Gentlemen: I have your communication of February twentyfourth, 1916, in which you submit the following question:

"May the township trustees, under Section 78 of the Cass highway law, fix the compensation of the township highway superintendents on a salary basis; for instance, at $800.00 per year, payable monthly, or does the phraseology of said section imply and require that the compensation of said superintendents be fixed on a per diem, or per hour, basis?" Section 78 of the Cass highway law, Section 3373 G. C., reads as follows:

"The township trustees shall fix the compensation of the township highway superintendent for time actually employed in the discharge of his duties, which compensation shall be paid from the township road fund. The compensation and all proper and necessary expenses, when approved by the township trustees, shall be paid by the township treasurer upon warrant of the township clerk."

Neither the section above quoted nor any other section of the Cass highway law contains any express provision that the compensation of the township highway superintendent shall be fixed on a per diem or per hour basis. It is provided, however, that the compensation shall be fixed for the time actually employed by the township highway superintendent in the discharge of his duties. This language warrants the inference that it was not in the mind of the legislature that the official duties of a township highway superintendent would require all the time of that official and an examination of the statutes relating to the duties of the township highway superintendent warrants the conclusion that a situation which would, in any given township, require the highway superintendent to devote all his time to his duties, would be very unsual. I think the language of Section 3373 G. C. and the nature of the duties of the township highway superintendent are such as to fully warrant the conclusion that it was the intention of the legislature that the compensation of the township highway superintendent should be fixed on some basis which would give him full compensation for the time actually employed in the discharge of his duties and no compensation when not actually employed about the duties of his office.

I, therefore, advise you, in answer to your specific question, that township trustees are not authorized to fix the compensation of township highway superintendents at a stated sum per month or per year, but that such compensation must be fixed on a per diem or per hour basis in order to insure the carrying out of the

legislative intent, to the effect that the township highway superintendent should receive compensation from the public treasury for the time actually employed in the discharge of his duties and should not receive any compensation from the public treasury when not engaged in the performance of the duties of his position.

The Expenses of County Commissioners in Proceedings Under the Provisions of Sections 6536, 6537, 6540 and 6556, General Code, as Amended in 103 Ohio Laws, 836, Pertaining to Joint County Ditches, Are Not Authorized to be Paid from Public Funds.

No. 1356-(Opinion Dated March 11, 1916.)

Hon. D. F. Mills, Prosecuting Attorney, Sidney, Ohio.

Dear Sir: Yours under date of March 4, 1916, is as follows: "I would like to have your opinion as to whether or not county commissioners are to be allowed their actual expenses while engaged in the location, construction or improvement of joint county ditches.

"Section 6563-44 G. C., provides as follows:

'Said surveyors named in Section 8 shall meet with the joint board of county commissioners whenever required by said board and said surveyors and auditors shall be paid their necessary expenses while employed under this act, and shall be allowed the same fees as are allowed in ditch work generally, and said commissioners shall receive the sum of $3.00 a day and their actual expenses while employed under this bill.'

"This particular section of the statute specifically refers to the bill passed by the General Assembly in Vol. 102, p. 575, O. L., now designated in the General Code as Sections 6563-1 to 6563-48 inclusive. While it is clear that the commissioners are allowed their expenses if the proceedings are instituted and the improvement constructed under the provisions of said bill, I would like to know as to whether or not they are allowed their actual expenses if the proceedings are instituted and the improvement constructed under Sections 6536 and 6537 G. C., as amended in O. L. 836; 6556 G. C., as amended in 103 O. L., 836, or 6559 G. C."

Section 6563-44 G. C., quoted by you, was enacted as Section 44 of House Bill No. 489, approved May 12, 1911, 102 O. L., 575, as stated by you.

In this act there was provided a distinct and complete scheme for the construction of joint county ditches. The procedure there

in provided was not made exclusive, however, since none of the statutory provisions then in force and operation, relative to the subject mater of joint county ditches, were specifically repealed by said act.

An examination of the statutes governing the activities or proceedings of county commossioners, in respect to joint county ditches, in force and operation at the time of the enactment of said House Bill No. 489, being Sections 6536 to 6563 G. C., inclusive, fails to disclose any provision for the payment of the expenses of county commissioners, incurred in the discharge of their duties in relation to joint county ditches under said section, nor is there found any provision for payment of the expenses of commissioners in joint county ditch matters in the amendment of a number of said last mentioned sections of the General Code, enacted in 103 O. L., 836.

It will be readily observed that the provision for the payment of the expenses of county commissioners, found in Section 6563-44 G. C., quoted by you, is expressly limited by its terms to "actual expenses while employed under this bill." The application of this provision is specifically limited by its terms to the expenses of commissioners employed under the act of the legislature in which said section of the General Code was originally enacted. The language of this provision is too plain to require interpretation and cannot be given such construction as to render it applicable to cases clearly not within its terms. It may be difficult to assign a satisfactory reason for a provision for the payment of expenses of public officials in a given case and a failure to make such provision in another similar case. It is, however, a sufficient reason for such distinction, in the present instance, that the legislature has seen fit to make provision for the payment of expenses in the one case and omitted to do so in the other.

It is a principle well established that public officials are entitled to receive only such compensation, fees and salaries as are authorized by law. Since, then, the legislature has chosen to make specific provision for the payment of expenses of county commissioners when employed under the provisions of Sections 6563-1 to 6563-48, inclusive, of the General Code, but has not chosen to make provision for the payment of expenses when engaged in similar service under other statutory provisions, it follows from the familiar principle just referred to that in the latter case there

is no authority for the payment of he expenses of county commissioners.

I am therefore of opinion, in answer to your inquiry, that the expenses of county commissioners in proceedings under the provisions of Sections 6536, 6537, 6540 and 6556, as amended, 103 O. L., 836, or Section 6559 G. C., are not authorized by law to be paid.

An Advertisement of General Interest to the Taxpayers, Deemed Proper to be Published by the Auditor, Treasurer, Probate Judge or County Commissioners, Fall Within the Legal Rate of Advertising Fixed in Section 6251, General Code.

No. 1397-(Opinion Dated March 18, 1916.) Bureau of Inspection and Supervision of Public Offices, Columbus, Ohio.

Gentlemen: Under date of February 23, you submitted for my opinion the following inquiry:

"Section 6251, General Code, provides the maximum price that may be paid per square for the publication of advertisements, notices and proclamations required to be published by a public officer, and Section 6254, General Code, defines what a square is.

"Section 6252, General Code, seems to authorize the auditor, treasurer, probate judge or commissioners to cause publication of such other advertisements of general interest to the taxpayers as the officers may deem proper.

"Question: Where any of these officers deem it necessary to publish a brief notice, can such be regarded as being one required by law which must come within the price per square mentioned in Section 6251, General Code, or may the publisher, for printing these, render a bill at so much per line according to the commercial rates of the paper in which same is published?"

An examination of the statutes discloses that the original act fixing the prices of legal advertising is found in 73 O. L., page 75. The first section of said act provides:

"That publishers of newspapers shall be allowed to charge and entitled to receive for the publication of all advertisements, the price or rate for which is not now fixed by law, which by law are required to be published by any public officer or officers of counties, cities, villages, townships, schools, benevolent or other public institutions, and all notices and publications known as official advertisements, notices re

lating to the estates of deceased persons, and all notices and publications generally known as legal advertisements, and all advertisements appertaining to any public interest and required by law to be printed in any newspaper in this state, the following sums, to-wit: For the first insertion, one dollar for each square; and for each additional insertion authorized by law, or by the officer or person so ordering, fifty cents for each square, fractional squares to be estimated at the same rate for space occupied; and in advertisements containing tabular or rule work, an additional sum of fifty per cent may be charged in addition to the before mentioned rates."

The second section of said act provides:

"That hereafter all proclamations by sheriffs for elections; orders fixing times of holding courts; treasurer's notice of rates of taxation; bridge, pike, and ditch notices; notices to contractors, and such other advertisements or notices of general interest to the taxpayers, as the auditor, probate judge, treasurer and commissioners may deem proper, shall be published in two newspapers," etc.

This was the condition of the statutes until the same were changed in the codification of the statutes made in 1880. At that time the codification committee changed the language of the said statutes so as to read as follows:

Revised Statutes:

"Sec. 4366. Publishers of newspapers may charge and receive for the publication of advertisements, notices, and proclamations, the price or rate for which is not otherwise. fixed by law, required to be published by any public officer of the state, or of a county, city, village, hamlet, township, school, benevolent, or other public institution, or by a trustee, assignee, executor, or administrator, the following sums, to-wit: For the first insertion, one dollar for each square, and for each additional insertion, authorized by law or the person ordering the insertion, fifty cents for each square, fractional squares to be estimated at the same rate for space occupied; and in advertisements containing tabular or rule work, an additional sum of fifty per cent may be charged in addition to the foregoing rates.

"Sec. 4367. Every proclamation for an election, order fixing the time of holding court, notice of rates of taxation, bridge, pike, and notice to contractors, and such other advertisements of general interest to the taxpayers as the auditor, treasurer, probate judge, or commissioners may deem proper, shall be published in two newspapers of opposite politics, if there be such published in the county; but this chapter shall not apply to the publication of the notices of delinquent tax and forfeited land sales."