The union Democrat. [volume] (Sonora, Calif.) 1854-1946, 1871-12-09
T.iffguua Act.

For the last few weeks great deal has
been said in the California newspapers
about the Lltigant Act. All of the Re-
publican and some of the Democratic pa
pers are loud and vehement for its repeal.
These repeating papers have every thing to
win, and nothing to lose by such repeal, as
they are not authorized to publish legal and
judicial notices under the act as it now stands.
The reasons given why the act should be re-
pealed. are that it eompels litigants to pay
higher rates than would be exacted If there
was no such law, and that obscure papers
have been appointed to do the public print
ing. Admitting that these reasons are true,
do they amount to any thing in contradiction
to the benefit of law regulating where legal
notices shall be published. This paper is the
Litigant paper of Tuolumne County, but has
received less for publishing legal notices
since its appointment than ever before.
There has no argument been made yet, that
will convince any one that Litigant law is
not right in principle. Quite often applica-
tons are made to the UNION DEMOCRAT for
copies of important notices that were publish
ed few years since in some paper in this
county, if not found in our files, the appli-
cants are at sea, they know not where to find
any of the numerous papers that were pub
lished and finally discontinued. Had there
been litigant law for the last twenty years,
which required that copy of the paper Sc
lected to publish legal notices, should be filed
in the County Clerks Office, much trouble, Ia
Dor and expense would be spared those who
are required to hunt up old records. The
object of the law is good one, and as law
should not berepealed. Themanner in which
papers receive appointments under it as it
now stands, is open to criticism and should
never have passed o Legislature. District
Judges should not be the means through
which monopoly of public printing is grant
ed for every county, it is a duty imposed, that
is inconsistent with all other duties of that
officer. The present law should be amended
taking away the authority given District
Judges to designate litigant organs, and the
matter left open to competition. Let maxi
mum price and definite period for the con-
tinuance Of the contract be fixed, then let
every paper in o county have the privilege to
make proposals. Break up the unjust mo-
nopoly created by the law as it now is. A
proper law regulating the publishing of legal
notices under which oil papers have on equal
opportunity, cannot help being beneficial to
the people at large. The members oe the
Legislature should give this bill due consid-
Grafton before attempting its repeal. The
law has been abused by partizan papers, not
that it was wrong as litigant act, but that
it was wrong in supporting and keeping up
certain class of papers. To US it is matter
of indifference whether the law is repealed,
amended or allowed to remain as it is, SO long
as the UNION DEMOCRAT is the only paper
published in the county, the law is of no
earthly benefit to that paper. Whenever
some other person publishes paper in this
county while we are doing so, we will be
willing to make our proposals if it is left
open to competition, which in all fairness
public printing should be.