superintendent to "forthwith receive and provide for him in such institution or otherwise." Again in section 2545, G. C., the superintendent is required to report the names of all persons to whom relief has been given outside of the infirmary. From this it will hardly be doubted that it was the legislative purpose to vest in the superintendent authority to provide relief for persons other than those actually confined in the infirmary under certain contingencies. In view of the manifest policy of the law as above stated, this provision must be considered in the light of an exception to such general scheme and policy, and by reason thereof to a rather strict construction. Cases suggest themselves which by reason of their peculiar circumstances render it impracticable that the necessary relief of proper county charges be afforded at the infirmary. A county charge may be in such physical condition as to render his removal extremely hazardous or be affected with a contagious or infectious disease of such character as to render it dangerous to the safety and health of other inmates that he be admitted to the infirmary or by reason of epidemic or other such exigency it may become temporarily impracticable to furnish proper accommodations for all those persons who are properly subject of county charge in the infirmary, hence the necessity for some provision and authority for relief outside of the infirmary. It is my opinion, however, that outside relief by the superintendent should be carefully restricted to cases of a character similar to those above indicated and even in those, outside relief should continue only for such length of time as to render practical admittance to and relief within the infirmary. Answering your question more specifically, insofar as the facts stated by you will warrant a conclusion, I am of the opinion that if the lady referred to is a proper county charge, relief may not be provided her at her home by the superintendent of the infirmary. As before stated, in counties where there is a county infirmary, township trustees may provide relief to persons who should become a county charge only for such length of time as may be necessary to have such person admitted to the infirmary in the manner provided by law. The distinction between temporary and permanent relief may not be determined by any hard and fast rule, but depends upon the particular conditions and circumstances of each case. It may be suggested that it does not follow of necessity from the above conclusion that the lady referred to should be committed to the infirmary and her children to the children's home. Your attention is directed to Section 13019, G. C., as follows: "The Board of Managers of the Penitentiary or Reformatory to which a person is sentenced or confined under this subdivision of this chapter, shall credit such person with forty cents per day for each working day during the period of such confinement, which shall be paid or cause to be paid by such Board or such Trustee." The trustees in this section mentioned should be appointed by the court under the provisions of 13010, G. C. I further call attention to sections 1683-2 to 1683-9, G. C., inslusive, (103 O. L.. 877-79) and 1683-10 G. C., (104, O. L., 199) providing for mothers' pensions which it seems would, perhaps, be applicable to the case stated by you. Respectfully, EDWARD C. TURNER, Attorney-General. In the attempt to administer the poor laws of Ohio and to have township officials realize their responsibility, many questions arise as to their legal authority and duties. Some of these questions can be reduced to the following abstract statements: 1. Must township trustees give relief to poor persons within the township, upon due notice given them? 2. Can a physician who renders emergency aid to an injured person be reimbursed by township trustees? 3. Have the trustees the right to modify accounts presented for payment? If trustees are indifferent or neglectful in granting relief to needy cases, can the person giving the relief be reimbursed for reasonable service rendered? An opinion of the Attorney-General on February 28, 1918, as hereinafter published, very clearly covers most of these questions, in answer to more general questions submitted to him for an Opinion. COLUMBUS, OHIO, February 28, 1918. HON. BENTON G. Hay, Prosecuting Attorney, Wooster, Ohio. Dear Sir:-In your communication addressed to this office, asking for an opinion you state: "Complaint was made to the township trustees of a township of this county that a person therein required public relief, but who had a legal settlement under the poor laws in an adjoining county. "In a suit against the township trustees of said township in this county could the person who furnished the necessary relief legally recover from the township trustees of said township in this county, the reasonable value of the relief given? Or would the county commissioners of the adjoining county be the only officials legally liable for such relief? "Upon such complaint being made to the township trustees in this county, are such trustees legally bound to furnish such pauper with relief or pay for the same if furnished by some one else, notice having been given them, but said trustees not having authorized or ordered such relief?" The provisions of the General Code pertaining to the poor laws applicable to your question are found in sections 3476 et seq. G. C. Under section 3476 G. C. the trustees of the township in question have a duty imposed upon them under certain conditions to afford public support to persons therein who are in condition requiring it. I take it from the inquiry that complaint was duly made under section 3480 G. C. and that the real question is your case arises from the fact that the person requiring the relief had a legal settlement under the poor laws in the adjoining county. The supreme court in Trustees vs. White, 48 O. S. 577, was called upon to construe section 1491 R. S. and the succeeding sections of the poor laws, which are now found in the General Code as sections 3476 et seq. The sections read practically the same then as they do now. Spear, J., at p. 583, speaking of section 1494 R. S., now section 3480 G. C., as amended in 1898, which, while changed in some respects, remains now practically the same as it was at that time, says: "The conclusion upon the reason of the statute, therefore, would seem to follow that the discretion by the trustees applies to all services rendered and all relief afforded for which the township is made liable. There may be doubt as to the true construction of this feature of the statute, but we are of the opinion that, under it, when notice is immediately given, the township is liable for all relief and for services rendered, but if notice is not given within three days, the township is liable for only such relief and services as may be afforded after notice is given, and that in either case the township is liable only for such amount of money as the trustees determine to be just and reas onable. In the performance of the duty enjoined, the trustees must pass The court at p. 580 calls attention to the case of Trustees vs. Ogden, 5 Ohio, 23, where it was held under a statute which provided that where the trustees should receive notice from the overseers of the poor that any person, not having a legal settlement in the township, was in condition requiring temporary assistance, such trustees should, if in their opinion such person was in suffering condition, and requiring assistance from the township, direct the overseers to provide such relief. Continuing, Judge Spear said (p. 580) : "The opinion of the trustees was not final, and any individual who, after notice to the overseers, should furnish necessary relief to such person, could have an action to recover the value of the same against the township. There was no direct provision in the statute authorizing payment of such claim, but the court held that a promise might be implied. The decision turned upon the duty to carry into effect the object of the law, there being no language in the act clearly showing that the opinion of the trustees as to the necessity for public aid should be treated as conclusive.” The statute imposes a plain and express duty upon the township officers, and where complaint has been made in a proper case, it is mandatory upon them to afford relief. In the event that the trustees fail or refuse to afford relief in a proper case, after compiaint, any person may afford such relief, notifying the trustees within three days after such relief is afforded, and the township then shall be liable for such relief, although, as provided in section 3480 G. C., the trustees or one of them may at any time order the discontinuance of such relief and escape liability for relief rendered thereafter. As the duty of affording relief is imposed upon the trustees of the township in which the pauper is found, it is my opinion that the right of action accruing to a person who in a proper case affords relief after the refusal or failure of the trustees so to do, is against the trustees of the township in which the pauper is found. If the pauper has a legal settlement in an adjoining county, the trustees of the township in which the person is found and where the relief was afforded would have a claim against and be entitled to reimbursement from the county in which the pauper had such legal settlement. So answering your question specifically, it is my opinion: 1. That in a proper case the township trustees of the township in which the relief was afforded to the pauper would be the proper persons against whom to bring the action for the expense of rendering such relief. 2. That upon complaint in a proper case it is the duty of the township trustees to furnish a pauper found within the township with relief. 3. That in a proper case, and after complaint, where the township trustees have failed or refused to furnish a pauper with relief and due notice under the statute has been given to said trustees, any person can furnish such relief without any order of the trustees, and such township trustees are liable for the expense of such relief so afforded. Very truly yours, JOSEPH MCGHEE, Attorney-General. Early in the year, Dr. Frank W. Harmon, Superintendent of Longview Hospital, Cincinnati, for more than a quarter of a century, was granted leave of absence on account of ill health. Later he tendered his resignation, effective April 15, 1918. Dr. Emerson A. North has been appointed to succeed him. Dr. North spent several years at Longview Hospital, as a member of the medical staff and later was connected with the College Hill Sanitarium. -00 Dr. Edward Reinert, Columbus, has been appointed by Governor Cox as a member of the Ohio Board of Administration. He succeeds Thomas E. Davey, who died on February 20, 1918. Mr. Davey was the only remaining member of the Board as originally constituted by Governor Harmon.. The appointment. of Dr. Reinert brings again into the membership of this important Board a physician, which many social workers believe is an important qualification for one member of the Board -00 The Bureau of Juvenile Research, conducted by the Board of Administration, will be under the guidance after May 1, 1918, of Dr. Henry H. Goddard, who has, for many years, been in charge of the research work in the Training School at Vineland, New Jersey. He is a psychologist of national reputation and is the author of numerous books and papers upon mental defectives. Plans have been prepared for the erection of a building which will serve for a laboratory for the Bureau. -00 The Children's Welfare Department of the Board of State Charities, like many other State departments, has been required to release several of its workers because of war activities. Last Fall Carl H. Bogart, a Visitor, was given leave of absence to enlist in the Naval Reserves. Early in March, Miss Esther Eaton, Assistant Director, entered the Rehabilitation Department of the American Red Cross and will soon be in active service in France. Miss Caroline T. Benham, another Visitor, retired from the staff on April 15, to associate herself with the Lake Division of the Red Cross. Ivan G. Wright, Visitor, resigned to accept an important position with the Children's Home at Cincinnati. On May 1, Miss Natalie Merrill, Visitor, resigned to accept a position with the Children's Bureau at Youngstown. The last two persons have been connected with the Children's Welfare Department for more than three years. Miss Belle Greve, of Cleveland, has been appointed a Visitor, to begin her duties June 16. 00 The Ohio Public Health Journal for March, 1918, published by the State Department of Health, Columbus, is largely devoted to child hygiene. There are a number of timely articles in this number which all persons interested in children's welfare should read. Copies of this Journal can be secured upon application to the State Department of Health. -00 Did you notice the announcement on page 14 of the Ohio Bulletin of Charities and Correction for December, 1917, relative to the book entitled, "The Greatest Problem of the Race-Its Own Conservation?" Copies of this interesting booklet can be secured from the Ohio Board of Administration, Columbus, at the nominal cost of fifteen cents. It is worth much more. Read it, if you have not already done so. -00 Great effort is being made by State and National authoritiles to make the National Road suitable for use by heavy trucks throughout Ohio, especially since many supplies for the Army are now being forwarded by motor truck. To bring this about in the quickest way possible, arrangements have been made for the use of men from the Ohio Penitentiary and the Ohio State Reformatory. The men selected for this purpose have entered into this form of National service with the greatest enthusiasm and zeal. |