The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-24
The Controller Must Explain
Why Expert Lewis Salary
Is Not Paid.
OFFICIALS AT SWORDS POINTS
Acknowledgement Fitzgerald and
His FelloW-Incumbenti in a
Wrangle.

| phChAMEN IL, SAD., S6pCs- ZO.-I HO
| rumors of war between the Attorney
| Generals Office and the State Controllers
| Office which have permeated the political
| air have given way to a declared conflict
and the first step in the battle was taken
to-day, when an alternative writ of man
date issued from the court OF Superior
Judge A. P Catlin was served upon State
Controller E. P. Colgan, demanding that
| he shall either draw warrant in favor of
T. A. Lewis for salary alleged to be due
| that individual from the State for services
rendered as expert to the State Board of
Examiners or appear in court on the 9th
day of September and show cause why
such mandate of the court has not been
complied with.
During the session of the last Legislature
bill known as No. 526 was introduced in
the Assembly. One of It's clauses provided
for the employment of an expert to the
State Board of Examiners. The latter
board is composed of the Governor, the
| Secretary of State and the Attorney
General the duties Of whose offices
consume all of their time. and the fact that
they have to sit as Board of Examinerslis
| looked upon by them as the imposition of
| to prepare. 1t is supposed to be the duties
of an examiner to inquire into and become
| thoroughly conversant with the needs
of all State institutions. the functions
of it's different officers, the salary
| roll and all contracts for supplies, and
| the method in which these supplies are
utilized. The members of the Board of
Examiners felt that, owing to the multi
plicity of the duties devolving upon them
in their separate offices, it would be i'm
possible for them to find time to acquire
that intimate knowledge of the methods Of
conducting the numerous State institu-
tons necessary to the wise exercise of the
function devolving upon them as Board
of Examiners.
AS remedy for this evil, they caused to
be introduced in the Legislature the bill
creating the office of expert, whose duties
it would be to personally visit all the State
institutions and acquire that knowledge
which the board deemed necessary for
proper discharge of the duties incumbent
upon it.
A clause was inserted in the general APP
preparation bill providing for the payment
o. salary of $1,000 per year in monthly in
stalments to the expert. The general ap-
preparation bill passed and received the
Executives signature, but Assembly bill
SIG, which provided for the employment of
the expert, died en- route, and failed to be
included in the statutes of the State.
Notwithstanding the fact that bill 526
failed to pass both houses of the Legis-
Iature the board, taking as basis for their
authority the clause in the general appro-
| LII I'll AL - l. h.,
ment of q salary of $1,000 year to an ex-
pert, engaged the services of Thomas A.
Lewis and dispatched him on tour of the
various State institutions.
On the 31st of July of the present year
Mr. Lewis presented a bill to the State
Board of Examiners in the sum of $166 662s
for one months salary, and on the 10Th
day of the following month this bill was
audited, approved and allowed by the
board and was then presented to State
| Controller E. P. Colgan for the purpose of
| procuring from him warrant on the
State treasury in payment thereof,
but this warrant Mr. Colgan refused
to issue on the grounds that there
must be other authority than the clause
inserted in the general appropriation bill;
or in other words, that bill 526 should
! have been passed before the State Board
of Examiners was empowered to create the
office of an expert; that the failure in the
passage of that bill left no clause either in
the code or statutes to show that the
| Board of Examiners was empowered to
employ an expert, and he left the plain in
ference that the Examiners should have
performed personally the duties they had
relegated to Lewis.
In all matters of disputed law or when
any intricate question which involves any
of the State officers arises, it is customary
to refer them to the consideration of the
Attorney General, who renders an opinion
which is usually conceded to be I'M
answerable. But in this case the matter
having been referred to the Attorney
General, it places him in very delicate
position, as he is literally called upon to
render an opinion upon one of his own in
dividual actions as a member of the State
Board of Examiners. Should he have
rendered an adverse opinion as
! to the legality of the action
taken by the board in the employment
of Expert Lewis, he would have thrown
discredit upon his own action. AS the mat
| ter stands, he has not done SO, but has rem
dered his opinion that the employment OF
an expert was perfectly valid. The ques-
ton now arises: Is the Attorney-Gen s
| opinion worthy of credence; is it legal for
the Acknowledgement to pass upon his own
actions?
Considering the question on these
grounds Controller Colgan has absolutely
| refused to issue any warrant IN favor of
| r. A. Lewis. and has placed the matter in
the hands of his attorneys, Messrs. Robert
Devlin of this city and Judge ]. A. Bar
| ham of Santa Rosa, and will contest the
validity of the Attorney Generals decision
| in the Supreme Court of the State.
In the meantime the refusal of Mr.. Col
| gan to issue the warrant in favor of Expert
Lewis has aroused the ire of Attorney
General Fitzgerald, and a number of
letters upon the subject have been re-
ceived by Controller Colgan from that
Il r. 4I