The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1899-01-08
OPPOSED TO The CONTRACT.
CITIZENS DEMAND THAT IT BE
ANNULLED.
Supervisors Want Advice From the
District Attorney as to Whether
They Can Rescind.

ASCoSA@As~e
There was large attendance OF cltl-
zens yesterday at the session OF the
Board of Supervisors, that being the
time set for hearing the Chamber Oh
Commerce committee on the proposition
to rescind the contract made with
Devlin & Devlin and a San Francisco
law firm for the collection from the
State of some $4,000 which the law
yers claimed to be due the county.
The board had also invited the
Messrs. Devlin & Devlin to be there
and present their side of the matter
The facts leading up to this actlon
have been thoroughly exploited by the
local press, and will also appear from
the debate itself. r. D. Stephens was
spokesman for the Chamber of Com
merce committee, and when the mat
ter was called up he asked that the
attorneys holding the contract first
state their side of the case
r. T. Devlin first addressed the board
He said the attorneys had undertaken
the collection of the tax commissions
on a commission, they standing all the
expense of the litigation. A claim had
been filed on behalf of Sacramento
County, on the ground that the Act of
1898, abolishing the payment of COM
missions to counties was not legally
passed. But that is only one OF the
points involved. If the case should
be successful, the county will receive
q large sum of money, and the attor-
neys will receive a large fee. The Gov
ernor had said that he examined the
original records of the Legislature, and
found that the law was properly passed.
If SO, then, of course, Sacramento and
other counties will get nothing.
But, said Mr. Devlin, assuming that
there is money belonging to the county
lying in the State Treasury, then it is
the duty of the Board of Supervisors to
have that money paid over to the coun
ty. If the State officials would admit
that the county was entitled to the
money, and would consent to pay it
over, there would be no necessity for
employing counsel to bring a suit 10
collect it. But the money is there; the
State refuses to pay it over, and it
can be recovered only by suit against
the State.
Mr.. Devlin thought there was no merit
taking money from one pocket and
putting it into another. The county is
very particular to collect from the
State every dollar coming to it about
which there is no question of legality.
The State even sent the Adjutant Cen
eral to Washington to collect money
due from the Government. If this tax
money is due the county the county
should have it.
AS to the terms of the contract, Mr..
Devlin said the attorneys would no
doubt relinquish the contingent fee for
a fixed compensation at lesser sum.
win or lose. At first people thought the
county had no case, and laughed at
the attorneys for attempting to collect
it. Now they say the attorneys have
an easy thing, and object to the big
commission allowed.
On the assumption that the money
belongs in the County Treasury for the
purpose of meeting county expenses:
If the money belongs to the county the
county should have it, If the county
can get it without going to law, all
we'll and good; but it can't. The only
question is, then, shall the contracts
stand or will the county pay a lesser
and fixed sum for the lawyers, win or
1ose2 There is labor and expense in
volved in this litigation. but under the
present contract the litigation will cost
the county nothing.
VIEWS OF W. NJ. SIMS.
w. NJ Sims explained to the board
the nature of the old contract between
the county and himself and Albert NJ.
Johnson some years ago, and how Sac
ramento, because of a technicality, was
deprived of much of the money due it
from the State. He contended that in
the present instance the county should
collect the money due it, as four ffths
of the counties will collect what is due
them and not donate the money TO the
State unless the other counties do the
same.
AS to the contract of four years ago,
Mr.. Sims said that he and his associate,
Mr.. Johnson, considered it as having
lapsed, and asked that it so appear of
record. They claim no further con-
tract with the county.
Supervisor Jenkins declared himself
as in favor of collecting from the State
every dollar that is due the county. He
referred to the discovery that the State
owed the hospital fund some $4,000
some years ago. 1t was collected. the
hospital improved. and the hospital tax
reduced.
AGAINST THE CONTRACT
Mr.. Stephens admitted that the coun-
ty should have whatever money the
State may owe her, provided the ex-
pense of collecting the money should
exceed the amount of benefit to be de-
rived
Mr.. Stephens asked a number of ques-
tions of Mr.. Devlin, involving points
already covered by the latter. He
thought it the duty of the District At
torney to look after any litigation in
volving the return to the county any
money that might be due it from the
State. If the money remains in the
State Treasury it will reduce the next
tax levy just that sum.
Mr.. Devlin here explained TO Mr.
Stephens that even if the Act of 1898
We're not repealed, he contended that