The herald., 1896-09-30
ACCOUNTS OF DIVISION
Riverside Makes a Claim
for Sl32,0z7.09
li6
COMMISSIONERS ACCUSED OF fraud
lsi
District Attorneys Opinion Re-
garding City Justices
AN OLD AND STALE SUIT
Or. del Amo Tells What He Did for the
~ seuor MarravilIa
save 'rfo'
4 Fresh Batch Of Deputies for the County
EeT Assessors Office
AN OLD AND STALE SUIT
<br. del Amo Tells What He Did for the
~ Senor MarravilIa
4 Fresh Batch Of Deputies for the County
EST Assessors Office
Marital Infelicities Being Strengthened
out-A Tenant Who Objects to Pay
$500 a Month Rental for s12
Dwelling-Court NoteS

Ever since the formation Of Riverside
county there has been long, continuous
dispute with San Bernardino county re-
garding the amount of money to which
the more recently formed county was
entitled.
Now the matter is in court for final set
tlement.l and strong force of legal tai
ent engaged in the case lined up in Judge
McKinley's department yesterday morn
ing. Chapman & Kendrick and R. E.
Houghton, esq. represent the plaintiff,
and Curtis, Oster & Curtis of San Ber-
nardino, and Van r. Patterson, esq.
late of the supreme bench, represent
the defendants The entire morning was
taken up in reading the lengthy plead
ings in the case.
The suit was brought by the county of
Riverside against the county of San
Bernardino, G. T. Stamm, H. NJ Barton,
John G. North, w. S. Wise and Joseph
Brown. iA'es3
After the formation of Riverside coun-
ty the board of supervisors appointed
John G. North and w. S. Wise to act
as commissioners and meet in confer
ence. H. M. Barton and ]. Br1wn, rep
resenting San Bernardino county, with
regard to determining the difference be-
tween the indebtedness of San Bernar-
dion county and the value of the prop
erty belonging to it at the time the act,
which called Riverside county into ex-
istence. took effect, for the purpose of
adjusting the indebtedness ard make
distribution.
1t is alleged that Barton, Brown and
Stamm combined in such manner as to
fraudulently impose upon Riverside
greater obligation than it's fair propor-
tion Of the Indebtedness of San Ber-
nardino actually existing at the time of
the passage of the act. The act took
effect March II, 1893, and the commits
sioners found that the assessed value of
all property in San Bernardino county at
that time was $26, ,786,547 according to
the assessment of the county for 1892
The value of the property in Riverside
county, as shown by the assessment of
1882, was declared to be SS,3S2,5 ,572. The
total indebtedness of San Bernardino
county was 1853, 1929, and the aggre-
gate value Of the property of the county
s213,526.9S, the property exceeding the
liabilities by $49,807.69.
Taking the assessed valuation as ba-
sis, the commissioners figured out pro-
portion OF .294 per cent, or SIS, 1862, as
the amount due from San Bernardino
county to Riverside county.
But Riverside claims that some of
these figures were untrue, for the reason
that San Bernardino's real indebtedness
did not amount to over 40,13942, and
that the commissioners added to that
amount $163, being the expendi-
lures for the salaries and expenses of
county officers from March IL, 1898. to
June z, 1895, which was not an indebted
ness within the meaning of the act.
Exception is also taken to the prop
erty estimate of San Bernardino county
which, 1t is alleged, ought to be $465,-
1920. On the plan of calculating fol-
lowed Riverside contends that instead
OF being entitled to 5,5S6S2, it is en-
titled to $132, ,027.09, and judgment for
this amount is asked. Failing in this,
the couE is asked to order the commits
sioners to readjust the details of set
tlement and strike out from the liabili-
ties of San Bernardino county the sal
aries of the officers and the expenses of
administering the county after March
II, 1893.