| Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 355 View pdf image (33K) |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
WILLIAM S. GREEN'S ESTATE. 355 the construction of a gratuitous grant by the state must be re- stricted to its obvious and plain intent. The grant of a dona- tion flowing from the bounty of the government must be con- strued most favorably for the government. See Mr. Justice Story's opinion in the case of Charles River Bridge, vs. War- ren Bridge, 11 Peters, 590, 597. If the view of the counsel who urge this construction bo correct, then it would follow that if the state had no other claims against Green than the judgments mentioned in the resolutions, that the excess of the credits after satisfying those judgments, would have to be paid him out of the treasury in money. This consequence would be inevitable, though the pro- vision in the resolutions that the defendants should not be re- lieved from the payment of costs and commissions to the state's attorney, show clearly that in no event did the state purpose to pay anything out of the treasury. I do not deem it necessary to go into a critical examination of the language of the resolutions, because I think the general intent is sufficiently obvious to make this unnecessary, but I think it quite apparent that when the legislature spoke of cred- iting Wm. S. Green with commissions which had been withheld from him because of his delay in paying the money due from him into the treasury within the time limited by law, they never supposed they were directing him to be credited with commis- sions on moneys which ho not only had delayed to pay, but which he has not paid to this day. The law says, that if the county clerks do not pay into the treasury within a limited time the money received by them for the state, they shall not be allowed the commissions to winch otherwise they would be entitled. In other words, their commissions shall be withheld. Mr. Green had omitted to pay in time, and when he came to pay subsequently, the treasurer withheld the commission. He withheld it because of the delay in making the payment, and it was the commissions thus withheld which the legislature intended should be credited, and in my opinion, to push the resolution further, and construe it to mean that credits were to be given upon moneys which never had boon paid at all, |
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
| Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 355 View pdf image (33K) |
|
Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!
|
An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact
mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.
Maryland State Archives