San Andreas independent., 1856-12-20
Supreme Court Decisions.

Supreme Court Decisions.
The following decisions were rendered,
on Monday last, by full Bench. As
they are of considerable importance to the
citizens of this county, we publish them
Laforge VS.. Magee.-At the time whe
| forge presented his warrants for payment, mere
being money in the treasury, which had been
appropriated under u previous and existing law
for that purpose, his right became fixed, and
could not be destroyed by subsequent legisla-
tive enactment. 1t was the duty of the Treas
urer to pay the warrants at the time of their
presentation, and the subsequent act of the
Legislature could not intervene to divest rights
already acquired In other words, had the
Treasurer paid the money at the time it was his
duty to do so, there would have been an end of
the controversy, or rather it would have had no
commencement. But he refused to comply with
what has been already determined to be his
duty, and delayed the plaintiff, until an act of
the Legislature was passed, attempting to i'm
pair his right, and now claims that the plain
tiff takes nothing by his judgment.
While we admit that the Legislature has
power to direct in what manner the revenues of
the county shall be disposed of, still they cam
not in case like the present, when the right
OF the party is complete, vested and determined,
divest or take away the right.
| Judgment affirmed. MURRAY, C. j.
| we concur: HEYDENFELDT, j.
TERRY.J.
The Sacramento State Journal gives the fol-
lowing history of the case:
A. B. Laforge held SIS, ,003 in warrants drawn
against the General Fund of the County, which
had been presented for payment, payment re-
fused for want of funds, and registered by the
Treasurer as the law requires. After this de-
mand and refusal of payment, and the regis
tration, and before there were any funds in the
Treasury to meet the warrants, it seems that the
Supervisors made an order appropriatng the
current years revenue, or portion of it, to the
current years expenses. Laforge doubted their
power, and applied to the District Court for
writ of mandamus to compel S. L. Magee, the
County Treasurer, to pay the warrants. When
the application came up for hearing, the facts
were agreed upon, and Magee set up for answer
the order of the Supervisors. After hearing
the arguments, Judge Creaner, on the 10th of
February 1856, issued peremptory mandamus
directing Magee to pay the warrants accord
ing to the order of their registration from the
first monies received by him as Treasurer of
said county," &C., &c.
Afterwards, on the 2lst Of February 1856, the
Legislature passed an act which provided that
the Supervisors might set apart portion, not
exceeding two-thirds, Of the annual revenue to
pay the current expenses of the county and
that " the monies so set apart for paying the
current expenses of the county shall not be
subject to any execution or writ issued for, or
on account of, any debt which may be DUE or
may become due from said county :" and the
act also provided that call monies over and
above the amount so set apart, which may re-
main in the Treasury shall be used for paying
the former Indebtedness of the county"
After the passage of this law the Supervisors
made another order devoting two thirds of the
revenue assessed for the General Fund to the
current expenses of the county, and Magee re-
fusing to obey the mandamus, applied for re-
hearing and filled an additional answer setting
up the statute-the order of the Supervisors
and the facts that (acting under the directions
of the Supervisors, and, as he supposed ac-
cording to law,) he had paid out two-thirds of
the entire receipts into the General Fund, for
the current expenses of the county and that
there was no money in that fund, because the
other third of it had been applied to the re-
demption of old warrants" by receiving said
warrants for one third of the General Fund tax as
cash. The Court after the re-hearng, issued
slightly modified alias peremptory mandamus,
directing Magee to pay the warrants accord
ing to their order Of registration, from the first
monies received to the credit of the General
Fund.-" &C., &c. Magee appealed to the Su-
preme Court, which rendered the above deci-
sion.
! Supervisors Of Calareras County VS.. James c.
Shipmdn.-The demurrer, having been over
ruled, it was the right of the defendant to go on
and try the case upon the facts set up in de-
fense in his answer. But no reason is assigned
why he failed to do SO, and as all ntendments
are in favor of sustaining the Judgment it must
be presumed that he abandoned his defense.
There is nothing set up in the demurrer which
can avail him.
Judgment affirmed HEYDENFELDT, J.
/ We concur TERRY, j.
1 MURRAY G.. ].
Dull TIMEs.-We never saw, says the Gaz-