The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-04-26

complished after which if any surplus re-
mains such surplus shall be transferred to
the general fund of such municipality.
The legislative branch of said city, town
or municipal corporation shall, at the time
of fixing the general tax levy, levy and
collect annually each year for the term of
twenty years a tax sufficient to pay the
annual interest on such bonds and also
one-twentieth part OF the aggregate
amount of such Indebtedness so incurred.
In this provision for the creation of a
bonded indebtedness is partial remedy
for the financial troubles of the city, but
it does not go to the root of the evil, nor
is it believed to be the proper remedy to be
applied. The supposed restrictions on the
creation of any Indebtedness by any OF the
counties of the State and the supposed
limitations on the Supervisors in the mat
ter of pledging the credit of the city do
not and never were intended to apply to
the creation of Indebtedness for necessarles
or the pledging of the credit of the city for
necessaries actually supplied.
The restrictions were intended to apply
and do apply only to created as opposed
to natural, incidental current expenses of
operation of the city government The
Supervisors are vested with power to do
any act that may be necessary to carry on
the functions of government, notwith-
standing any attempted limitations.
Many novel legal questions have been
raised by the financial troubles of the city,
but undoubtedly they all would have been
answered by resort to the consideration
of the basic principles of the law of con-
tracts and the laws governing municipal
corporations generally. But the trouble
has been that each attorney has confined
his attention to the investigation of the
case of his individual client and his energy
entire has been devoted to the satisfaction
al h. how ho1 fAy
collection.
1t has been shown by officials that all
persons doing business with the city are
charged with knowledge of the condition
of the city finances. All officials of the
county are likewise charged with such no.
tice, that is to say, notice OF the condition
of the county treasury and the extent OF
the claims against the same. All Super
visors, and any other officer authorizing or
aiding to authorize or auditing or allowing
any claim or demand upon or against the
treasury or any of its funds, are liable in
person and on their several officials bonds
to the person or persons damaged by such
illegal authorization to the extent of his
loss by reason of the non-payment OF his
or their claims.
The only way out of their responsibility
for the Supervisors, the only means OF
escape for the present incumbents, their
predecessors for two terms, and the bonds
men of all the officials who have been in
any way connected with the disbursement
of public money for six years past is in
resort to the defense provided in the gen.
eral permanent powers of Boards of Super
visors, in which it is provided that Board
of Supervisors may do and perform any
acts (besides its prescribed dutiesl deemed
necessary in carrying out their duties as
the chief executives of the municipality.
An admission that they get no power or
authority under this section of the law
will subject them, in the opinion of COM
petent attorney, to litigation to no end in
stituted by the dissatisfied creditors of the
city.
However, the entire question is yet a
debatable one. Some of the points bearing
on the issue are established with a degree
of clearness; some are very much involved.
The consideration of the subject is timely.
The situation is going from bad to worse
every year, and eventually all the misfit
legislation will be annulled or repealed if
the Supervisors in the mean time do not
see fit to exercise the powers vested in
them and clear up the situation themselves
in the light of reason and applied business
principles bearing on such exigent circum-
stances as are presented to-day in the con-
dition OF municipal finances.