The San Francisco call., 1897-09-24
CLERK CURRY
TO THE JUDGES
He Asks for Judicial Advice
in Regard to His
Office.
Believes That the Reduced Al
lowanee Will Be Insuf-
foient.
He Does Not See How He Can Keep
Business Up to Date on $4,000
Month.

County Clerk Curry has appealed to the
Judges of the Superior Court for an inter
p1etation OF the la W touching the running
OF his office under the reduced appropri-
alton that is to be placed at his disposal
bv the new tax levy. He has written
letter to thei~ Honors which he Will ask
them to consider III bank The letter OF
Mr.. Curry Is IS follows:
As County Clerk aud ex-officio Clerk of the
Superior COuru OF the city ana county OF San
Francisco, I res pectfully beg leave TO call your
earnest attention 10 the existing state OF al
fairs IN reference to the apDortionment made
by the Board OF Supervisors tor ne county
Clerk office.
On Fe bruary 13. 1880, the Legislature passed
an act which provided as follows:
In all cases in which by statutes in force. on the
3lst dav of September. 1879, the County Clerk OF
anv county, or city and county, is authorized 10
appoint deputies or assistants 10 whom duties are
assigned by such statu. es in in connection
with any Of the courts which were abolished Dy
the constitution, the Clerk may assign 10 such
deputies or assistants dut1es IN or In connection
with the Superior Court of his county or city and
county, ana they shall be entitled to the same
compensation as is provided in said statutes and
the same shall be audited and paid AT the same
time and in the same manner and from the same
source as IS provided therein
The last act passed by the Legislature prior
TO the adoption of the new constitution in
reference to the County Clerks office of the
city and county of San Francisco was ap-
proved February ,, 1872 That act provided
that the County Clerk might appoint for each
OF the courts then in existence one register
clerk and one courtroom clerk at a salary OF
Sl75 each, and two assistan register clerks at
a salary of $3.50 per month each, and three
copyistS fol the entire county.
SUP -equenty similar acts were passed to
spply TO courts that were hereafter estab-
Hshed.
On April ,. 1880, the Legislature passed an
act authorizing the County Clerk of any city
and county having over 100000 Inhabitants
10 appoint four competent persons as depu-
ties, assistants and cOpylstS Tor each Judge OF
the superior Court OF SAID CITY ana county
and as many copyists the business of the
Office should require provided that such copy
ISIS should not exceed three for each Judge OF
The Superior Court and fixed the cOmpensa-
ton OF said Copyists a S3 per day, and pro-
vided that the compensation OF the deputies
and assistants so appointed should be the
same as fixed by the statutes in force on The
Slst day OF December 1879.
The various County Clerks Of this city and
county since January l, 1880, have conducted
their Office, made their appointments and
fixed the salaries OF the deputies and assist
ants and copyiSts in accordance with the stat
utes last above referred TO.
In some instances the County Clerks, in
der to keep within the appropriation fixed by
the Board OF Supervisors, have fixed the sal
aries of the clerks at sum lower than that
fixed By the statutes of 1872, but in every in
stance where the question has been brought
before the Supreme Court that court has held
that the one-LweIfth act was not applicable to
deputies whose compensations and salaries
were fixed by law.
1 respectfully call your attention to the
cases OF Cashln VS., Dunn, 5S Cal, 5S1; Welch
VS.. slrother, - Cal, Alb, and Lewis VS.. Wild
Der, 80 Cal, 412.
1t is now claimed, for the first time since the
adoption OF the new constitution, that the act
OF April 2 1880, is unconstitutional.
The Board OF supervisors has fixed the COM
pensstion for the County Clerks Office for
nine months, commencing October l, at $4,000
per month and has based that com pehsation
upon the proposition thai the County Clerk
was only authorized 10 appoint the number of
deputies specified in the act of 1872, and the
various amendment that were made thereto,
prior to Decem Der 81, 1879.
l respectfully submit that If the County
CLERK shall be compelled TO pay the salaries
adoption Of the new constitution, and at the
same time to keep within the 5000 limit, it
will be an lmposslbility to conGuct the office
TO keep with the business of the
courts aud satisfy htigants and their attor-
news.
beg leave to state that during the time
have been County Clerk my Office has been
conducted in such q manner as to keep the
work up to date and avoid delays that might
in many ms tances Tetard the business of the
courts and be disastrous 10 htlgants. This
cannot hereafter be done if 1 have to purs lie
the course mapped out ior me by the Super
ylsors, and great in justice will be done TO liti-
gants and attorneys. delays will be numerous
and the business OF the courts will necessarily
be delayed.
1t has been publicly announced that all Off
GERS, and especially the County Clerk, win be
prosecuted for malfeasance in Office under
section 772 OF the Penal Code if they fail to
keep within the limit fixed by the Board of
Supervisors.
AS / desire to obey the law I respectfully ask
your HOnors to meet in bank and advise me-
as an officer of the court what co urse should
pursue under the circumstances.