Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-11-10
Snnrenle Gnnrf.

The Supreme Court met in this city YES
terday at . P. NJ. Several cases were called
and combinations granted. James NJ. AL
len, on behalf OF San Mateo county, APP
piled for an alternative writ of mandate
against D. J. Oullahan, State Treasurer,
John P. Dunn, State Controller, and Ed
ward c. Marshall, Acknowledgement. as re-
spondents. 1t alleges that on February %,
1884, an action was commenced in the Su-
perior Court of the city and county of San
Francisco by the People of the State against
the Southern Pacific Railroad Company. to
recover the taxes due the State and the
counties of Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles,
Monterey, San Benito, San Bernardino, San
Diego, San Francisco, Santa Clara, Santa
Cruz, Tulare and San Mateo, for the State
and county taxes for the fiscal years 1888
81 1t sets out the removal of the suit to
the United States Circuit Court, the stipula-
ton entered into by the company defend
ant, the order entered thereupon, the sub
sequent judgment and the payment to the
Attorney General by the railroad company
of 1925, S06 81, of which 1882 40 was the
proportion of county taxes belonging to
the county of San Mateo
The petition alleges that Attornev-Gen
eral Marshall has offered to pay the amount
so received to the Controller, but before
making a tender demanded the certificate
required by Sections 453, 434 and 433 of
the Political Code, but that the Controller
refused to give such certificate. 1t contains
similar allegations as to a suit commenced
against the same defendant on February
g. 1885, for the State and county taxes for
the same counties for the fiscal year 1SS4-S5
the amount received by the Attorney Gen
eral in this case being S124,720 81. and the
county proportion 81 1876 70. As reasons
for applying for the writ, it alleges that the
Board of Supervisors Of the county, in
levying the taxes for the fiscal year 1885 Sc
took into consideration these sums of
1882 40 and s., 1876 49, and therefore
levied a smaller amount than it otherwise
would have levied, and that without
said sums ii would not have enough
money for county purposes for the fiscal
year; that the Attorney General has
under his control over S664 600 received
under similar circumstances from other
railroad companies that rs the attorney of
the people of the State of California. he
has about 81 10000 in all which ought
to be paid into the State Treasury and the
treasures of different and many counties
OF the State, and that the payment of the
same into and the reception of the same by
the State Treasury and SAID county treas
uries depend upon the final settlement by
this honorable Court by its decision of the
principles involved in this matter and pro-
ceeding, which petitioner therefore alleges
to be of great public concern and great
public Importance in respect TO the duty of
certain public officers, TO wit, the State
Treasurer and County Treasures and the
State Controller. That Judgment of q
Superior Court would not be final or au-
thoritative, and that the past conduct of
said Controller and State Treasurer indicate
that an appeal would be taken by them
from any such judgment, and thereby de-
lay the disposition of all said money year
or longer"
The petitioner therefore prays that an
alternative writ of mandate issue to the
respondents directing them to show cause,
at time and place to be designated by the
Court, why the said sums, and each of
them, should not be paid by the Attorney
General into the State treasury why the
Controller should not issue certificate for
each of such sums and why the State
Treasurer should not receive them into the
State treasury.
The writ was ordered to issue returnable
at San Francisco on Monday next.
Judge J. II. Mckune, as counsel for John
Rooney, applied for a similar writ against
Controller Dunn, Acknowledgement Mar
shall and Treasurer Oullahan, directing
that all the money said to be in the hands
of the Attorney General on account of
railroad taxes be paid into the State
treasury.
A class of fifteen young men made ap-
plication for admission to practice Five
were successful, among whom was Dwight
w. Fox. of this city. Mr. Fox was born
and raised in Ell Dorado county; is a grad
uate of the State University, and for the
past two years has been reading in the law
office of Judge S. c. benson.