The San Francisco call., 1895-05-21
FEE BILL IS NULL,
Judge Buckles of So
lano Decides Against
the Act.
IT IS NOT GOOD LAW.
Under 1t ConStableS and JUS
Etices Could Draw All the
Office Earnings.
OUR GALLANT DEFENDER
The Crack Cruiser of the United
States May Be Ordered to
Mare Island.

VALLEJO, CAL, May 20.-The fee bill
recently passed by the Legislature has
been declared unconstitutional by Superior
Judge Buckles. After the fee bill became
law Auditor Wooderson notified all con-
stables and Justices of the Peace that he
would not pay salaries either under the
old or new law until the court had rem
dered decision.
Immediately there was a consultation of
all interested parties, Constable Dan
Fitzpatrick of Suisun brought an action
against Wooderson for the purpose of test
ing the constitutionality of the new law.
Judge Buckles, after listening to the argu-
ments by counsel for plaintiff, rendered
the following decision:
The act of March %, 1895, statutes 1895,
page 26S, provides that constables and jussices
shall receive as fees compensation for services
rendered, with provisos in the case of con-
stables that in criminal cases he shall not
receive more than 800 in any one month and
not more than $1,000 in any one year, and in
case of justices not more than $75 in any one
month shall be allowed out of the county
treasury in misdemeanor cases to any one
justice. "Does this act repeal so much of the
county government act of 1898 as relates to
justices aud consta bles of Solano County?"
10 90 SO IL must nave Deen lQe OF
the Legislature that it should, and then the act
must follow the plain mandate of the consti-
tuition. Under the county government act of
1898 these officers were paid salaries accord
ing to duties to be performed, which were fur
ther measured by the population of their
respective townships, and such salaries were
Vallejo, constable 800 and justice 500;
Benieia. 800 and $75; Suisun, 800 and $65
Vacaville, 800 and $75; Silveyville, $50 and
d. cpOn =
and SIS; EImira, $50 and $50; Denver
ton, $40 and $40; Montezuma, $40 and $40;
Main Prairie, $40 and $40: fremont,
$40 and $40. If the act of March 25, 1890,
takes the place of the provisions of the act of
1898 relating to justices and constables in the
thirteenth class, the compensation of these
officers would be so regulated that each might,
by due diligence and a superabundance of
tramps in their respective bailiwicks, be as fol-
lows Constables 500 or $1,000 year and
justices $75 or more. These salaries would ap-
ply to the above-named officials in Vallejo,
Benicia, Suisun, Vacaville, Silveyville, Rio
Vista, Green Valley, Elmira, beaverton, Monte
yuma, Main Prairie and fremont.
1t will be observed also that the Justices may
receive for misdemeanor cases alone $500 per
annum besides what he shall be entitled to for
examinations in felony cases, at So each, to
be paid by the county. 1t will require but a
any one that while the compensation of the
constables of Vallejo, Benicia, Suisun and
Vacaville would be reduced from $1,000 to
$1,000 per annum, the constables in all other
townships would be able to earn an increased
compensation from $120 in the lowest case and
$3.50 in the highest per annum to $1,000 pei
annum.
Section 9, article 9, of the constitution pro.
vides that the compensation of any county,
city. town or municipal officer shall not be in
creased after his election or during his term OF
Office. Every act of the Legislature which at
tempts to increase the officers compensation
during his term of Office is void, because OF the
constitutional prohibition. Bnt it is contended
that the Board of Supervisors, in allowing the
claims of constables and Justices, might pre-
vent the application of increase under act
of March %, by allowing only the sum
paid by the county government act
This, however would be delegating to
the Supervisors the power to fix com
Legislature and cannot be delegated. Besides
such system would lack that uniformity
required by the constitution; and further, a.
the act of March % is inconsistent with the
county government act of 1898, so far as it re
lates to compensation of these officers, if it be
constitutional and at all operative as to these
officers, then it repeals that part of the county
government act, but 1t does not. For reason.
here stated all that part of the act of March
%, 1895, relating to Justices and Constables
monthly compensation is void SO far as the
county is concerned, and the Auditor viii
draw warrants for the salaries of these officers
according to the provisions of the county gov
ernment apc of 1893