The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1898-01-07
Recorder Hodgman Gives
His Side of the Case
MONEY PAID IN ALL RIGHT
BUT HE NEVER BELIEVED IT HIS
OWN, INDIVIDUALLY
Awaited Supreme Court Decision Be-
fore Giving It Up-Holton
Also Tells Why

"The way the article concerning my
office is worded in The Herald makes it
look worse than it really Isl said
County Recorder Hodgman yesterday.
In the first place here is a decision of
the supreme court in the case of the
county of San Bernardino against
Alonzo S. Davidson ct al, decided in ia
vor of the defendants.
'It is held therein that statutory
county recorder is not required to re-
cord a miners notice of location; if he
chooses to do so he may transcribe such
notice of location in book or collec-
ton of sheets of paper procured for
that purpose, but if he does so he does
it, not as county recorder elected by the
people. but as a person selected by the
miners to do an act not provided for by
the recordation laws of the state, and
any moneys which they may pay him for
such services are not fees for which he
and his bondsmen are accountable to
the county.
During the last legislature Powers
mining bill was passed in which it is
enacted that the fees of mining records
should go to the county. The constitu-
tionality of the act was questioned and
last August Superior Judge Virden of
Mono county declared the Powers law
unconstitutional. Under that act the
mining district recorders are COM
PEELED to deposit their records in the
county recorders office, but my eX-
perience has been that they have stead
lily refused to do so since August last
they taking refuge in Judge Virden's de-
cision.
When this decision from Mono county
came to my knowledge, thinking that
was not doing right in paying these fees
into the county treasury, 1 opened a
special deposit to the credit of mining
locations at the Broadway bank with
a view of awaiting decision from the
supreme court to which the Mono county
case had been taken by the supervisors
of that county. The 1852 that accumu-
lated in bank did not hold there as my
individual property, but merely as fees,
the possession of which was to be de-
termined hereafter.
u consulted the district attorney-I
mean Deputy District Attorney George
NJ. Holton-on the subject. He said: "If
you pay this money to the county you
| will have an awful job getting it back
if you win He gave me typewriter
opinion, which you can read. 1t con-
sists almost textually of extracts from
the supreme court decision in the San
Bernardino case and it advises me that
1 do not record mining location notices
as county recorder and consequently
might keep the fees.
when the grand jury experts came
to see me about the matter of these fees.
I showed them all the papers which /
have shown you. I told the grand jury
that I didn't want to stand in the light
of a county official illegally retaining
fees. I do not think that the county is
entitled to this money, but am not go
ing to have it appear that I am con-
testing for this small amount, or even
a larger one.
"The advice of the district attorneys
Office when I had conferred with the
grand jury was: Under the circum-
stances I think you had better turn over