302 F. G. Young. In 1872, however, it was provided "That there be and hereby is allowed to each of the Justices of the Supreme Court doing Circuit Court duty, the sum of one thousand dollars per annum, to defray the traveling and other incidental expenses to which said Justices may be subjected in the execution of their official duties." In 1878 when relieved of the work of circuit judges their salaries were again fixed at $2,000. In 1889, however, an increase of $1,500 was again provided for in their salaries. The reasons assigned at this time were the additional expenses that would be incurred in holding a term of court away from capital required now for the first time, and the expenses in- volved in preparing duplicates of opinions, a syllabus of points in each decision, indexes, etc., etc. In 1903 the compensation for these additional expenses and services was raised to $2,500. Their salary thus stands at $4,500, notwithstanding the lan- guage of the constitution given above. The fees that went into the pockets of the secretary of state and the state treasurer were much more lucrative than their perquisites for extra duties. As samples of the earlier fees received by the secretary of state we have the following: $25 for recording and issuing certificates of deposits required of foreign insurance companies with the state treasurer; $10 for issuing license to life insurance agents ; 5% commission on all sales of stamps required to be affixed to insurance policies ; in 1887 4° % of the annual license of $100 required of all life and accident insurance companies. Then there were the fees for issuing commissions to notaries public ; fees for recording and filing articles of incorporation ; profits on the transcribing of the session laws and the journals. This list is not complete, but will suffice to indicate the character of this source of the secretary's income. Recently suits were instituted to compel those who had filled this office since 1895 to disgorge. Judg- ment was secured in a state circuit court for over $100,000 against the incumbent from 1899 to 1907. The state supreme court reversed the decision of the lower court. The higher
