The San Francisco call., 1895-08-03
AN OFFICE IN DISPUTE,
County Detective Herbert's
Warrant Is Rejected
as Illegal.
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
Ar Attempt Made to Legalize the
Function of the Last
Legislature.

County Treasurer Sanford of Alameda
County refused yesterday to pay the first
warrant presented to him by n. V. Her
bert for months salary as county detec-
tive. This action of tie Treasurer will
take a very interesting case into court.
Mr.. Sanford had given the matter some
attention, and when Mr.. Herbert presented
his warrant he was shown two Supreme
Court decisions that the Treasurer said he
had been advised of by his bondsmen.
The Office of county detective was created
by the Supervisors month ago. 1t tcreated
much surprise, and called forth much dis
pleasure all over the county, and was con-
demned as waste of public money. The
salary was fixed at $125 per month, and H.
V. Herbert, the discharged claims adjuster
of the Southern Pacific Company, was ap-
pointed to the Office. At that time there
was less criminal business before the courts
than at any time for the past two years.
When the Office was made it was stated by
Supervisor Church that it was necessary
for the District Attorneys Office to have a
detective at its disposal to assist in gather
ing evidence for criminal prosecutions.
The Sheriff's Office was said to be made
quate, and additional help was necessary.
1t was not known till last night that an
attempt was made during the last session
of the Legislature to introduce a clause
into the county government bill providing
for the creation Of the Office of county de-
tective. The measure was championed by
ex-Chief of Police Schaffer, who tried to
get the support of the Alameda County
delegation. A member OF the delegation
said last night that the inquiry they made
convinced them that such an Office would
be a wanton waste of public money.
"Assemb1 b1yman North, myself and Sem
ator Earl" said he, were approached and
asked to aid the bill. We made little in
vestigation and found that the Sheriff of
Alameda County was netting from $1,000 to
$4,000 after all expenses. The District
Attorney was making $4,000 clear and was
supplied with Offices and typewriter.
''We concluded that with such margins
the allowance must be very ample, and
positively refused to aid the measure,
which died. When the appointment was
him of his liability if he paid any warrants
to county detective, and he decided not
to do so. The place was created solely for
the incumbent, to whom the Supervisors
are under personal obligations, and it was
an outrage, but fortunately the remedy is
so simple that nobody will suffer. The
salary proposed in the addition to the
county government bill was $3.50, but I see
the Supervisors fixed it at SIPS"
Mr.. Sanford says he is absolutely sure of
his position, and has the best of legal ad-
vice. The Supreme Court opinions that
he handed Mr.. Herbert are: County of Ell
Dorado VS.. Meirs, 100 Cal, p. 268, and
County of Los Angeles VS.. Lopez. 104
Cal, p. 257. In each of these cases the
Supervisors created the office of County
License Collector, and the Treasurer re-
fused to pay the warrants. The Supreme
Court said in each instance: The Board
of Supervisors has no power to create any
office except that power be delegated to it
by the Legislature" In each case it de-
cided against the License Collector.