Joseph Story

Name: United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court
Author: Joseph Story

United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Joseph Story. It explores elements such as the United States, receiver and compensation.

Quotes from United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court (Joseph Story)

Joseph Story, United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

“ The construction given to the laws, by any department of the executive government, is necessarily ex parte, without the benefit of an opposing argument, in a suit where the very matter is in controversy; and when the construction is once given, there is no opportunity to question or revise it by those who are most interested in it as officers, deriving their salary and emoluments therefrom, for they cannot bring the case to the test of a judicial decision. It is only when they are sued by the government for some supposed default or balance, that they can assert their rights. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Joseph Story, United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

“ The commission is a compensation attached to the particular officer, for his yearly service, and not to the office itself for a fiscal year. If the intention of the legislature had been, what the argument for the United States supposes, the language of the proviso would have been different; it would have been, provided that the United States shall not, in any one calendar year, pay more than one per centum upon all the moneys received during that year; and that the commission for any one year, to whomsoever paid, shall not, in the whole, exceed the sum of $2500. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Joseph Story, United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

“ Suppose it might be so, it would be a case of very rare occurrence; and to put an extreme case is not a good test of the fair and just interpretation of any statute. In such a case, each successive receiver would only receive his just proportion of the year's salary, and no more commission than congress itself had established to be a reasonable compensation for his expenditures and responsibilities in receiving, safe-keeping and transmitting the public moneys. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Joseph Story, United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

“ The compensation is for services to be rendered by them, officially, during their continuance in office; and up to a certain point, at least, it is in exact proportion to the extent and duration of those services, and the responsibility incurred thereby. The compensation is measured by years. It is to be by an annual salary, and by a commission not exceeding an annual amount. The words are, that 'they shall receive an annual salary of $500 each.' The natural interpretation of these words, certainly is, that the salary is to commence at the time when the service is to commence ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Joseph Story, United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

“ The argument ab inconvenienti, therefore, under such circumstances, does not address itself to this court with the force which it has been supposed to possess. It amounts merely to this, that the act is defective in some of its details; and does not reach all the cases which ought to be provided for. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Joseph Story, United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

“ The proviso limits that per-centage to an amount not exceeding $2500 for one year. Until, then, the per-centage of the particular receiver has reached that amount, in whatever period of the year it may arrive, the proviso, according to its very terms, has no operation; and when that maximum is reached, the per-centage ceases, whether any more public moneys are received by that officer or not. The case, then, of the present receiver falls directly within the enacting clause. He seeks only the maximum commissions upon the moneys actually received by him, during his continuance in office ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Joseph Story, United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court

“ At the trial of the cause, Dickson insisted upon certain credits to be allowed to him, and proved the receipt by him, while receiver, into his office, as receiver of public money, amounting to more than $250,000, in each year, during the two years of his continuance in office: And also of more than $250,000 for the fraction of a year, commencing on the 22d of November 1835, and ending on the 26th of July 1836, when he resigned his office; and he also proved the depositing of sufficient amounts in Natchez, to entitle him to credit for the disputed items of his account. ”

Joseph Story

Summary

Quotes from United States v. Dickson — Opinion of the Court (Joseph Story)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature