The record-union., 1893-07-22
Numbers CT Them Who Delayed
Qualifying.
District Attorney Ryan Now Included
Among the DiIatory Ones,
And He Has Lots Of ConPany-Hs Says 1t
Doesn't Trouble Him-The Super
ViSOrS' Answer TO Jones.

1t was but few days ago that an action
was begun by Assistant District Attorney
J. Charles Jones against the Board of
Supervisors, in which he petitioned the
court for a writ of mandate to compel
that body to audit his claims for salary.
All the members of the board, except
Chairman Morrison, were named in the
complaint, the latter being omitted for
the reason that, in Jones' opinion, he was
not holding his Office legally.
Jones also brought suit to test Morri-
sons right to the office of Supervisor, on
the ground that he had failed TO subscribe
to his oath of office, as required by law.
The Supervisors yesterday filed their
answer to Jones' complaint, through
their attorneys, r. I. and w. II. Devlin
and J. w. Hughes, in which they take the
somewhat sensational ground that Dis
trict Attorney Ryan is in somewhat the
same fix that Jones says Supervisor
Morrison is in-namely, that he failed to
properly qualify within the time required
by law; that the office is vacant and
therefore that his assistant has no legal
standing. In their answer the Supervisors
say:
THE OFFICE VACANT.
In the Superior Court, County of Sacra-
mento, State of California;. Charles
Jones, petitioner, VS.. NJ. Miller, Super
visor, ct al. respondents.
Come now the respondents and with
out waving their motion to strike out on
demurrer, but insisting there on now.
and answer petitioners amended petit
ton.
Aver that at the general election held
November s, 1892, one Frank d. Ryan
was elected District Attorney of Sacra-
mento County. That he failed and neg
lected to take and file his official oath
and give and file his official bond within
the time prescribed by law. That there
is now, and ever since the first Monday
in January, 1893, has been vacancy in
the Office of District Attorney of Sacra-
mento County, but that said vacancy has
not yet been filled by appointment
or election by the Board of Supervisors of
said county. That said Frank b. Ryan, al
though having no right in law so to do,
has ever since the first Monday in Janu-
airy. 1893, and during all the times in said
amended petition mentioned, acted as
and claimed to be the District Attorney of
said county of Sacramento.
JONES' APPOINTMENT INVALID.
That on the 9TH day of January, 1893,
said Ryan, so claiming to act as District
Attorney, appointed said petitioner as a
Deputy District Attorney, by an instru-
lnent in writing in the words and figures
following, to wit:
OFFICE OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY
OF THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, I
". B. HonLton, county Clerk This is TO
Caarles Jones Assistant District Attorney Of
sacramento County, vice Henry L. Buckley
resigned, and / do hereby authorize said ].
Charles Jones to act as my deputy, and you
VIII please recognize him as such.
FRANK D. RYAN,
District Attorney of Sacramento County.
That said j. Charles Jones took and
subscribed the oath OF Office as such as
sistant and deputy, and the same, with
his appointment, was filed on the 9TH dav
of January, 1893, in the Office of the
County Clerk of Sacramento County; that
over since sald date, and during all the
times mentioned in his said petition, he
claimed to be and acted as deputy OF the
said Ryan, so claiming to be District At
tOrney of Sacramento County.
NOT A COUNTY CHARGE.
That for the purpose of paying said pc
titioner his salary as such deputy of the
District Attorney the resolution set out
IN petitioners petition was under the adj
vice and at the request of said RYAN.
claiming 10 act as District ATTORNEY.
passed as set out in said petition. That
said respondents are now advised that
lney nave no pow CT 10 pay deputy OF the
District Attorney, but that said District
Attorney must pay all the deputies that
he may appoin, out of the compensation
allowed him by law. That, as now ad-
vised, said resolution is a mere subter-
fuge to do indirectly what the law will
not permit to be done directly. That ali
the services performed by said petitioner
as related in his said petition were per-
formed by petitioner as and claiming TO
be a Deputy District Attorney and that
he performed
NO SERVICES FOR THE COUNTY
OF Sacramento other than those required
by his said office of Deputy District At
torney and in that capacity. That re-
spondents have no knowledge whether
said petitioner has been paid by his said
principal, said Ryan, for said services or
whether said claim is still unpaid by said
principal.
Deny that there became due to petit
toner from Sacramento County, during
the month from April, 1893, to May, 1893,
or at any other time, for compensation
for the reason set out in the petition, or
any other cause, the sum of 500, or any
other sum whatever. Deny that said
sum, or any other sum, is due or owing
from Sacramento County TO petitioner
Deny that it is the duty of said respond
ents, or any of them, on the - day of
May, 1898, or at any other time, as the
Board OF Supervisors OF sacramento
County, or otherwise, TO examine, or set
tie, or allow said claim, or to order a war
rant for the sum of 500, or any other
cum, in favor of petitioner, to be drawn
therefor by the Auditor of Sacramento
County, or otherwise, on the Treasurer of
Sacramento County. or otherwise.
Aver that petitioner has no claim of
any kind or nature whatever against the
county of Sacramento, and that they are
and should not be compelled TO examine
or audit or allow said claim, or any part
thereof.
Wherefore, said respondents pray that
this proceeding be dismissed and they re-
cover their costs.
THE ALLEGED DIFFERENCE.
1t is claimed by the attorneys for the
Supervisors that there is a material differ
ence between the cases of Supervisor
Morrison and District Attorney Ryan
that in the former the allegation is that he
merely failed TO subscribe his name to his
oath of Office Dust as Sheriff O'Neii is
said to have done, while Ryan neglected
10 take his oath OF office within the pre-
scribed time.
--npDrcnNsS nENTTrRPED