The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1898-03-03
SUPREME COURT WILL DECIDE
ARE THE FOLSOM ROAD BONDS
ILLEGAL?
Why Dillon g. Hubbard Advised
the Highest Bidders Not to
Take Them.

The opinion of Dillon q HUBBARD OF
New York, the attorneys whose advice
10 y. Harris & CO. caused the latter
to decline to purchase the Folsom ROAD
bonds, unless declared by the stare
Supreme Court to be legal, has been
received
Their chief objection TO the bonds IS
based on the belief that the county,
acting through the Supervisors, cannot
impose on the people of a municipality
an obligation to pay for road work
outside such city. They also hold that
a county cannot issue bonds to build a
State highway
On this latter point. at least, District
Attorney Ryan and other local after
neys hold that Dillon & Hubbard are
wrong There is to be no deed of The
road from the county to the State, be-
cause under the California law al
cuonty roads are State highways, and
when road becomes county or pub
lie highway the State has acquired all
the interest therein it can have.
Now that the opinion has been re-
eeived an agreed case will be taken
into court on the points raised and il is
thought that only a few weeks will be
required to obtain a decision from the
Supreme Court. If that tribunal should
hold that the bonds are legal they Will
be taken at once and the work on the
road commenced and pushed forward
rapidly.
THE OPINION.
New York. February 23d.
Messrs n. w Harris & Co. 81 Mas
sau street New York, n. Y.-Dear Sirs:
AT your request we have examined into
the proceedings of the Board of Super
visors of the County of Sacramento,
California, under which that county
proposes to issue $4,000 road bonds
dated February 1, 1898. These proceed
ings show that the project Of issuing
these bonds had its origin in the Act
to aid in the construction of a State
highway or wagon road from the City
of Sacramento TO the City of Folsom in
Sacramento County as the construction
OF said highway is provided for in an
Act Of TIE Legislature of the State. ap-
proved March 20 1897. Session laws
Of 1891, CHI. CLXXNL, p. 1339) This
Act contemplates distinctly a State
road as distinguished from a county
road or highway. If the road could
be treated as a county road the Act
would be open to very serious constlu-
tional objections probably; but. as said
above. it is Enthusiastically a State road
as distinguished from a county road.
The Act contains no provision author
izing the county to aid in its consruc-
ton. The Act provides that the Com
missioners shall be appointed by the
Governor; that the road shall be built
under the direction of the Governors
Commission; that it shall be macad-
amiZad. and built according to the
most approved methods of modern
highway construction, and completed
before the next session of the Legisia-
ture to the end that the same shall
be exhibited to the members of such
Legislature as a sample of modern and
improved highway construction" etc.
Sufhceth it TO say, therefore, that the
Act provides for a State road. with no
provision enabling any county to aid
in its construction.
The power 70 issue these bonds is
claimed to be given by paragraph l3
OF Section % of an Act, entitled An
Act to establish uniform system of
county and township governments.
(Sess;on laws Of 1897. p. 49, Para
graph Is of Section % of this Act pro-
Vides, inter ALA, that any county may
incur q bonded Indebtedness
for any purpose for which the Board
of Supervisors are herein authorized 10
expend the funds of said county" The
Board of Supervisors are not in any
portion of the said Act last mentioned
authorized to expend the funds of the
said county to aid in the construction
Of the State road above mentioned or
of any other State road and, therefore
if these bonds are issued. as these pro-
ceedings tend very strongly, If not con-
clEsively. 10 show, for the purpose of
aiding the State road aboYe mentioned
they are. in our judgment, clearly IN
valid.
When. however, we come 10 look Al
the further proceedings Of the Board Of
Supervisors eventuating in the proposal
TO issue and sell the bonds in question
we ind that it IS recited that these
bonds are 10 be issued under the Act
entitled An Act 10 establish a uniform
system of county and township govern
ments." approved April /, 1897. above
mentioned and in pursuance Of an or
der of the Board OF Supervisors made
on the 29th day Of January, 1858, and
with the assent Of two-thirds of the
qualified electors of said county voting