Co. v. Carter, 2 Kan. 115. 4. Mills v. Williams, 11 Ired. (N. Car.) L. 558.

5. In Illinois, counties are public corporations, and can be changed, modified, enlarged, restrained, by the legislature, to suit the ever varying exigencies of the State. Coles v. Madison Co., 1 Breese (Ill.), 115.

In Pennsylvania a county is a corporation, and must be sued in its corporate name. Wilson v. Commissioners, 7 W. & S. (Pa.) 197. They can be sued only in the courts of the county itself. Lehigh Co. v. Kleckner, 5 W. & S. (Pa.) 181; Brown v. Somerset Co., II Mass. 221; Hecksher v. Phila., 20 W. N. C. (Pa.) 52.

In Tennessee they are held to have enough of the attributes of corporations to enable them to contract. Railroad Co. v. Davidson, 1 Sneed (Tenn.), 637.

So in Minnesota it is held that a county or other municipal corporation capable of holding real estate is capable of becoming a beneficiary under the act of Congress known as the Town Site Act. Blue Earth Co. v. Railroad Co., 28 Minn. 503; Bell

At common law a county could not be said to be a corporation, and could not sue or be sued.1

In certain States, counties are considered quasi corporations, and as such can sue and be sued.2

The federal courts have decided that counties may sue and be sued in such courts as citizens of the State where they are situated.3 In general terms it may be stated, that as counties are the creations of the State, and as the power of the legislatures over them has no limit save the State constitution, their status as cor

Co. v. Alexander, 22 Tex. 350; Milam Co. 7. Bateman, 54 Texas, 153.

In New York the county is the corporation, the Board of Supervisors is not. Brady v. Board of Supervisors, 2 Sandf. (N. Y.) 460; People v. Ingersoll, 58 N. Y. I; Greenville Co. v. Runion, 9 So. Car. 1. Under the code of Alabama a county is a body corporate, and may be sued in the same manner as a natural person. Randolph Co. v. Hutchins, 46 Ala. 397.

In Arkansas, counties are held to be political divisions of a State government organized as part of its machinery; they do not derive any of the corporate powers they possess by a special charter; their functions are wholly of a public nature, and their creation a matter of public convenience and governmental necessity, and, in order that they may the better subserve the public interest, certain corporate powers are conferred upon them. Granger v. Pulaski, 26 Ark. 37.

In California a county is a corporation, and liable to suit. Nash v. El Dorado Co., 24 Fed. Rep. 252.

In Nevada, counties are liable to be sued in the State courts the same as natural persons. Vincent . Lincoln Co., 30 Fed. Rep. 749. See also Marion Co. v. McIntyre, 10 Fed. Rep. 543; Nash v. El Dorado Co., 24 Fed. Rep. 967.

1. Lyell v. St. Clair Co., 3 McLean (C. C.), 580; Hunsaker v. Berden, 5 Cal. 288; Word. County of Hartford, 12 Conn. 404; Schuyler Co. v. Mercer, 9 Ill. 20; Anderson v. State, 23 Miss. 459; Granger v. Pulaski, 26 Ark. 37.

2. Price v. Sacramento, 6 Cal. 254; Jay v. Oxford, 3 Me. 131; Coms. v. Day, 19 Ind. 450; Hampshire v. Franklin, 16 Mass. 87; Hawkes 7. Kennebec, 7 Mass. 461; Lincoln v. Prince, 2 Mass. 544; Jewett v. Somerset, I Me. 125; Emerson v. Wash ington, 9 Me. 88; Levy Court . Coroner, 2 Wall. (U. S.) 501.

Counties are merely quasi corporations, and act in subordination to and auxiliary to the State government. They have no power to purchase land or to hold the same unless it is given them by statute. Ray Co. v. Bentlery, 49 Mo. 236.

A county is a quasi corporation, and

therefore may sue and be sued by virtue of the New Mexico statute, extending the word "person" to bodies politic and corporate. Donalson v. San Miguel Co., I N. Mexico, 263.

Counties are quasi corporations, and may take and hold real estate for the purposes of their creation. Hayward v. Davidson, 41 Ind. 215.

As to what are public corporations, see Yarmouth 7. N. Yarmouth, 56 Am. Dec. 666, and cases cited in note to same; s. c., 34 Me. 411; Loyd . May, 55 Am. Dec. 347; s. c., 5 N. Y. 369.

In Kansas a county is a body politic, and process in suit may be served on clerk of its boards of commissioners. Commissioners v. Sellew, 99 U. S. 624.

66

In a suit on coupons issued by a county, certain persons described as County commissioners were made sole defendants. Held, 1. That neither the constitution nor statutes of South Carolina declare the name by. which a county shall be sued. 2. That if the action should have been brought against the county by its corporate name, the misdescription was amendable at the trial, and therefore furnished no ground for reversing the judgment. Commissioners v. Commerce Bank, 97 U. S. 374.

A county may be sued on the commonlaw action of trespass. Montgomery Co. v. Miller, 82 Ind. 572.

As to liability to suits generally, see Raymond v. Stearns Co., 18 Minn. 60; Blackford Co. v. Schrader, 36 Ind. 87.

In Louisiana, police juries are prohibited from contracting a debt against a parish without providing in some ordinance for the payment of the principal of the debt so contracted. Copmartin 2. Police Jury, 23 La. Ann. 190. But see Talbott v. Parish of Iberville, 24 La. Ann. 135, and Ruis v. Parish of Iberville, 24 La. Ann. 146.

Bonds and notes issued by the police jury without authority of law, are void. Breaux v. Iberville Parish, 23 La. Ann. 232; Marrionneaux v. Police Jury, 23 La. Ann. 251.

3. McCoy v. Washington Co., 3 Wall. Jr. (U. S. C. C.) 381; Floyd Co. v. Hurd, 49 Ga. 462.

porations will be found laid down in the constitutions, codes, and acts of the various States; that either as acknowledged public corporations, or as quasi corporations, they generally will be found. invested with the following corporate powers:

I. To sue and be sued by a corporate name.

2. To have a county seal.

3. To take and hold real estate within their respective limits, and also personal property, for such objects and purposes as county rates are, or may be, authorized by law, and for such other objects as may be expressly authorized by law.

4. To make such contracts as may be necessary and proper for the execution of the same objects and purposes.

5. These corporate powers to be exercised by commissioners, supervisors, or such officers as may be created and designated for that purpose by the several State legislatures.1

The following cases will illustrate certain miscellaneous general powers of counties as expounded by the courts of the several States.2

1. See title "Counties" in the Annual Acts of Assembly, Digests and Revisions of the Laws and Constitutions of the several States.

2. Counties created by a territorial legislature have power to bring suit, although the statute does not expressly give the authority to do so. Salt Lake Co. v. Golding, 2 Utah, 319.

A county may maintain an action to enjoin a railroad company from laying a track without any lawful authority along and in a county road. Stearns Co. v. Railroad Company, 32 N. W. Rep. 91.

A county has the legal capacity to sue for injuries to its highways. Lawrence Co. v. Chattaroi R. Co, 81 Ky. 225.

It may sue in ejectment or foreclosure. Lincoln Co. v. McClellan, 3 Mo. App. 312. And a county has the right to employ counsel. Jordan v. Osceola Co., 59 Iowa, 388.

Under the laws of Minnesota a county can take and hold land in satisfaction of a lawful claim against a debtor. Shepard 2. Murray Co., 33 Minn. 519.

Power of counties to sell their swamp lands is considered in Linville v. Bohanan, 60 Mo. 554; Audubon Co. v. County, 40 Iowa, 460; and Page Co. v. County, 41 Iowa, 115.

The fee of all streets in any city in Kansas is in the county for the use and benefit of the public. Smith v. City of Leavenworth, 15 Kan. 81.

The county property is for public use. Stone v. Charlestown, 114 Mass. 214.

The property of a county can be purchased only through the Board of Supervisors, except in cases where some other

officer is specially authorized to make sale. McCrossin v. Lincoln Co., 57 Wis. 184.

As to powers of a county in the construction of bridges, validity and enforcement of contracts therefor, and proper ap plication of county funds in payment, Clark v. Dayton, 6 Neb. 192;. Follmer v. Nichols, 6 Neb. 204.

Building a public bridge may be a work of public improvement, in aid of which an issue of county bonds may be made, notwithstanding that the constructors of the bridge are to be authorized to collect tolls. Building Ass. v. Sherwin, 6 Neb. 48.

Under power to appropriate money to build a bridge, a county may do part when a foreign corporation does the rest. Kansas City Bridge Co. v. Commissioners, 34 Kan. 670.

In the absence of a statute or contract, one county cannot compel another to join in the erection or repair of a bridge across a stream separating them. Brown v. Merrick Co., 18 Neb. 355. See also Bridges, 2 Am. & Eng. Encyc. of Law, 540.

A county cannot sue out a writ of error to review a judgment in a proceeding to compel the commissioners to perform duties devolving upon them as individuals. Kitsap Co. v. Carson, 1 Wash. Ter. 419.

County authorities may not make a bargain with an agent to refund certain bonds on a commission, although an agent may be allowed reasonable compensation for services performed.

The court will not allow any one to speculate on the funds of a county by proffering advice on matters of law. Webster v. County of Lancaster, 30 N. W. Rep. 538.

« ForrigeFortsett »