Thompson v. Rowe
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, for Sacramento County. ■ On the 22d of December, 1851, Rowe filed his petition, stating that he was owner of warrant No. 177, drawn by the auditor of Sacramento County on the county treasurer, for $1192.70, for work on prison ship, in favour of one Gale, or order, and by him indorsed; dated August 1st, 1850, and noted by the treasurer on the same day, “ not paid, for want of fundsthat the warrant was duly…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, for Sacramento County. ■ On the 22d of December, 1851, Rowe filed his petition, stating that he was owner of warrant No. 177, drawn by the auditor of Sacramento County on the county treasurer, for $1192.70, for work on prison ship, in favour of one Gale, or order, and by him indorsed; dated August 1st, 1850, and noted by the treasurer on the same day, “ not paid, for want of fundsthat the warrant was duly registered, &c.; that on the day of filing the petition, the plaintiff presented the warrant to Rowe, then treasurer, and…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Heydenfeldt
The act concerning courts of justice and judicial officers, passed March 11th, 1851, confers general powers of taxation and ap propriation upon the Court of Sessions, for County purposes. *71But in relation to the taxes of the present (current) year, it specially directs, that one half shall be set aside and applied to the payment of any county indebtedness then existing.
This provision is a rule for the government of the county treasurer : and after the application of one half of the revenue for the year, in the payment of indebtedness existing at the time of the passage of the act, the other…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McDonald v. MadduxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858