The herald., 1898-04-08
OFFICE OF THE HERALD.
Los Angeles. Cal, April Z, 1898.
"It is some compensation for great evils
that they enforce great lessons"

"It is some compensation for great evils
that they enforce great lessons"
The street law of California is wonder
full and intricate complication of facts,
acts, precedents and presumptions, mis-
leading provisions and contradictory legis-
lation.
A new trouble in relation to its interpre-
tation has arisen in consequence of the
decision rendered by tho supreme court In
the case of Palmer, assignee, VS.. Burn
ham ct al, which was fled on the 1st inst.
and reported in these columns on the End
inst.
In cases where contracts for street i'm
provemcnts have been awarded by the
city II has been a common occurrence that
the party or parties receiving such award
have assigned their contracts, either before
or after completion of the work. In such
cases. it has been the custom for the street
superintendent to make his assessment
and warrant in favor Of the assignee, and
in cases where q contract may have been
assigned more than once, the warrant has
been drawn In favor OF the last assignee.
In the case above mentioned the supreme
court has just decided that as the superin-
tendent of streets Is not required or au-
thorized to verify tho suffciency Of such an
assignment, his act in issuing the warrant
to one assuming to be the assignee of the
contractor is neither conclusive Of the fact
OF such assignment nor sufficient to create
lien in his favor. The court holds that
the only way in which 1t may be de-
termined from the record whether a lien
exists. Is in following the provision of the
statute, which requires that the warrant.
together with the assessment, shall be is
sued In the name of the person with whom
the superintendent of streets entered into
the contract for doing the work. Other
wise persons dealing with the property
would never know whether the assessment
constituted lien, since there Is no pro-
vision for recording or authenticating for
record any assignment of the contract.
1t has been enormously assumed in GER
tain quarters that. In consequence of this
decision, the original contractor has no
legal means of enforcing a lien In cases
where he may have assigned his contract,
and as large majority of street contracts
have been assigned it Is surmised that
heavy loss will fall upon the parties who
expected to collect the assessments under
authority of warrants issued to assignees.
1t Is needless, perhaps, to say that there
has been great stir among contractors
and a good deal OF anxiety expressed as to
the extent to which this unexpected de-
cisiOn will operate
While it does not appear that there is
any prospect of absolute loss to the par
ties interested, there Is no doubt that the
decision will cause n great deal of trouble.
If the assessment and warrant issued in
favor of the assignee OF a contract Is void,
as indicated in the above mentioned de-
cision. the original contractor may remedy
the defect by coming In within a reason
able time after discovering the error, and
may require the superintendent of streets
to make out i fresh assessment, and issue
Il warrant in his favor, thus preserving a
lien upon the property affected.
The complication that will arise. how
ever. is in cases where bonds have been
issued under such void warrants, and es-
pccially, as has been the case in some in
stances. where installments upon such
bonds have been paid. While it is ap-
rarently provided that the fact of the is
sua3ce of the bonds shall be considered as
conclusive upon the question of their le-
gality, 1t may vet be a subject Of conten-
ton as to the length to which a legislature
enactment in this direction may prove op-
erative. Ii 1t should be decided that the
bonds issued under void assessment and
warrant are Of no value. and If property
owners should have paid certain INSTALL
ments on such bonds. 1t is not exactly clear
how or in wha. shape new bonds might be
issued, nor as to the term of interest etc.
The decision has practically unsettled
once more the old question of street bond
issues. and before the inevitable litigation
Is terminated there may be yet more sur
pcises in store. 1t would certainly seem
to be 4 wise proceeding to get as early a
decision as possible from the supreme
court upon the Interpretation of the stat
ute which provides that the issuance Of
the bonds shall be considered conclusive
as to their legality.
O o O
The statement of the financial condition
, of the Bank of California at San Francisco
at the close of business, March IS, 1898, was
as follows:
RESOURCES
Bank premises. 250, 900. 90
Other real estate. e.................. 257.6 Sc