The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1895-12-06
TnH COUNTY ASSESSORS SALARY GRAB

TiB COUNTY ASSESSORS SALARY GRAB
The county assessors Office cost the
county $2S, 1874 the first half Of the pres
snt year. Yet strange TO say Mr.. Sum-
merland, the county assessor, does not
think he is getting enough. but is max
ing grab for about $4,000 more. The
county government act, rs amended in
1885, provides that the county assessor
shall receive a salary OF $4,000 per year
apd have whatever deputies are needed
paid for by the county, but that he shall
not receive the 10 per cent of the poll tax
collected by him. nor the per cent OF
the personal property tax collected by
him. These percentages amounted in
1894 to over $780, and it is fair to pre-
sumo that tins year the amount Is still
more; certainly it is no less.
Mr.. SummerIand claims that the said
county government act is unconstitution-
al, for the reason that the act is not uni
form throughout the state. as required
by the constitution, the assessor being
allowed such percentages III other coun-
ties in the state. lie has therefore com.
menced action in the supreme court to
com gel the allowance 10 him by the coun-
ty auditor OF such percentages, and if he
receives favorable decision will draw
down q salary of over $4,000 per year
twice as much as a congressman and
moro than the chief justice CT the su-
preme court of the United States. But
if said county government act is uncon-
sttutonal, for the reason and in the
particulars which Mr.. Summerland
alleges land We believe It isl, it Is also
unconstitutional in some other respects
for the same reason. AS before stated, said
act allows the assessor whatever deputies
ara necessary to conduct the business OF
his office, to be paid by the county, and
this provision is not uniform throughout
the state, as in most of the counties the
assessor is given lump salary and the
aforesaid percentages, and is required to
pay his own deputies. Now, "sauce for
the goose ought to be sauce for the gam
der" and if the act is unconsti. tional in
one instance it is also in the other. Yet,
although Mr.. Sum crland is holding on
to these percentages, the board OF super
visors has paid his deputies about $2i, 600
this year, which, according to Mr.. Sum.
merland's own argument, should have
been paid by himself. In fact the
board, just few days since, allowed
Mr.. Summerland two extra deputies, to
DO paid by the county. There can be
little doubt but that the entire county
government act is unconstitutional; for
it provides for salaries for the various
county officers, and then provides that
the board Of supervisors shall allow them
whatever deputies are necessary to con-
duct the business of their respective
offices. Now, in tho case of Dougherty
vs.. Austin. % CAL, 601. and again in the
case of People vs.. johnson, 95 Cal, Al,
the supreme court of the state of Califor
MIA decided that the provisions allowing
tho board of supervisors to allow deputies
to an officer, to be paid tor by the county,
was unconstitutional and the Legislature
was the only body having authority to
fig the salary OF county officer. and that
they could not delegate mat authority TO
the board of supervisors. And they also
held, in just so many Eord., that to allow
an officer a deputy with a salary paid
by the county was to allow him so much
additional salary. These decisions are
80 clear that there is no mIstaking their
meaning. Tho board OF supervisors has
no authority to pay deputies of the
county assessor, ana in doing SO they are
violating the law as laid down by the SUI
preme court. Under the rulings OF the
suprsme court the law fixing the salary
of the county assessor OF this county is
the county government act OF 1883 under
which his salary ID Sli, 900 plus the per-
centagen above mentioned, amounting
in all to over S2l, 600; but he must pay
his own deputies out of that sum. The
county assessors Office cost the county
last year, in salaries and percentages,
$34, GAG; so that ii the law is enforced the
county will save over Sl1, 900 per annum
In the Office of the county assessor. And
the county assessor IS now getting SILL
O0O per year more than he is entitled to
under the law.
Now we say to the grand jury, super
visors and district attorney, what are YOU
going to do about it?
Will you. members of the board OF su-
pervisors, continue to pay the deputies
of the county assessor in face of the de-
cisiOn OF the supreme court? Will you,
Mr.. District Attorney and mem bers of
the grand Jury, allow it to DE done? If
You do the taxpayers will find some other |
way to see that the law is enforced. But |
the duty is yours and the people expect |
you to perform il.