The record-union., 1891-04-24
THE "BEESUBUJ,

Suit Commenced to Recover County
Money Paid Out.
The following complaint was filed yes
terday in the office of the Clerk of the
Superior Court:
In the Superior Court, in and for the
county of Sacramento, in the State of
California. Sacramento County, plaintiff,
VS.. Charlotte McClatchy, V. S. Nc
Clatchy and c. K. McClatchy, copartners
doing business under the firm name of
James McClatchy & Co., defendants
The plaintiff, complaining, alleges:
First-That at all the times named
herein it was and it now is body COR
porate and polite, formed and organized
under the laws of the State of California
Second-That at all the times named in
this complaint Charlotte McClatchy, V.
S. McClatchy and G. X. McClatchy were
and they now are copartners doing busi-
ness under the firm name and style of
James McClatchy q Co.
Third-That on the 11th day of April
| 1891, the Board of Supervisors of the
plaintiff did order paid to the defendants,
ostensibly for advertising, the sum of ST.
/ 3l7, and the said sum of 81 ,3I7 was on said
1lth day of April, 1891, actually paid to
the defendants by the Treasurer of the
plaintiff, in pursuance of the said order Of
said Board of Supervisors.
Fourth-That the said order of said
Board of Supervisors for the payment of
the said money was without authority Of
law and was illegal, and in violation of
an Act Of the Legislature of the State of
California, entitled "An Act to Establish
a Uniform System Of County and Town
ship Governments" approved March IA,
1888, and the several Acts amendatory
thereof and supplementary thereto, and
that the said illegality and violation and
want of authority of law consisted as fol-
lows, to-Wit:
A. That no claim or bill against the
said countywas ever presented to or filed
with the Clerk of the said Board of Su-
pervisors, itemiZed as required by law
or verified, as required by law, or other
wise, or at all, for the said money so or
dered paid by said Board of Supervisors
and paid to and received by the said de-
PENDANTS as aforesaid.
b. That the said money was, as afore-
said, ordered paid by the said Board of
Supervisors to the said defendants, and
was actually paid to and received by the
said defendants ostensibly, and under a
claim made by the defendants that the
plaintiff had incurred the liability to pay
said sum by reason Of the publication by
the defendants of the delinquent liSt' of
all persons and property owing taxes to
said plaintiff for the year 1890, required to
be published by the provisions of chapter
seven, of title nine, of part three, of the
and that the same was published without
any contract having been made with the
defendants, or either of them, and with
out the publication having been con-
tracted for with the lowest bidder, and
without the giving of notice for ten days,
or any other time by publication, or the
giving OF any notice. that the contract for
| the publication of said delinquent list''
would be let and without any bidding
having been made for the contract to
publish said delinquent list' by sealed
or any other proposals that during the
year 1890 there were, ever since have
been and now are more than four news
papers published in the said county of
Sacramento.
G.. That the said order of said Board of
Supervisors directing said payment of said
sum of 81 BIZ to the said defendants, and
the payment of the same TO and the re-
ceipt of the same by the defendants were
ostensibly for the publication of said de
linquent list" and the legal charge of
said publication and advertisement, if the
defendants were entitled to receive pay
therefor at all, was, at the time the same
was SO published and the said order for
payment made and the said money re-
ceived, and ever since, has been the sum
of S444 and no more.
Wherefore the plaintiff prays judgment
against the defendants for the sum of
81, l,3l7, together with 20 per cent of said
sum damages for the use thereof, and for
its costs of suit herein expended, and for
such other, further or different relief in
the premises as TO the court may seem
proper.
Frank D. Ryan, District Attorney, and
Johnson, Johnson Il Johnson, attorneys
for plaintiff.
Dated, Sacramento. April %, 1891.
WHAT MIR. RYAN SAYS.
There having been rumor last even
ing that the complaint had not been filed
with the knowledge and consent Of Dis
trict Attorney Ryan, that official was re-
queSted to make a statement in regard
thereto. 1t was very late when the mes
senger called at Mr.. Ryan's residence,
| and the latter made the following brief
statement:
Mr.. Grove L. Johnson had spoken to
me about the matter previously, but took
| it upon himself to file the complaint
without first obtaining my signature. To
say the least, he acted prematurely, and
not with my full knowledge and consent.
Il differ somewhat with Mr.. Johnson
as to the law of the case, and j expected
he would first submit the complaint TO
me for careful consideration before filing.
This he did not do, and / may be called
upon under the circumstances to dismiss
the action as commenced"
So severe is the climate of South Amer
lea upon iron that before railroad ties