Year: 1859

III NuS tiHe lCiulieH " law aJttf tll"t
time had expired, it also appeared in the
California Express, having been given to
that paper in the face Of the statute, 10y a
majority Of the Board of Supervisors who
were friendly to that office and desired it to
have the entire printing to be done in the
county, The bin Of the NATIONAL DEMocnAr
was presented to the Board and rejected. That
Of the California express was ordered paid.
Naturally indignant at such high handed
usurpation Of power and determined not to
lose their Just rights on account of what was
clearly either the willful and INSCRIPTIONS
partisanship of the Board or lack Of ability
on their part to understand the plain letter
Of the law, the proprietors Of this paper
brought suit against the county-its agents
having refused justce-for the recovery Of
the amount due. The District Court render
ed judgment against the County. The
Board had already put the county to the un
necessary expense of employing additional
counsel to assist in the defense of the suit
The additional counsel was Of the same po-
htical leanings with the Express and the ma
iority of the Board But this was perhaps
accidental. At any rate he received his fee
Of we believe, hundred and fifty dollars
from the Treasury of the county. Not yet
satisfied with the waste of the pubic money
which they were making, the Board ordered
an appeal in the case, and it was taken to
the Supreme Court That tribunal has re-
Gently rendered decision in favor of the
plaintiffs 1t is an emphatic rebuke to tie
Board of Supervisors, or rather the acting
majority, and is as follows:


A. S. RANDALL & Co. V. TnE County OF YuEA-
The main aHd decisive question in this case is,
whether Tax Collector has the power to con-
tract for the publishing Of the delinquent list Of
taxpayers so as to bind this county Tor the pay
ment OF the price. Ii is SO cOnteuded by the ap-
pelant that he has no such power, but that the
BO I'd of Supervisors have the authority to make
OF authorize such contracts. This question is to
be decided by the statutes.


BY the revenue law Woods Dig, p. 6l9, sec.
l4,) It is provided that on the Saturday next pre-
cedmg the third Monday in November the Tax
Collector shall have completed list OF all persons
and property then owing any taxes, which list
shall be called the delinquent list and shall be
published AS hereinafter provided; aud after said
list Is completed and published the Tax Collector
shall collect IN addition to the taxes and the five
per cent. added thereto, hily cents on each aud
every lot, piece or parcel OF land, separately as
sessed and also on the assessment Of personal
property Of each delinquent tax payer; twenty
nye cents of which shall be paid to the county, IN
full for the cost It may incur for printing the list
and the other twenty-five cents shall be returned
by the tax collector IN full for all services ia pre-
pairing the lists. by the 10th section it is provl-
ded that the Tax Collector shall cause the delIn-
quent list to be published, giving the names, &c.


1t thus appears that the county is to pay for
the printing, aud fund provided for the purpose
Of indemniiylug 1t Tor the payment of the charge.
1t also appears that the tax collector Is charged
with this duty ofhavlng the printing done. II is
true that the act speaks of the cost incurred by
the county but this does not show, or teHd to
show, that this cost must be incurred by the Or
der, any action Of the Supervisors for there is
no reason why the Tax Cullectur-whu is a coun-
ty oiicer-may not as well be- the agent of the
county to have this printing done, as the Board of
Supervisors.


No control over this subject seems to be given
any where in the Act, TO the Board of Superyl-
sOrs. who are only agents Of the county with
specified powers but this specific duty seems 10
be entrusted to the Tax Collector aud being IA
mere ministerial duty, 1t IS not p received that be
is not as competent to discharge It as u Board 1t
uOtS lUl ltllUW tUut tue NOulQ De TeSpOL-
sible for every contract which Tax Collector |
might make. But for the reasonable exercise Of
this agency the county Is bound 1t could SC lrce-
" have been contemplated that the Tax Collector |
should pay the printer, and then receive the mon
ey from the county for the Act provides that the |
fund for the reimbursement OF the county, shall |
be paid by him into the treasury, which prOba- |
bly, would not have been cons dered necessary If |
ii were to be returned to him again as money due
him for paving for the printing.


2. Some technical errors are assigned, but we |
think there is nothing in them.


The question put to the witness was not i'm |
properly refused the mere fact that the Tax Col
lect0r had asseuted to a contract previously made
or attempted to be made by the Supervisors with
another party, is not enough to affect the plain
titfs if they had no notice of it; and offer was
made to show that they had. The same remark !
applies to tue striking out Of portion Of the an
swer


8. The appellant made no objection to the ac-
count because it was not authenticated, and it can
not be urged now for the first time.


On the whole case, we think the judgment
should be affirmed. Ordered accordingly.


BALDWIN, J.


concur; Core, j.


1t seems astonishing that in a case so plain
as the above any set of men in the world
would have taken the responsibility of run
ming the county into debt, but there is no
accounting for the actions of men who are
swayed or blinded by mere partsanship.-
The decision in no manner astonishes any
body that we know Of unless it be the mem
bers of the Board who ordered the appeal,
and we shall not undertake to defend their
sagacity at the expense Of their honesty by
saying that they had too much good sense to
believe that their refusal to pay the bill Of
the NArIoNAL DEMOCRAT was a just and
righteous act. We shall not undertake to de
clare that they were not astonished Let
them have the credit of it, if they desire it,
for small credit they can have in the matter
at the best.


Tur pETArt-AfA Apcue This il the namp