The record-union., 1899-05-23
ALAMEDA AND HER TAXES.
WHY SHE HAS NOT SETTLED
WITH THE STATE.
Assessor Dalton Claims Commis-
sions Which Controller Col
gan Will Not Allow.

Alameda County, owing to differ
ence of opinion between it's Assessor,
H. P. Dalton, and State Controller Col
gan, has not yet paid into the State
Treasury the last installment of its
taxes for 1898, and just when it will
do so-or whether or not it will do SO
at all without an order from the court
remains to be seem
Heretofore Assessors were by law
allowed e per cent. commission for
collecting personal property taxes, and
10 per cent for collecting poll tax. Eut
Alameda County evidently did not be-
lieve in doing business in that way,
and it's representatives had inserted in
Section 160 of the County Government
Act of 1897 Chat section applying to
counties of the third class-Alameda)
providing that the County Assessor
shall receive a salary of $1,000 per
year, and that he shall have a large
number of deputies each of whom
shall receive a specified salary; the
duty of two of whom shall be to col
lect poll taxes, and of one to collect
personal property tax, their salaries to
be paid out of the County Treasury.
The section also provides that no COM
missions shall be allowed for the col
lection of poll taxes, road poll taxes or
personal property taxes.
But the County Government Act, as
amended in 1897, and which is still
in force, is an omnibus measure in
which many queer things ride, and Sec
ton 10 would seem to seriously con-
fiict with the section above referred to
as applying to Alameda County.
Section 30 provides that Assessors
shall be ALLOW Il to receive and retain
for their own use per cent. of all
personal property tax, and 10 per cent.
of all poll tax collected, provided, that
counties of the first, second and third
class (San Francisco, Los Angeles and
Alameda) shall receive no commission
for the collection of personal property
taxes"
There the section ends, and that is
why Assessor Dalton has not yet set
tied with Controller Colgan and paid
the last 1nstallment of taxes into the
State Treasury. AS a matter of fact,
under his construction of the two sec
tlons of the County Government Act,
the Auditor Of Alameda County al
lowed Assessor Dalton to retain the
10 per cent commission on poll taxes
collected
Controller Colgan declined to settle
with Alameda County until the 10 per
cent deducted from poll tax collected
was forthcoming, and Assessor Dalton
declined to pay, holding that the two
sections of the Act We're conflicting,
and that the one appearing last in the
Act-Section 215-would hold good, and
that Section 16D would fall
The Controller, on the other hand,
held that Section 100 of the Act was
specially prepared to fit a specific case,
and that it must prevail
Then Assessor Dalton came back
with the long legal opinion prepared
by his attorneys, Fitzgerald & Abbott,
who contended that there was an ire
concilable conflict between the two sec
tions, and that such being the case the
last words of the Act would stand and
the first be repealed-in other words,
that Section 215 annulled Section 100.
They admitted that if the sections were
not irreconcilably inconsistent the spe-
cial statute would govern.
To this opinion Controller Colgan re-
piled by letter, in which he admitted
the strength of the argument, but dis
eaSlceu oH tHe point maQe, tnaI sec
tions $50 and 215 of the County Gov
ernment Act were 'irreconcilab bly, in
consistent" The closing paragraph of
Controller Colgan's answer is as fol-
lows:
TO my mind the decision in the case
of Bateman VS.. olgan fully covers the
point in this case, and the special pro-
visions will prevail l am convinced
that my position is the correct one
and shall therefore, in the pending set
tlement with your County Treasurer
refuse to allow commissions on per-
sonal property and poll tax collections,
and shall continue to refuse such, allow
ance in the future until the law Is
changed or am compelled to make the
allowance by an order of the court
A letter was yesterday received by
the Controller from Assessor Dalton. in
which the latter stated that he has
not yet decided whether or not he will
settle without testing the matter in the
courts. If he declines to settle the
Controller will take the initiative and
bring suit for the full amount of the
10