Amador ledger., 1903-07-24
WONDERFUL UNANIMITY.

According TO the reasoning OF Judge
Rust there will be, if anything, a re-
duction of pay to the justices and con-
stables of this county by his decision.
as there was an opportunity under the
fee system to pile up costs indefinitely.
The Dispatch hopes that the decision
will stand, and that the auditor will
accept the decision as final, and pay
the salary demands as they are pre-
sented.-Amador Dispatch.
1t is not yet determined whether the
auditor will appeal from the decision of
the Judge, but it is to be hoped that he
will not, because the consensus of opin-
ion is that the law is just one; that it
gives a fair remuneration to public
servant, and should be enforced when
and where the makers esigned-Echo.
Now that the superior court has held
that the salary should be paid, we
trust that the auditor and district attor-
ney will not try to wear out the town
ship officers by appealing the case to
the supreme court. .. We
hope that auditor Culbert and his
legal advisor can see their way clear to
give the township officers the we'll
earned small salaries.-Amador Record
We publish the above as a psyche
logical curiosity. Men versed in
mental science say that no two minds
can think alike. Here we have all
our cotemporaries dropping into the
same groove of thought, adopting
substantially the same language, and
giving expression to their views at
practically the same time. Remark
able coincidence We often hear of
two hearts that beat as one," but
the spectacle of three editors within
a radius of twelve miles directing
their "hopes" simultaneously in the
same channel is a fact not to be
gauged by the ordinary laws of men
tai science. However suggestive it
may be in itself, it is not for us to
inquire what hypnotic spell moved
them to travel the same mental path
way. The Ledger is not "in" on
this peculiar combine. We must re-
mark, however, that this identity
OF thought only extends to the hope
that the Justices salary suit will not
be appealed. When they start in to
give reasons for thus hoping, their
views become not only divergent
but actually conflicting. Thus, one
writer says the law gives only fair
remuneration to a public servant.
Another editor, who had the decision
in extenso before him, says there
will be, if anything, reduction of
pay of justices and constables under
the new law. Now, just fancy the
township officers, some of whom
were resigning and declining under
the'old law because it did not give
enough compensation. actually start
iA1 .nandamus proceedings in their
anxiety to collect under the new law
winch effects reduction in their
pay? Was ever such self-sacrific-
ing spirit known before. In Justice
to the logic of the decision itself,
we beg to state that the document
nowhere ventures the opinion that
the pay of the justice is likely to be
cut down by the salary scheme. It
does discuss how few cases it would
take under the fee system to make
more than the salary provided by the
act in controversy. Into this do
main, however, it is inadvisable to
pursue the subject.
Our contemporaries seem to look
at the matter-like lawyer arguing
case-from a one-sided standpoint. t.
They talk of the hardship that will
be entailed upon the officials directly
concerned by appealing the case.
They do not stop to consider what
hardship may possibly result to in
nocent parties from failure to ap-
peal. Justices and constables are
under bonds. If they draw money
from the county treasury that they
are not legally entitled to, they are
liable on their official bonds for the
amount thereof. Is it Just and
right to throw upon these bondsmen
the ultimate responsibility of a fail
ure to take the case to the court of
last resort. Suppose the matter is
allowed to rest, so far as Amador is
concerned, in its present indecisive
shape, and that township officers
are permitted under the Judgment
of the trial court to draw the salaries
provided for in the act. And sup
pose some other county appeals the
matter to the supreme court, and
that tribunal finally holds that the
constitution is bar to the claim of
present incumbents for salary under
the act. Into what delightful con-
dltlon OF confusion this would plunge
things? Who would be called upon
to refund the money so illegally paid
out? Would not the responsibility
attach all along the llne-the treas
I1ror for, ,oarino III ,,-o.... =,