The record-union., 1895-12-10
AN OUTRAGEOUS DECISION.

The Superior Court of Sonoma County
has rendered a decision that is in de-
feat of justice, and plays precisely and
exactly into the hands of those who
wish to use public funds as private
banking capital. It will be charitable
to say that the court misinterprets the
law by reason of failure to comprehend
it. But the decision is none the less
vicious.
That the public may have clear I'M
Outstanding Of the ruling, which, if
maintained, may affect the credit of
every county in the State, it will be
necessary to set out the law and the
facts. These will make it clear to who
ever has thimblefuI of brains, that in
the Sonoma County case a monstrous
set that is dangerous to the financial
stability of the counties of the State.
Under the law the County Treasurer
is required to keep the public money
in his own possession" He must not
place it in the possession of any other
person" He must permit no person
to use it," He must not loan it out for
any purpose whatever" But it is pro-
vided that he may make special depos-
its ofsthe money for safe keeping" but
shalY be responsible on his bond there
for
Tt will be observed that this permits
sion to make special deposits does not
by expression or implication give the
Treasurer the right to allow the money
to be used for any purpose. It may be
deposited for safe keeping" just as
plate or jewels may be put under lock
and key for the same purpose.
The law requires three examiners at
least once a month to do two things,
namely, ascertain first, what amount
of money should be in the treasury /;
second, the amount and kind of money
actually therein" Having ascertained
these facts, they must verify their re-
port and publish the same. Why? That
the people may know the exact state of
the treasury. The Auditors books show
what amount of money should be in
the Treasurer's possession; the count
of the actual money will show what is
In the Treasurer's possession. Hence,
If there is any default the examination
will disclose 1t.
In Sonoma County the Treasurer
made special deposits of the county
money in several banks widely sepa-
rated. The examiners called upon him
In November to produce the money
that they might count it. They found
there should have been in the treasury
S90,2S2 10, that the actual coin pro-
duced by the Treasurer was S10.3S2 ID.
The Treasurer exhibited to them non
negotiable certificates of special de-
posts aggregating $4,000 90, which
they refused to count as coin. And
therein it may be remarked the exam
liners ulQ lnSlI QlStEl-
guished service.
They then brought the Treasurer into
court to compel him to produce the
county money that they might count it
as the law requires. The Treasurer de-
Tended, and for one thing set up that
the Examiners had filed report of the
count for November. the burden OF
which we have quoted, and that, hav-
ing done so, their duty had been full
filed, and he should not be required to
produce the actual money to be counted
The examiners, on their behalf, con-
tended that the privilege to make spe-
cial deposit of the funds is subordinate
to their right to have the money in
coin or currency before them for actual
counting. Upon this issue the court
holds, on demurrer, that when the ex-
aminers follow the statute and report
the amount of money that should be or