The rule also applies to the assignment of their salaries by public officers. One of the reasons given by an English judge was that "it is fit that the public servants should retain the means of a decent subsistence, without being exposed to the temptations of poverty." 56 It is not regarded as contrary to public policy for an officer to assign his salary after it has become due, but an assignment of it before it is due is void. The reason is that an officer is not apt to be as efficient in the performance of his duties after he has assigned his unearned salary.57 The rule has been carried so far as to render void a contract by a public officer to apply unearned salary or fees to the payment of certain obligations upon which he was liable with others.58

So, also, the assignment of a pension may be illegal if it is not granted exclusively for past services. "Where the pension is granted, not exclusively for past services, but as a consideration for some continuing duty or service, although the amount of it may be influenced by the length of service which the party has already performed, it is against the policy of the law that it should be assignable." 59

56 Wells v. Foster, 8 Mees. & W. 149. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 125; Cent. Dig. § 583; "Assignments," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 15; Cent. Dig. § 23.

57 BLISS v. LAWRENCE, 58 N. Y. 442, 48 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 22, 17 Am. Rep. 273, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 236; Banks v. Dunn, 66 Cal. 72, 4 Pac. 963; Bowery Nat. Bank v. Wilson, 122 N. Y. 478, 25 N. E. 855, 9 L. R. A. 706, 19 Am. St. Rep. 507; Schloss v. Hewlett, 81 Ala. 266, 1 South. 263; State v. Williamson, 118 Mo. 146, 23 S. W. 1054, 21 L. R. A. 827, 40 Am. St. Rep. 358; Field v. Chipley, 79 Ky. 260, 42 Am. Rep. 215; National Bank of El Paso v. Fink, 86 Tex. 303, 24 S. W. 256, 40 Am. St Rep. 833; Brackett v. Blake, 7 Metc. (Mass.) 335, 41 Am. Dec. 442; First Nat. Bank v. State, 68 Neb. 482, 94 N. W. 633, 4 Ann. Cas. 423; Contra, State Bank v. Hastings, 15 Wis. 78. The rule applies to an assignment of his fees by an executor before they are ascertained and fixed as provided by statute. In re Worth-ington, 66 Hun, 633, 22 N. Y. Supp. 1110; Id., 141 N. Y. 9, 35 N. E. 929, 23 L. R. A. 97. See "Contracts;' Doc. Dig. (Key-No.) § 125; Cent. Dig. § 583; "Assignments," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 15; Cent. Dig. § 23.

58 Serrill v. Wilder, 77 Ohio, 343, 83 N. E. 486, 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 982. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 125; Cent. Dig. § 583; "Assignments" Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 15; Cent. Dig. % 23.

59 Wells v. Foster, 8 Mees. & W. 149. And see BLISS v. LAWRENCE, 58 N. Y. 442, 17 Am. Rep. 273, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 236 (collecting the English cases). Act Cong. Feb. 28, 1883, c. 58, § 2, 22 Stat. 432 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3278), makes void any "pledge, mortgage, sale, assignment, or transfer of any right, claim, or interest in any pension." See Loser v. Board. 92 Mich. 633, 52 N. W. 956. See "Pensions," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 9; Cent. Dig. § 11.