Jasper County Democrat, Volume 14, Number 72, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 16 December 1911 — ACCOUNTING ACT DECLARED LEGAL [ARTICLE]

ACCOUNTING ACT DECLARED LEGAL

Supreme Court Reverses Starke Circuit Court Finding TITLE IS HELD SUFFICIENT Ruling Says “Due Process Of Law Is Not Denied”—Title of Act Also Held Sufficient—Constitutionality Upheld. Upholding the constitutionality of the public accounting law in every particular, the Supreme Court Thursday reversed by the cision of the Starke Circuit Court in the case in which a taxpayer sought to obtain an injunction against Lee M. Ransbottom, auditor of the county, and others. The injunction was asked to prevent the county from paying expenses incurred by field examiners of the State Board of Accounts in going over the books of the county in search 'of discrepancies in accounts of public officials. The ground of action alleged in the complaint was that the accounting law was unconstitutional and that assertion was prodiated upon two proportions. (1) It was alleged that the law was in violation of Sec. 19 of Art. 4 of the constitution of Indiana, which provides that every act shall embrace but one subject matter and that such subject matter shall be expressed in the title of the act. (2) The act was alleged to be in violation of both the state and Federal constitutions, because it denied to the citizens of counties of the state due process of law. “The proposition that the statute violates either the constitution of Indiana or that of the United States because it denies" ‘due processor' law,’ can find no support either in reason or authority,” Chief Justice Morris of the Supreme Court declared in his opinion on the case, and numerous authorities were cited to sustain the opinion. The title of the act also was held sufficient by the higher court. The contention of the appellants that the plaintiff—the state of Indiana, on the relation of Henry R. Rodbins, a taxpayer of Starke county —lacked legal capacity to sue was discussed as follows: “Where it is sought by a taxpayer of a county to enjoin the unlawful expenditure of county, funds, suit should be brought in the name of the taxpayer, for his own use, and for the use of the other taxpayers thereof.” . The judgment of the Iow r er court, in which the defendants’; demurrer setting out the causes ; of invalidity of the attack on the accounting law was overruled,; was reversed by the Supreme] Court with instructions to the Starke Circuit Court to sustain the demurrer and undertake such further proceedings in the case as will not be inconsistent with the decision of the higher tribunal. The defendants in the case in; the lower court 4 were Lee M. 1 Ransbottom, auditor of- Starke county; and Christopher C. White, Otha C. Herdrick, Chas. H. Knapp, Alfred R. Hardesty, aminers upon whose investigaLeonard R. Schrader and Wil- • liam A. Hammond, the field extions the suit was based.. The judgment of the lower court enjoined the auditor of the county from issuing his warrant] for the payment of the sum in! controversy and from paying the ■ and held that the plain--tiff in the case should recover the costs of the suit from the! defendants. It went further and; adjudged the act of the legislature, known as the public accounting; law, unconstitutional; and denying the citizen and taxpayer due process of law. Lee M. Ransbottom. the auditor. failed to pray an appeal, but Attorney General Honan, acting for the State Board of Accounts, had the notice of the appeal to the Supreme Court served upon

the county official. The total amount of the claims, filed with State Examiner W. A. Dehority by the field examiners, who worked in Starke county, was $1,705.90. Mr. Dehority ordered Ransbottom to pay the sum out of county funds, as provided by] law; and the injunction suit followed.