Year: 1859

What has passed the Assembly, the reader
will inquire Why Mr.. Streets bill entitled uAn
Act to provide for the payment of the keepers
of the jails in Shasta and Colusi counties. and
to legalize all warrants heretofore drawn for tho
same"


As soon as it was publicly known that this
bill was before the Assembly, sentiments of in
dignaton were very generally expressed. A pe-
tition was hastily drawn up, and in few hours
was signed by nearly all the taxpayers of this
place. The petition was not sent to the eopntrv
as it was feared that, if not despatched imme-
diately, it would not reach the Capital before
the wrongful bill became law. For the same
reason the petition was addressed to Senator
Garter alone, as it was believed the bill would
be in the Senate before it could reach Sacra.
mento. Since then, until the l4th, the bill was
permitted to lie quietly in the hands of the COM
mittee, and our citizens thought that was the
last of it. They will therefore be astonished to
learn that Mr.. Street has pushed this bill tbroupb
the Assembly-that he has for the benefit of
two men-Ex-Sheriff Dreibelbis and Sheriff
Stockton-added several thousand dollars to our
debt and opened an additional leak to the Conn
ty Treasury. Mr.. Street knows that there are a
score of good men in this county ready and aux


ious to take the Sheriff7s office, with the condi-
ton that they receive no pay for keeping the
jail We venture to say that Sheriff Stockton
would not to-day sell out his interest in the
Sheriifalty-for the remaining siz months of his
term, for the sum of $1,000, though he has to
keep the jail without pay.


But the most Objectionable feature of the bill,
las we understand it, for our representative has
never afforded his constituents an opportunity
OF seeing copy of bill in which they are so
Immediately interested,) is the provision for le-
CALLING some three thousand dollars worth of
scrip illegally issued to Ex-Sherif Drebelbs
for keeping the Jail. The Supreme Court has
pronounced this sort of scrip Illegal null and
void. The Supreme Court has said in effect that
Sheriff Dreibelbis had no right to present an ac-
count for keeping the Jail, that there was no law
for any such charges, and tkat scrip issued to
him in payment of such services was of less
value than the blank paper upon which it was
written or printed. Mr.. Streets bill proposes to
override this decision of the Supreme Court
and create, for the tax payers of Shasta county,
debt which the Supreme Court says does not
now exist Is it any wonder that property hol-
ders feel outraged at the passage of such bill
through the Assembly Is it not monstrous that
the Assembly,-that Legislators from San Diego
and Del Norte and San Francisco, for instance,
will attempt TO create debt for Shasta county,
out of scrip illegally issued two years ago for
services which the law required to be performed
by the Sheriff without pay


Suppose the Board of Supervisors were to is
sue scrip to the County Clerk, at the rate of five
dollars per day, for the service of keeping safely
the County records. Or suppose they were to
issue S5O,oOO worth of scrip for any illegal pur-
pose. The Supreme Court would declare it il
legal. Could legislative act make it binding
upon the County to pay that illegal scrip? We
think not If not, then Mr.. Streets bill will
not stand the test before the Supreme Court.