¶1It appears from tlie transaction in this case, that at the July term, 1877, of the county court of Union county, James S. Smith, sheriff of the county, presented for allowance the following account:
¶2Union County,
¶31877. To James M. Smith, Sheriff, Dr.
¶4April 28. To hiring 16 guards, by order of the cir- • cuit court, at the April term, for 11 days, at
¶5$8 per day..............................................$1,408 00
¶6April 28. To amount of board for 16 men for 11
¶7days............. 273 00
¶8April 28. To amount of provisions for guards before order of the court ordering new
¶9guards................................................... 35 35
¶10April 28. To amount of hire for wagon and team in transporting the prisoners from El Dorado to Camden.............................................. 100 00
¶11Total...............................................$1,816 35
¶12The account was certified as approved by his honor, the circuit judge.
¶13The county court pronounced all of the items of the account, except the third, to be exorbitant, and not warranted by law, and cut—
¶14The first item down to......................................$66 00
¶15The second to................................................... 25 00
¶16Allowed the whole of the third........................... '35 35
¶17And cut the fourth item down to........................ 20 00
¶18And rendered judgment of allowance in favor of the
¶19claimant for.../..........................................$146 35
¶20Smith appealed to the circuit court, where the cause seems to have been submitted to the court sitting as a jury, upon an agreed statement of facts, and the court rendered judgment in favor of Smith against the county for the whole amount of the account, $1,816.35, and ordered it certified to the county court, etc.
¶21No motion for a new trial was made, and no bill of exceptions taken.
¶22Udíoii county brought error.
¶23It appears from the recitals of the judgment, that the county'scrip of Union county was, at the time the expenses charged for in the account were incurred, not worth more than fifteen cents on the dollar in lawful money, and it is manifest from the face of the judgment, that the charges in some of the items of the account were greatly enhanced by the claimant, and allowed by the court, on account of the depreciation of the county scrip, which was forbidden by statute, and contrary to public policy. Gantt’s Dig., sec. 602, Goyne v. Ashley County, 31 Ark., 552.
¶24It may have been difficult for the sheriff to procure guards, etc-., and feed them at ordinary money charges, when the county, owing to its financial condition, could not meet its current expenses otherwise than by the issuance of depreciated scrip, but the enlargement of allowances on account of such depreciation enhances the evil, is a ruinous public policy and forbidden by law. All who serve the public must receive such compensation for their service as the law provides.
¶25Error appearing upon the face of the judgment, it can be reviewed here without a.motion to set it aside, or for a new trial in the court below, as held in Badgett v. Jordan, 32 Ark., 154.
¶26The judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further-proceedings.