The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-19
rs SPECIAL LEGISLATION
The Point Raised by w. A. Gett
Before the Sacramento
- Supervisors.
MAKING THE ANNUAL LEVY.
Revenue to Conduct the Elections
Had Not Been Included in
the Amount.

SACRAMENTO, CAL, Sept. 49, The
validity III the act of the last Legislature,
approved March 81, which refers to the
manner of conducting primary elections
in counties of the first and second classes,
has been brought before the Board of Su-
pervisors' of Sacramento by w. A. Gett Jr.
The board referred the com mmunication OF
Mr.. Gett to Frank d. Ryan, the District
Attorney of Sacramento, and he has stated
it to be his opinion that the act is uncon-
stitutional.
Mr.. Gett's communication came in the
form of a petition calling the Super
visors attention to the fact that in making
the annual tax levy they had omitted to
provide a source of revenue for the holding
of primary elections according to this law.
His letter was as follows:
To the Honorable Board of Superpisors-GEN-
TLEMEN: IN the specifications for making the
next tax levy notice that your honorable
body appears to have overlooked levy to pro-
vide revenue for conducting general primary
elections in accordance with the law passed by
the Legislature and approved March 27, 1895,
appearing at page 207 of the printed statutes
of 1895.
That law provides (section q that unless
conventions are held by delegates elected in
accordance with its provisions the nominees
of each convention shall not be allowed the
privilege of appearing on the ballots printed
by the County Clerk under the Australian bal
lot system, even though the candidate may be
a nominee of convention held under the old
system.
The result of this would be to force each
nominee to circulate petition and cause him
to appear with the appelation "lndependent'
after his name instead of having his party
designation appear after his name. Moreover
this law provides for conventions to elect dele
gates to the National Convention in March,
1896 and also for holding primary elections in
July, 1896, and unless provision is made in the
tax levy OF September 16, 1895, for revenue, it
will be impossible for your honorable board to
comply with the provisions OF section 1S of
said act, which provides that "It shall be the
duty of the Board of Supervisors of each
county within the State of California to appro-
pirate from the general funds of the county a
sufficient sum OF money TO pay all necessary
expenses of holding any such primary elec-
tions within such county," etc.
mistake as to the class of counties seems to
have arisen, and, therefore, because section 26
of said act provides that the said act shall ap-
ply to and take effect only in counties of the
first and second Classes, it was presumed that
the classification set forth in the county gov
ernment act was referred to. However, that is
not the fact The classification in the county
government act is for the purpose of regulating
the compensation OF officers only.
The classification of counties appears in Sec
ton 1905 of the Political Code of the State of
California, which provide that counties of the
first class, for purposes other than for roads
and highways, are those containing 10000 in
habitants or over. Counties of the second class
are those containing 5000 and under 10000
inhabitants Section 4007 of the same code
provides that whenever a new census is taken
in counties on the first day of July next there
after and by operation of law the county is
classified under such census Therefore, as the
census of 1890 shows that Sacramento County
has population of 40,399 it is in the first class
for ali purposes Of elections and primary elec-