Skip to main content
· 4/3/1918

Commonwealth ex rel. Lafean v. Snyder

Citations

  • 261 Pa. 57
  • 104 A. 494
  • 1918 Pa. LEXIS 688

Syllabus

<p>Constitutional law — Constitution of Pennsylvania, Article IV, Section 8 — Public officers — Banking commissioner• — ■Nomination by governor — Rejection by senate — Appointment by governor after adjournment of senate — Validity — Constitutional construction — Refusal of auditor general to pay salary — Mandamus — Parties plaintiff — Act of June 8, 1893, P. L. 315 — Action at relation of banking commissioner — Practice, C. P.</p> <p>1. Under tbe Act of June 8, 1893, P. L; 345, Section 4, providing, inter alia, that when a mandamus proceeding “is sought to enforce a duty affecting a particular public interest of the State, it shall be on the relation, of the officer entrusted with the management of such interest,” such a proceeding is properly brought in the name of the Commonwealth on the relation of a banking commissioner against the auditor general and State treasurer to compel the payment of the commissioner’s salary, which was refused on the ground that he had not been legally appointed by the governor. While the relator has also a private interest in his salary, yet the payment of his compensation, as well as the payment of other expenses of his office, is a necessary incident to the administration of the affairs of the department, and, being paid out of public funds, is a mattér of public concern and the duty of the officials having charge of such payment is a public duty.</p> <p>2. To the general rule that title to public office cannot be inquired into by mandamus proceedings there is an exception where there are no conflicting claimants to the office, but there is involved merely a question of right to salary, which in turn depends upon whether claimant properly holds office.</p> <p>3. A constitution is to be construed in the popular and ordinary sense of the language used, and in the light of the circumstances attending its formation, so as to give effect to the intent of the framers and of the people in adopting it, and also with a view to carry out, the

Judges: Brown, Frazer, Mestrezat, Mosohzisker, Potter, Stewart, Walling

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.