Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-06-03
THAT IS PER cznr.
Auoitor mckee, Declines to Act WithoC
Spe ,cIfr Tustruc<t<,n.

Auditor McKee, Declines to Act Without
Specific Instructions.
At yester Jays session of the CITY Trus-
tees MI. Wolf inquired whether Auditor
Mckee had complied with the order of the
Board, made at the last meeting. providing
taat but IS per cent. of the net proceeds Of
the water works should be paid into the in.
terest and sinking fund.
Mr.. Mckee replied that he had not com.
piled with the order, as he did not under
stand that there was anything in the order
that compelled him to act.
Mr.. Mclaughlin said that an order
passed by the unanimous vote of the Board
ought to be sufficient authority for the
Auditor to apportion the receipts accord.
ingly.
Mr. Wolf stated that if the Auditor did
not feel like carrying the order of the Board
into effect he was in favor of taking such
action as would compel him to do so. The
Auditor, he thought. had no right to refuse
to comply with the Boards direction
Still, if he was afraid he might involve his
bondsmen in trouble, perhaps he was right
in refusing, and the Board should take
steps to compel him to.
Mr.. Mckee said he had endeavored to
consult an attorney during the week, but
the gentleman was absent. He preferred
that the Trustees should make their order
mandatory on him.
Then Mr.. Wolf went out to find the CITY
Attorney, in order to get his opinion in the
matter. They returned in few minutes,
and the situation was explained to Mr.
Hart.
The latter gave it as his opinion that the
Auditor would be governed bv any legal
order of the Board of Trustees. If The
latter should make an order that something
be done which they had no right to do, un-
der the law Tor which the Auditor had rea-
son to believe they had not), of course he
would not be bound thereby. In the mat
ter under consideration he did not see that
there would be. any contempt of Court on
the part of the Trustees as it was only one
method of bringing case before the Su-
preme Court for the second time. 1t would
not be new thing for a Court to reverse
its decision, and he did not believe any lla-
billty would rest upon the Trustees or the
Auditor.
Mr.. Mckee said that if he had appor.
toned the money last week in accordance
with the Boards order it would to-day
have been all paid out and then, if the
city should again lose its case where would
the money come from to replenish the
Treasury? He held that if the Board
wanted him to perform some specific act it
must so direct in its order. In this case
the Board had not directed him to do any,
thing. If called into Court and asked
on what authority he had changed the ap.
portionment; he would not be able to pro.
duce any. Let the Board go ahead and
make an order directing him to act, if it
wanted to settle the question.
The order of last week, as it appears on
the minutes of the Board, reads as fol-
lows:
Trustee Wolf moved that this Board cease to
pay 90 per cent. of the gross water receipts to
the sinking and interest fund. Carried.
The Auditor called attention to its word
ing, and Mr.. Wolf said it should also ap-
pear that 80 per cent. of the net proceeds
OF the Water Works should be paid in.
The Auditor smiled in knowing way,
as much as if to say, That's all there was
of itn
Ex-City Attorney Anderson was then
consulted by Mr.. Wolf, and he drew up
new order Qor passage by the Board) d.
recting the Auditor to apportion only SIS
per cent. of the net proceeds to the sinking
and interest fund, and also directing the
City Treasurer to pay only that proportion
of the Water Works receipts on demands
upon the fund named.
The order, as thus moved by Mr.. Wolf,
was passed by the Board.