Sacramento daily record-union., 1882-12-20
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

The Board of Supervisors met in regular
session yesterday morning, all the members
present.
Warrants on Swamp Land District No.
4o7 were allowed, as follows s. Dickey,
s197 53; M. W. Blanchard, S602 6S; All
Wong and All Wy, s55S; J. G. Pierson, ,S1l3; |;
William Poole. s10o; c. A. Boon, 50. $40 09;
Pacific Life Insurance Company, 1922 O5 /:
William Poole, S2l5.
| On motion the sum of 81 was allowed to
William MCLEAN for relief.
! n. Pattep, Overseer of Road District No.
| 9, appeared before the Board, and asked for
| instruction as to changing the course of
water ditch on the Placeryille road. and the
matter was referred TO the Committee on
Roads and Bridges.
| A communication from the Clerk of San
Joaquin county, stating that the bridge across
Dry creek was completed, and that il was de.
| sired TO turn the same over to the COUNTY
was read ani further ceasidesa.ion most.
] ponce. -
In the matter of the hearing of the resolu.
tion of Supervisor Beckley, in relation to the
grading OF county roade, it was ordered that
further hearing be continued until January
3, 1881, at 10 AN. A recess was then taken
until P. NJ.
At the afternoon session Supervisors Butler
and Bailey were absent.
4. L. Jones appeared before the Board en-
behalf OF Z. ii. McGrew in the matter of
the case of McGrew vs. the County of Sac.
ramento. and stated that he desired to know
if a compromise in the case could be OBJ.
tained. and that the plaintiff was present and
willing to take the lowest sum for which the
claims had been fled.
District Attorney Buckley was present.
snd stated that Grove l.. johnson had been
secured as associate counsel, and that owing
to other business which demanded his atten-
ti5n the matter had been in the hands of Mr..
Johuson, and he was not fully posted in re-
gard to the merits of the case, but that he
tBuckleyl was always in favor Of compro-
mise OF all claims against the county, and in
this case his judgment was that fair com.
promise which would be satisfactory to the
county would be better than a trial of the
case in the Courts.
Chairman Bsckley said the Board had
never made thorough examination of tie
work dons. ~
Mr.. Jones thought the case could be won
by plaintiff, but if the case could be won by
the county it would not be just for the work
was done and by the plaintiff,
Chairman Backley thought committee of
the Board should be appointed to examine
and investigate the amount Of work done
before any definite action was taken, and
that sworn statements should be taken from
the plaintiff ia regard to the amount of work
done.
P. III. McGrew said that in consultation
with some of the members of the Board they
had decided to take for pay the lowest figure
at which the work had been done without
any profit II there was any doubt about the
amount be was willing that experts should be
brought in and ne would agree to abide by
the decision.
A majority of the members of the Board
expressed themselves as in favor of compro-
missing the matter, and it was ordered that
further hearing of the matter should lie post.
poned Until this forenoon.
The Board then took recess until 10 A. NJ.
to-day.