The appellant assigns several errors of the trial court, but the only one of sufficient importance to call for a discussion is based upon the action of the court in holding that the six (Hemingway's Code 1927, section 2635) and not the three-year statute of limitation applies to this claim.
In the case of Madison County v. Collier, 87 Miss. 204" court="Miss." date_filed="1905-11-15" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/madison-county-v-collier-7989434?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="7989434">87 Miss. 204, 30 So. 610" court="Miss." date_filed="1905-11-15" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/madison-county-v-collier-7989434?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="7989434">30 So. 610, this court held that the fees and salaries allowed to officers do not arise from contract, and that the six-year statute of limitation applies to claims for such fees or salaries. Whether we now follow and apply the doctrine of that case or whether we adopt and apply the doctrine of the United States supreme court as expressed in the recent case ofRobertson v. Miller, 48 S. Ct. 266" court="SCOTUS" date_filed="1928-02-20" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/mississippi-ex-rel-robertson-v-miller-101227?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="101227">48 S.Ct. 266, 72 L.Ed. ___, decided February 20, 1928, that, "after services have been rendered by a public officer under a law specifying his compensation, there arises an implied contract under which he is entitled to have the amount so fixed," the conclusion reached must be the same. The claim or action therefor is not upon an implied contract provable by parol, but is one provable by a writing. The promise to pay is implied by law after the services have been rendered by a public officer, but it is a promise the terms of which are provable by a writing embodied in the statute fixing the compensation which
will be paid upon the performance of the services by officer.Washington v. Soria, 73 Miss. 665" court="Miss." date_filed="1896-03-15" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/washington-v-soria-7987861?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="7987861">73 Miss. 665, 19 So. 485, 55 Am. St. Rep. 555. We conclude, therefore, that the six-year statute of limitation applies to this claim, and that the judgment of the court below is correct.
Affirmed.