Amador ledger. (Jackson, Amador County, Calif.) 1875-19??, 1910-09-30
THE DETACHABLE
LICENSE BUSENE SS

The mix-up of remission of libility
for back licenses of John Ratio id w.
II. Glenn, and granting of free
licenses to them for future protection
against any demand on the part o the
license collector, has made little bad
way toward unravelment during the
week. The grant of freedom is at
tempted to be bolstered up by this
clause in the license ordinance as
passed by the board of supervisors
Sec. 16 The board of supervisor of
the county of Amador shall have The
power to order a free license issue to
any person who may apply therebr,
whenever in their Judgment the sane
may be necessary to enable any p-
plicant who may be poor and unableto
pay his license, to earn a livelihood.
What this joker was injected into be
revenue ordinance for we know nd.
1t is about on par with lawmakers IF
the state injecting into a penal statue
provision to the effect that tie
Legislators reserved the right to male
certain criminal offense not a crime
whenever in their judgment TIE
offender was entitled to such mercifll
intervention. If boards of supervisors
are granted power to monkey with Of
dinances of their own making, so as
build up system of favoritism, it il
about time the people of Amador wer
made acquainted with the fact. w
do not believe the clause imparts t
the board any authority of the kind
nor is any instruction based on sue
clause of any binding force upo
officers charged with the enforcement
of revenue laws. Supervisors are EN-
powered to pass ordinances not in con
flict with state laws, and they ca
amend or repeal them, but with thes
acts their authority in the matter i
exhausted. They cannot say to tn
collector, Collect the license tax i
this case and don't collect in tina
case" according to their whims an
personal feelings, whether backe
with an application from the in
dividual to be favored or not. |
Suffer Creek at the present time tn
anomaly is presented of one showma
claiming exemption from license b
the grace of the supervisors, and an
other Snowman in the same bushes
being made to pay $40 per week fC
the privilege of running his show.
1t is vital to the welfare of Amado
county to find out definitely whethe
such proceeding will stand the test o
the courts. In this spirit the editor o
the Ledger waited upon the dlstric
attorney last Wednesday and inquire
if he had looked up the law on tn
subject, and what action could b
taken to recover the back license
from Ratio, estimated at $500, and al
so to compel him to pay the prescribe
| llCcllSC III IuG luCuIS. I1G Sdlu lie Wa
prepared to make a criminal com
| plant, or start civil suit to determin
the issues involved. The legal advise
waxed angry, and declined to take an
action whatever. He claimed that n
individual taxpayer but only the boar
of supervisors, could require him t
act in such proceedings.
So that the remedy for the injustlc
herein stated must be sought else
where. We may say that the matte
is by no means settled by this rebuff
1t is simply clearing the way for othe
action. To grant free license to th
other Snowman will not meet the is
sue. He is oppressed not by payin
his license tax, but by the favoritisr
shown the other by not demanding
payment from him. We want to know
whether we have got county wort
living in from a governmental point 0
view. And we are going to find it GU
if possible.