Points decided. (February 8, 1900.) CLYNE v. BINGHAM COUNTY. [60 Pac. 76.] QUARTERLY STATEMENT OF COUNTY OFFICERS.-Under act of March 7, 1899, it is the duty of every county officer to prepare his quarterly statement or account, showing each item of expense necessarily incurred in the performance of official duty, and each item of fees received during the quarter, at the end of each quarter, accompany the same with proper vouchers, verify the same with his oath, and file the same with the clerk of the board of commissioners for its consideration. Such statement, under said act, must be full and complete. EXPENSE OF COUNTY OFFICERS-HOTEL BILLS.-Items of expense incurred by a county officer cannot be considered by the board of commissioners, or by such board allowed, as an independent account, but must be considered and acted upon by such board only when included in the officer's quarterly statement or account required by act of March 7, 1899 and not otherwise. APPEAL FROM ALLOWANCE OF CLAIM AGAINST COUNTY.-An appeal will not lie from the action of a board of county commissioners in disallowing a portion of a claim against the county, as, under the statute, the claimant must accept or reject the action of the board, as a whole, upon the entire claim. ESTOPPEL.-Where a claimant presents a claim against a county and the board of commissioners allows a portion only thereof, acceptance of a warrant by the claimant for the portion allowed estops him from appealing from the action of the board, or from after ward asserting any claim against the county for the portions or items disallowed. OFFICERS ACCOUNT AGAINST COUNTY.-Items in a claim or account against a county must be specifically set forth with such certainty that each item can be identified, and any item for expense incurred by an officer must be so set forth that it can be ascertained from the statement thereof that it was necessary. The law contemplates and requires this for the purpose of protecting the public, and to enable any taxpayer who may desire to do so to investigate and ascertain the correctness of any and all items. SHERIFF--LIMITS OF AUTHORITY.-A sheriff cannot go out of the state, or out of his county, to serve a subpcena, at the expense of his county, he having no authority to act out of the state, and it being unnecessary for him to go out of his county, as the process can and should be served by an officer of the county where service is had. Opinion of the Court-Quarles, J. SAME LIVING EXPENSES.-Living expenses, which are not merely incidental to the performance of an official act, such as items for bed and board, are not legal charges against the county, and boards of commissioners have no authority to allow such items. TRANSCRIPT ON APPEAL-DISMISSAL OF APPEAL.-On appeal from the action of a board of commissioners in allowing or disallowing a claim against the county, the transcript consists of "the notice of appeal," the order or decision appealed from, together with the accounts, bills, contracts or papers connected therewith, and necessary to a proper hearing thereof, or certified copies thereof," and when such transcript is not brought into the district court on such appeal, the appeal should be dismissed. APPEAL FROM ORDER OF BOARD, How TRIED—STIPULATION OF ATTOR NEYS.-On appeal from an order or action of a board of commissioners to the district court, the matter must be tried anew, and the jurisdiction of the court, and its duties in the premises, cannot be abridged or curtailed by stipulation of counsel. JUDGMENT-DISMISSAL BY APPELATE COURT.-When the transcript on appeal contains no judgment or order from which an appeal will lie, the appeal will be dismissed by the appellate court on its own motion. (Syllabus by the court.) APPEAL from District Court, Bingham County, N. H. Clark, for Appellant, cites no authorities. No attorney for Respondent. QUARLES, J.-This is an apparent attempt on the part of the appellant to have a portion only of his quarterly statement or account as sheriff of Bingham county reviewed on appeal by the courts. The transcript in this case is imperfect, meager, and merits severe criticism. In order to intelligently understand this cause as it comes before us, it is necessary to set forth the transcript at length. The transcript consists of twenty-five printed folios, which, after omitting title of court and of the action, is in words and figures as follows: "Bingham County, Idaho, to D. H. Clyne, as Sheriff, Dr. "Hotel and Horse Feed. Aug. 7. State of Idaho v. Sam Kuntz, Jr.; Aug. horse feed.... ... 15.50 $8.75 Sept. 2 State v. J. H. Jackson; two meals for officer Sept. 19. State v. Hyrum Cherry; hotel at Dillon, on subpoena... 2.50 2.50 Sept. 23. State v. Hyrum Cherry; hotel at Aug. July 19. Mrs. A. E. Dwight v. Town of Idaho Falls; three meals and one bed.. July 20. F. J. Fowers v. Eagle Rock Water Co.; three meals 25. R. R. McElroy v. Lillis and Crow; two meals ...... ...... Sept. 15. Wm. S. Dillibor v. American H. P. Sept. 22. First National Bank Pocatello, for Fremont Co.; hotel $6; team feed in same case in subpoenaing witnesses, $6....... Sept. 24. First National Bank of Pocatello v. Bingham County, two cases; five "D. H. Cine benz fra dal sworn deposes and says that the foregoing works is the and correct, that the services or artides therein mentioned have been furnished, and that no part of the same has been allowed or pail. "D. H. CLYNE. "Subscribed and sworn to before me this fourteenth day of October, A. D. 1883. "GEO. F. GAGON, "Clerk. "In and before the Board of County Commissioners of Bingham County, Idaho. "In the Matter of the Appeal of D. H. CLYNE from Certain Orders Made by Said Board. "NOTICE OF APPEAL. "To the Board of County Commissioners of Bingham County, Idaho, and to Geo. F. Gagon, Clerk of Said Board, and to N. H. Clark, County Attorney of Bingham County, Idaho: "You, and each of you, will please take notice that D. H. Clyne, sheriff of Bingham county, and who is the claimant upon the bill hereinafter described, hereby appeals from the order of the board of county commissioners of Bingham county, Idaho, made upon the twelfth day of October, 1899, disallowing the said bill, to the district court of the fifth judicial district of Idaho, in and for Bingham county. This appeal is taken from said order wherein the following described bill was disallowed, to wit, the bill of D. II. Clyne, filed with said board on the eleventh day of October, 1899, for the sum of $64 and 50/100 dollars. This appeal is taken on both questions of law and fact. "Dated this second day of November, 1899. "CLARK & HOLDEN, "Attorneys for Appellant. "Filed Nov. 3, 1899. Opinion of the Court-Quarles, J. "STIPULATION. "This cause having come on regularly to be heard before the court, sitting without a jury, whereupon it was stipulated and agreed by the counsel in open court that each, all, and every of the item of the bill in controversy in this appealy are true and correct, and the amounts as set forth in said bill were paid for the purposes therein set forth, and that the sheriff of Bingham county, while being away from the court house on official business, serving regular process, incurred and paid for board and lodging the amounts as set forth in the said bill on file in this cause, which bill was duly presented to the board of county commissioners for their allowance, and which bill was by said board disallowed, from which action disallowing said bill the said D. H. Clyne, sheriff, appeals to this court; that the only question to be tried in this appeal is whether the board and lodging of a county officer, necessarily incurred while away from home on official business for the county, is an expense of said officer for which the county is liable. "Filed Dec. 5, 1899. "N. H. CLARK, "Attorney for Bingham County. "CLARK & HOLDEN, "Attorneys for D. H. Clyne, Sheriff. "FINDING AND DECREE OF COURT. "This cause came regularly on for trial on the tenth day of November, A. D. 1899, before the court without a jury; a jury trial having been duly waived in open court by the parties; and Clark & Holden, Esqs., appearing as attorneys for plaintiff, and N. H. Clark, Esq., county attorney, for defendant; and from the evidence introduced the court finds the facts as follows, to wit: "That the following bills and amounts are actual and necessary expenses actually incurred by D. H. Clyne, sheriff of Bingham county, in and about the performance of his duty as such. sheriff, to wit: State v. Dan Hopkins; hotel expenses.. State v. Woodruff; meals... State v. J. H. Jackson; two meals... $8.75 1.50 .50 |