The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, August 11, 1897, Page 12

12 THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1897. REFORNS FIR THE SCHONIS Joint Meeting of the Direc- tors and the Charter Committee. STATUS OF TEACHERS DISCUSSED. Should the Board of Education Be Elected or Ap- pointed? AGED TEACHERS T0 FE PENSIONED. Fred Campbell Lifts Up His Voice in Defense of Some New Textbooks, The sub-commiitee on schools of the charter committee held a Imeeting last night in the rooms of the Board of Ed cation for conference with the board on the subject of the school provisions of the proposea charter. School Direct Derham opened the discussion by saying that anything jast and iair would be suitable and satisiac- tory. Laws should be formulated so that all advancements in the department should be based on abiiity and experience —on civil service rules. New teachers should be chosen by competitive examina- tion. He believed also that the Board of Edu- cation shouid not be elected. The mem- bers shouid be appointed and thatsix members would be sufficient. He favored also rotation in office. He would not have the six members go in at one time. The Board of Education should deal with matters of education only «ud have do with the erectiom of school the rey to the same. Director Waller remarked that the rea- son he would give would bte that peda- gogues were pedantic; they were confined within narrow channeis; they were not broad minded. Experience in the public schools of the East showed that business ability was required in a board of educa- tion. “I deny the statement in regard to the Eastern schools,” said Mr. O’Connor. Mr. Waller took a iresh hold and went achers should be retired on sions after having passed a certain ag. I believe aiso,” continued Mr. Waller, growing eloquent, “that teachers shouid be required to pass an examination every five y to see if they have kept up with their work. Otherwise they would get into one groove and iall behind the prog- ress of the age. There should be no graded schools. The same teacher shouid take the same class from the tegiuning unul they get out of the grammar school, and then go back fora new class in the pri- mary grades, Director Armer presented the following plan: pen- osed of Mayor without re ta district. er and heads of five Directors ap- ard to poli- 3. To . for Bervices. suitable compensation ve 1d oftice for four years. Those first d to be retired by lot as follows: One of office at_end of first year, one at ear, one at end of third year t of fourth year. Three to constitute a quorum. sessions public; records of proceed- 4 books in general to be open 10 public tiou . Power to employ, pay and dismiss teach- and office employes and rccommend the fixing and altering of their salaries to board having jurisdiction over same, 8. No teacher to be dismissed except for s red by toe State law (1791), and iair . Teachers to be regularly elected from a sucstitute list in the order in which they are on the substitute list. Teachers to be placed on the substitute list in the order and according to the percentuge received upon competitive examination of those hoiding teachers’ certificates. 10. Subst e list for day schools to consist of thirty-five. List to be replenished when it falls below twent 1X. 11. Board of examiners to consis o heads of depariments of pedagogy at Stanford and Uni- versity of Caiifornis, two principals of San Francisco schools (with salary), and Superin- tendent of Schools (without extra salary), 12. board of Education not to employ janitors, shopmen her employes o de- partment except teacters and office employes, and to attend striciiy to educational maiters or o 13. A Board of Public Works to have charge of all expenditures for buildings, supplies, etc.,, receiving recommendations from the Board of Education. 14. Board of Education to have power to grant and revoke teachers' cerificales; to establish and enforce all necessary rules for the government of the schools; to investigate charges against any person connected wiih or in the employ of the School Department; io administer oatis nnd take testimony in the conduct of such investigations. 15. To adopt and reject text books, not to be changed in four years, and then only if found 10 be deficient. 16. Vice-principals. Vacanc: ‘n position of vice-principal to be filled by se:tor teacher in point of service at the schocl in question, pro- vided said tencher has a life diploms_indicat- ing ten vears' or more experience. If senior teacher has no life diploma vacancy to be filled by competitive examination of senior teachers of other schools having such diploma. Vacancy in principalship to be filled by principal of same school. If school has rincivel, then by competitive ex- amination of vice-principais of other schools who wish to compete. 18. No teacher to be transferred from a school where she has taught for oue year or more except with her consent. A general discussion followed on the subject of the election of the board by the people and their appointment by the Mayor. It was argued that the Mayor (any Mayor) might be a partisan and might appoint a strictly partisan board, while on the other nand it was concedea that the present mode of election was partisan also. NEW TEXTBOOKS. Fred Campbell Defends Them on Educational and Literary Grounds. itor Call: In the excited discussion of any subject the necessarily imperiect presentation of some of the points occurring in such dis- cussion generally, if not inevilably, results in much serious misapprehension of iacts. A couple of paragraphs in an article in to-day's (Sunday’s) CALL furnishes a case in pomt, and, a8 my mname occurs in these vparegraphs, 1 respectfully crave space for such a statement as shall tend to correct otherwise unfortunate misapprehen- sions. Such siatement, moreover, wili be but a simple act of justice to a preceding Boerd of Ed ucation, to ieachers, to the Superintendent and 1o the general public, as well as to the great company which Ihave the honor to rep- Tecent here in the State of California. Reterence is herein had to those paragraph in the ariicle on page sixteen of Sund CALL in which Brander Matthews’ “Introduc- tion to the Study of American Literature” snd clect American Classics” are mentioned. (Copiesof these two books are sent for your inspection with this commuuicalion, an with the hope that you will read at leu; o four or five pages of introduction to Professor Matthews’ boOK.) THE NEW (OR REVISED) SERIES OF STATE READERS Were limited in number to three books (first, second and third readers) for use in the pri- Tincy snd lower grammar grades. This limita- tion, it is to be presumed, was in accordance with an educational creed now universally ac- cepted, to wit: that the reading in the upper eraminar grades (say the last two)shouid be something d flereni—something better—than tle scrapp lections which make up the bulk of tne regular Schoo Rv-uders~sho\}’|d be, in other woids, “continuous readings;’ and that these readings, moreover, should be from udard authors. 0w, what books should be selected to thus compléte, in_ these two higher grades, the course in reading and literature, ot which the State Readers form the earlier part? This Juestion was an important one, because the Jaws of Catifornia provide (P. C. Sec. 1874) hat any books once adopied as part of a uniform series must be continued in use not less than four years,” und the law then further snecifies ali the necessary steps for making changes. The Board of Education which colved this question for the San Francisco schools was composed of the following well-known citizens: Henry L. Dodge, Wiiliam F. Ambrose, Emmet T. Barrett, Thomas R. Carew, Dr. Charles A. Clinton, A. Comte Jr., Charles H. Hawley, H. C. Henderson, Andrew McEiroy, Charles'A. Murdock and Henry T. Scoit. Action was finally had in the premises ata regular meeting of the boird at which all the members wers present, held on the evening of November 25, 1896, by the unanimous adoption of the following preambles and resolutions which were presentea by Director Charles A. Murdock: “WHEREAS: 1. The State Series of Readers were lutentionally limited to the lower grades of toe grammar schools, and no books on literature and reading having yet bren adopted or provided for in tbe seventh and eighth grades: 2. Tne editors of the State Readers strongly mend the books named hereafter as most admirably adapied to supplemeni the State readers ia these grades: “:3. The school course of most of our pupils ends with the grammar school snd it is, therefore, very important. as affecung their future reading, that they <houid at least be introduced, as is 30 admi bly done in these books, to those authors and their works whose writings have so largely influenced our thought and chsracter as a Nation, and thu be stimulated and inspired with a taste for the bestliterature, which shall render uupa atable and distatefol the trashy and demoralizing reading which, unfortunately, Is so bountifaliy prepared therefore be 1t Glved: 1. That Brauder Matthews' ‘Intro- uto the Study of American Literature’ be heréby adopted as a textbook for n the seventh-grade classes of the schools in ihis department; 2. Toai ‘Select American Classics’ be and the same is hereby adop.ed asa reading-book in the Lauds of the pupils of the eighth-grade classes, the same to be critically read sna studied in class iu counectiou with the aunotatious. 3, That both LOOKS go luto_use at the opening of the school tern in January, 189 4. That the Superintendent ot <chools {s hereby insiructed Lo give promp: notice of this action to principals and to teachers of the grades named, (0 the eud that they may be prepared. in advance, to take up the work immediately and intell gentiy at tue opening of the next school term, in January, 1 Thal the publishers of sald books be and are hiereby required to enter into contract, within fivedays after the adopiion of this resolution, and give good and sufficient bonds that the books fur- ished shall aiways be in accordance wiih samples submitted, and that the prices shall at no time dur- iug the term of legal adoption be advanced from the present prices, to wit: One (1) dollar for the Amer- ican Literature. and sixty (60) cents for ‘~elect American Classics.’ " These prices are always the “list prices,” from which dealers are allowed a disconntof i 10 per nt if purchasing from the jobbers | here in San Francisco, or 20 per cent if pur- chasing dircet from the purchasers in the E s of the books named, let it be under- stood, had been in the hands of ail thein- dividual Direciors for a long time, ana_their own good opinions of them had beeo re-en- forced by tne written indorsements (copies sent herewith) of many San Francisco prin. | cipals and o hers who had examined or had | ed the books., They were further re-enforced by an opinfou of the editors of the Revised tate Keaders and the Revised State Gram- themseives, as most gracefuily expressed by Miss Anna C. Murphy (and concurred in by her assoeiate, Mrs. George, and by the editor- | in-chief, Mr. W. H. V. Raymond) as follows: “I am entirely pleased with Mr. Brander Mat- thews’ little book, *An_Introduction{o American | Literature.’ not only for the grace and ease of the xuthor's Style—wnicu wouid carry one if his theme were -Patent Office Keports'—but for the | #bsorping i [ atter chosen, the unerring s presenting salient poinis, the suggesiive ¢ 5 of the reiationsand affini- | of the 1t men and their works and | 5 > sturdy Americanism which | ie docirine of our National independ- | terature. Maithews had worked in conjunction ditors of the ‘Revised California Read- 1d Grammar’ he could not have prepared a more to their liking to put into the hands of pupis In the eighth and ninth grades of our | schiols, 1o supplement the extracis, amplily the biographles and strengihen the literary perspec- tive of these textbooks.” Among the many other expressions of fa- | vorable opinion considered by the board were the following from Earl Barnes, professor of education :n Stanford University; Mr. James A. Barr_of Stockton, well known s one of the most efficient and painstaking school super- intendents in this State; Professor Pennell, president of the State Normal School at Chico} and the veteran school superintendent J. B. Brown of Humboldu County. Professor Earl Barnes said : “I was very glad to see Brander Matthews’ little book, ‘An lutroduction to the Study of American Literature, and | have read it with very great pleasure. Auything to which Brander Matilews puts his name is sure to be good, and this little book s no disappointment 1he book will not take the piace of the siudy of American literacure, but {¢ wili give a seiting and unity to such frag- menizry studies as can be made In our pubilc schools, and will prove a real boon 10 seuchers and students aiike. The selection of authors pleases me. “The Introduction isa large and inspiring out- look, and our American boys aud eirls of the graw mar grades and in (he high schooi, who have this little book in their hands and work it through uuder the guidance of Intetligent teachers, supple- menting it with readings rom the works' treated iu this ifctle volume, wil have an intelligent and worthy understanding of that part of our civiliza- tion wiich IS more worthy of our pride than our in- dustrial development or our politics. May all suc- cess attend the book. 5 “ihe litile book, ‘Select American Classics,’ covering extracis from irving Webster and Em- erson, covers anything of obje tion that I may have had in my mind to Krander Matthews’ little book. His work, used with such selections as | these, wiil give Young Amerl asach « sense of | our literature and such a foundation for Amerk can patriotism as past generations have never had.” Superintendent Barr wrote: “For several years T have been on the lookout for & text on American lirerature within the com- prehension of grammar-crade pupils. Last year the book was found. Brander Matthews in his ‘1ntroduction to the Study of American Litera- ture’ has given us a beok interesting. concise and adapted 10 grammar-grade work. Since its intro- duction on the Pacific Coast It has been in uss as & texibook in the highest gram uar grade (eighth | grade) of the ~t.ckion schools.- The book has stood Lhe test of actusl use in our schuols. “With this book ia the hands of our puplls, sup- plemented with rexdings from books su.gested therein, our boys and giris are eaving the grammar grades with a better understanding and higher ap- preciation of American literature than ever be- fore.” Professor Pennell stated “When I first saw Brander Matthews’ ‘Introduc- tion to the Siudy of Literature,’ I was o pleased witn it that I determined Lo test it in the class- room, and have myselfgone over it witn a clsgs, The book is all that is claimed for it—and more too. I rarely commend & Loog highly, but this comes 50 newly the fdeal book of its sort that I am glad to write thus about it.” Superintendent J. B. Brown bore testimony as tollows: ‘‘We are nsing Brander Matthews' ‘Introduction to the Study of American ! ierature’ as a text- boOk in this county, with great pleasure and with great success. Ali the teactiers snd pupils 1ike it, and take deligh in reading and studylag the book. 1t is creating real live interest in the study of ‘American auchors and their works.” The action of the San Francisco board in the adoption of these two books is, moreover, thoroughly vindicated by the unanimity with which similar action is being uud by other boards ot education, among which are those the cities of Los Angeles, Oakland, Stockton; the counties of San Diego, Fresno, Del Norte, Santa Cruz, Los Angelesand a score of others. Now, in conclusion, let me say thatit was not necessary for me, as suggested in Sunday's CALL, nor, indeed, for any one eise at this time, to “insist that these books shall be used.” The State law insists upon that, and thus protects parents, the schools and the children against the change of them for any others, as it does against the change of any and ali books once adopied until the inpse of four yenrs from the date of such adoption, and even then only “by competent authority and in accordance with all the forms of law in such cases made and provided.” Furthermore, I have yet to near of one sin- gle parent of any children, either of the two upper grades of the grammar schools of this City, from the date of the adoption of these books for use therein—nesrly oue year sgo— until to-day, objscting to their purchase; nor has word of any such complaint come to my knowledge from any other place where they have goie into use, The books themselves furnish the best possible excuse and argument for their adoption tor use in that portion of the curricuium of the grammar &chool, and in thatsubject, for which books of some kind had i0 b: adopted. These books are weicome guests in every family into which they go, and prove of great interest and profit 1o, every member of such family. e Thanking you in advance for the courtesy which I hope you will extend in the publica- tion of this communication, I am, most sin. cerely yours, FRED M, CAMPBELL. WHELAN REFUSES 10 OBEY Declines to Cause the Ar- rest of Examiner De- fendants. RELIES ON A PECULIAR OPINION. Advised Contrary to the Law as Interpreted by the Superior Court, CLAUS SPRECKELS AFTER HEARST. Scene at the County Olerk's Office. Default Entered Against Wil- liams and Aiken. A default has been entered in the Supe- rior Court against two of the defendants in the =uits of Ciaus Spreckels against Hearst, Williams, Lawrence and Aiken. The chief counsel for Hearst, in his haste to get an extension of time for defendants to answer certain questions before the notary, got his papers oi application mixed, and hence extension was not al- lowed in a case against Williams and in a case against Aiken. At the expiration of the time designated Messrs. Johnson, Lin- forth and Whittaker had the default en- tered. Counsel for the Examiner at- tempted to bulldoze the County Clerk’s deputy as they did Notary Craig and bis bondsmen, but the scheme failed to ter- rify. In his rage one of the Examiner lawyers grabbed a paper of record and changed the number thereon, but the clerk at once made an indorsement on the paper of the change. The decree, how- ever is entered and cannot be set aside exceot by the court. Hearst now fully comprehends that he has run up against a man who will stand | no nonsense. For a time his lawyers may keep him out of court by such tactics as changing papers of record and threaten- ing officers of the law, but ultimatelv he will be brought to justice. Claus Spreck- els did not institute the libel suit for pas- time. He means straight business. Yesterday Reddy, Campbell & Metson advised Sherift Whelan that Notary Craig bad no power to commit Lawrence and Williams for contempt, and so the Sheriff declined to arrest the defendants. This refusal on the part of the Sheriff to arrest the defendants may cause some delay in getting the true issue before the court, | and may develop another issue on the side, but the side issues will not obscure the main point. No doubt the opinion handed down by Patrick Reddy is acceptable to the de- fendants. The advice which Reddy gave to the Sheriff was not unexpected in the office of tae plaintiff’s counsel, and surely no one of Hearst’s counsel was surprised. It may be surmised that Dick Whelan hfmself was not overcome with astonish- ment. The fact that Reddy, Campbell & Metson in the Weinstock vs. McClatchy libel suit advanced the doctrine that a notary had power to punish witnes«es for contempt shows that the firm, having decided both ways, Is bound to be right in one decision at least, and is, therefore, not surprising. In view of the opinion which Reddy, Campbetl & M:tson rendered to the Sneriff, and which is published herewith, it is interesting to note the decision ren- dered by the Superior Court of Sacra- mento County in the Weinstock-Mc- Clatchy case. In thatsuit this law firm, now the adviser of tne Sheriff of San Francisco, was the counsel of record for the plaintiff McClatehy. Elaborate argu- ment was made to convince the court that the notary had power to punish for con- tempt, and the court, hearing the argu- ment and considering the numerous au- thorities presented, rendered this deci- sio I them must conclude, the high authority given, that notaries have power under our statutes to punish for contempt a witness who refuses to an. swer a question proper to be asked. The lawyers employed to advise the Sheriff were not led into ambush. The brief which Johnson, Linforth & Whit- aker hauded over to Reddy, Campbell & Metson contained a citation of the Sacra- mento case, and Mr. Reddy knew, when he advised the Sheriff that notaries had no power to punish for contempt, thata decision to the contrary had been ren- dered in a case in which his firm was counsel of record, and in which a client of the firm gained the point at issue. The weakness of the Sheriff will not change the determination of Claus Spreckels’ counsel to bring Hearst into court, A way may be found to bring the case before the Superior Court on a pro- ceeding of another kind, and when ail the facts are presented the court may decide that a notary has power to punish for contempt and that the Sheriff's neglect to | arrest the defendants for refusing to an- swer proper questions constituted neglect in the performance of his official duties. Section 772 of the Penal Code provides this remedy: When an accusation in writing, verified by the oath of any person, is presented to & Su- perior Court, alleging that any officer within the jurisdiction of the court has been guilty of cherging and collecting illegal fees for ser- vices rendered, or to be rendered, in his office, or has refused’ or neglected to perform the official duties pertaining to his office, the court must cite the party charged to appear belore the court at a time not more than ten nor less than five days from the time the ac- cusation was presented, and on that day, or some other subsequent day not more than twenty days from that on which the accusa- tion was presented, must proceed to hear, ina summary manner, the accusation and the evi- dence offcred in support of the same, and the answer and evidence offered by the party ac- cused; and if, on such hearing, it appears that the charge is sustained, the court must enter a decree that the party accused be de- prived of his office, and must en‘er a judg. ment for $500 in fuvor of the informer, and | #uch costs as are allowed in civil cases (Amendments approved April 12, 1880; vl-gg;)n;‘lmenu 1880, 33. In effect April 12, | Hearst is making the fight of his iife to escape service in these libel suits insti- tuted by Claus Spreckels, He dreads the | from | { ordeal of facing in a court of justice the reputable and hirh-minded citizen whose personal and commercial character he has assailed. He reles on his azents, backed by counsel and the terror which ke fancies that his California paper can produce, to frighten notaries, alarm Sheriffs and in- timidate officers in the discharge of pub- licduty. He has had a long career of success in escaping the full measure of responsibility for the conduct of his paper. It happens now that he has a man to deal with who possesses firmness of character and whose career has not the slightest stain of scandal. The old and familiar tactics of digging up some unpleasant feature of the past to frighten the plaintiff cannct be employed. The plaintiff is not a candidate for public office. He has no ambitions for Hearst to shatter, He rec- ognizes it to be his duty to protect his personal characte r and his commercial in- tegrity from aseault in the public press. He has chosen to go into court for the r dress, and if the law has not lost its force in the land he will bring his defamer to the bar of justice. Many citizens of prominence and char- acter who have heen assailed in the same manner that Mr. Spreckels was attacked take a deep interest in the pending proceedings. They note the attempt to buily and frichten the notary. One man was frightened and with- drew from the bond of the notary. A scone was made rt the County Clerk’s office because a decree of default was en- tered against two of the defendants. The Sheriff accepts a weak opinion an ex- cuse for refusing to perform his duty. Men of characterand thought reflect when they observe this falling down and ask if the law isat fault or if the fault is with those elected or appointed to enforce the law. Hearst’s conduct is regarded as cowardly in the extreme. His counsel and his em- ployes have implored him to accept serv- ice and make his fight in court, but he still shrinks from tte responsibility ana fears to authorizo anybody to represent him. He has acquired residence in New York ana fancies that he can slander mer- chants in San Francisco at his pleasure. Following is the text of the opinion which Patrick Reddy gave to the Sheriff yesterday: SAN FraNcrsco, Cal., August 10, 1897, Richard I. Whelan, Sheriff of the City and County of San_Francisco, New City Hall, City— DrpAR SIR: We have examined the commit- ment and warrant of arrest of T. T. Williams, and also the commitmentand warrantof ar- rest of A. Lawrence, issued in the case of Spreckels vs. Hearst et al, by Lee D. Craig, no- tary public, and piaced in your hands for ser- | vice, and in answer to your questions: | "1.’Hus & notary public jurisdiction or au- thority to issue such a warrant? and 2. Is it your duty under the law to execute such & warrant? We have 1o say: In answer to your firstques- tion, it isour opinion that a noiary public has no such authority. In Lezynsky vs. Superior Court, 72 Csl., 512, the court held tuat the Superior Court had no pOWeT to punish & person forcontempt because he hed refused ‘to obey the subpena of a notary public, and had refused to answer, for the reason that such acts did not constitute a | contempt of court, or were not with'n the pro- visions of subdivision 10 of section 1209 of the Code of Civil Procedure, defining contempt of ; that that piovision of the law has re‘erence to courls of justice and not to notaries, and that if such scts constituted a contempt, it was of the notary, and not of the | court, We think it should go without saying that & notary public has no power to punisn for a contempt of court. The court itself can attesd 10 such matters withoul the aid of a notary | pub ic. We do not find—after what we conceive to be & thorough examination—any law defining such an offcuse as contemplof & notary pub- lic, and we apprehend that before & notary public can convict and punish he must find some express authority for the exercise of such an extraordinary power. | In the case lastcited the court declines to | decide whether a notary has power to punish for contemnvt, for the reasou. evidently, that that question was not involved. The only question there was whether the Superior Court had power to punish as a con- tempt the acts described. The authority of the notary to issue a sup- pena requiring attendance before him for the purpose of taking a deposition is found in subdivision 2 of section 1986 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and is given to notaries in common with all officers authorized toad- minister oaths or to take testimony in any matter under the laws of this State. Under section 2031 of the Code of Civil Pro- cedure: “Either party may have the deposi- tion taken of a witness in this State * * x before a Judge or officer authorized to admin- ister oaths.” From this it will be seen that a deposition may be taken before any officer authorized: to administer oaths. Who are authorized to administer oaths? “Every court, every Judge, or clerk of any court, every Justice, and every notary public end évery officer or person authorized to take testimony in any action or proceeding, or to decide upon evidance, has power to adminis ter oaths or affirmations.” (C. C. P., section 2093.) cuion 1028 of the Political Code providet ery executive and judicial officer may aa- minister and certify oaths.” Under these provisions every public officer in this Stete, irom the highest to the lowest, has authority to tuke depositions. Under scction 2031, C. C. P., a notary public is not glven any higher or greater power or authority in respect to iaking a deposition than the lowest execut ve officer in the State. The party has the right toselect from all of these oflicers the one before whom the deposi- tion shul: De taken. “And if a party selects, out of the officers before whom depositions may be taken, one who canzot punish for contempt, he puts him- self, so far as that method of enforcing the at- tendance of his witnesses is concerned, out of the reach of legislative grace, and must rely upon the provisions that the discbedient wit- ness forfeits to the aggrieved party $100 and | all damages sustained by his failure to atiend, | and that,'if he be a party, his complaint or answer may be stricken out.” (Lezynsky v. Superior Court, 72 Cal., 512.) From this language it plainly appears to us that there are officers authorized to take depo- sitions who have not the power to punish for contemot. This must be so, or else every of- ficer, judicisl or executive, from the highest to the lowest, would heve 'the power to try and convict the citizen snd deprive him of his liberty. Section 1991, C. C. P., provides: “Disobedi- ence toa subpenn, or & refusal to be sworn, of toanswer as a witness, or to subscribe an ai- fidavit or deposition waen required, may be runlshed a8 u contempt by the court or officer tsuing the suopena or requiring the witness to be sworn; and if the witness be a party his complaint or answer may be stricken out. It may be punished as a coniempt by the court or officer issuing the suopena or requir- ing the witness to be sworn, previded (he officer is authorized by law to punish for con- tempt, but, as said above, many officers may issue subpenas who are not authorized 10 punish for contempt. Executive officers in this State haye no such power. Section 1993, C. C. P., provides: “In case of failure of & witness to attend the court or officer issuing the subpena, upon proof of the service thereof, and of the failure of the wit~ ness, may issue a warrant to the Sheriff ot the county 10 arrest the witness and bring him before the court or officer where his attend- ance was required.” This sectiou should be read with the same proviso—that the officer who issued the sub- pena had authority to punish for contempt. We do not think that it was the intention of the Legislature by the enactment of sections 1986, 1991 and 1993 of the Code of Civil Pro- cedure to confer upon execative officers the power to exercise judicial functions involving ihe liberty of the citizen. If, however, It was the intention of the Leg- islature to confer by these sections authority upon every officer, executive or judicial, o punish for contempr, it exceeded its consti- tutional power and such legisiation was void. Section 1 of article 1II o the constitution of the State of California reads as foilows: “The powers of the government of the State of Calitornia shall be divided into three sepa- rate depariments—the legislative, executive and judicial; and no person charged with the exercise of powers properly belonging to one of these departments shall exercise functions appertaining to either of the others, except as in this constitution expressly directed or per- mitted.” A notary public is not a jndicial officer, and the Legisiature cannot take the judicial power from the courts, where it bas been vested by the constitution, and confer it upon notaries public or other executive officers. To decide upon the legaiity or pertinency of evidence is the exercise of judicial functions. Section 1 of Article VI of our constitution reads: “The judicial power of the State sha.l be vested in ‘the Senate sitting as a court of impeachment, in a Supreme Court, Superior Courts, Justices of the Peace and such inferior courts as the Legislature may establish in any incorporated city or town, or city and county.” The constitution having vested the judicial power of the State in the courts and boaies mentioned, it must there remain, and the Leg- islature has no power over it. The constitu- tion has intrusted the life, liberty and prop- erty of the citizen to these tribunals and not to notaries public or other executive officers. This question has been so ably and fully dis- cussed 1n_a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Kansas that we deem it unnecessaiy, in support of this proposition, to do moreé than quote some of the language of that de- cision. In In re Huron, 48 Pacific Reporter, 574 et seq.. ilis sal an tue notary exercise the power which the statute purports to confer? It must be couceded that to try a guestion of contempt and adjudge punishment is an exercise of judicial power. Has that hign judicial func- ton been vesied in notaries public? A mn- jority of the court are of the opinion that they are not judicial officers and cannot arrest and punish for contemp._ Tue view of the court is that the whole judiciai power of the State is vested by ‘the constitution, and can only be vested, in such tribunals as are therein’ prescribed. It provides that ‘the judicial power of this State shall be vested in a Supreme Court, District courts, Probaie courts, Justices of the Peace and such other courts inferior to the Supreme Court as may be prescribed by law.’” [Cons!., Art. 3, Sec. 1. 1t will be observed that the judicial poweris placed in the courts express'y wentioned, and any inferior courts that may be created by the Legislature, but is lodged in courts alone. Uutil a tribunal {is created which rices to the dignity of a court it cannot be vested with judicial power. A notary public is not a_ court the sense in which the term is used in the constitution. He is simply an executive officer, who is chosen with reference to the duties to be performed by officers of that class. No limit is placed upon the number that the Goy- ernor may appoint in a county. * * * These duties, inciuding the mere taking of testi- mony by deposition, are not judicial in their character, and in the commercial world a no- tery has been regarded ss a judicial officer. While the taking of testimony is incidental to a judicial proceeding, the notary, in teking the deposition, is not required to determine the relevancy and competency of tesiimouv, but simply writes ana_authenticates the testi- mony given, with such objections as the par- ties desire to make. * * * Up to the time of the refusal of the witness. at least, the notary was only an executive officer, and was exer- cising executive power. 1Theie is no such thing as contempt of executive authority which is punishable.” In support of this doctrine the court cites: Whitcomb’s case, 120 Mass., 180; ex parte Doll, 7 Philus., 595, Fed. case 3968; in re Ma- son, 43 Fed., 510; in re Kerrigan, 33 N. J. Law, 844 ; Rhinehurt vs. Lance, 43 N. J. Law, 311. It is ulso said in this case; ‘‘The atiempt of the Legislature to confer judicial power on a mere executive officer of the Government must be deemed to be invalid, As was said in Langenberg vs. Decker (ind. Sup.), 31 N. E., 190: ‘The authority to imprison resides where the constitution piaces it, and the Legis'ature cannot give it residence elsewhere. ‘lhe au- thoriiy 18 essentially & judicdal oue, abiding in the courts of the landa. As it is a {:xdicial power it is not created by the egislature nor vested in thatbody. * * <« Judicial power, like all sovereign powers, comes from the people, and vests where the i people’s constitution directs that it shall vest, The Legislature may name tribunals that s hall exercise judiclal powers, unless the constitu- tion otherwise provices, but the power itself comes from tne constitution and not irom the statute.’ See also Eastman vs. State, 109 Ind., 278, 10 N, E., 97; Lezyn<ky vs. Superior Court, 72 Cal., 510, 14 Pac., 104. For these reasous it must be held that a notary public is not a judicial officer, and has not been vested with power to commit and punish for contempt.” We have reached the counclusion that No- tary Lee D. Craig had no jurisdiction to issue the warrahts above referred to,and if you should execute those warranis you would be a wrongdoer. (Ald:rsonon Judicial Writs and Process, pp. 459-460.) In answer to the second question we advise you to decline to serve or execute said war- rans, and to return the same to Mr. Craig, the notary. Yours respeciiuily, REDDY, CAMPBELL & METSON. Dead in the Sand Dunes. Yesterday afternoon Aaron Brooks, the hermit of the sand dunes, while wandering over the waste where he has chosen to live out his life, found the body of an unknown man. The body was in an_advanced stage o!f decomposition. Beside it lay a large revolver, one chamber empty, and a bullet-hole in the skull told the story of a su.cide. The boay was attired in a black coat and vest, light tweed trousers and a brown Fedora bat. The old hermit notified the coroner of his find and the body was removed to the Morgue. —_—nn——— - — — NEW TO-DAY. | it. Oceans of talk plainer. & Bazaar premises. S. | (Columbian Woolen § REMOVAL SALE. Good clothing, fashionable clothing, suits, overcoats, trousers—selling for actual cost of manufacture (and in some cases less | than cost)—that’s the long and short of won’'t make it any We must and will clear out all goods | before we move into the Golden Rule N. WOOD & CO. Mills), 541 Market st NEW DRESS FABRICS! FALL 1897. During the past week we have re- ceived several large latest styles COLO DRESS FABRICS shipments of the RED and BLACK for this season’s wear, and invite special attention to the following VERY CHOICE GOODS. 5 CASES TAILOR-MADE SUITINGS in Melton- ettes, Whipcords and Redferns, all the very latest fall shades. 1 CASE NOVELTY FRENCH PLAIDS, all the new colorings and a great variety of styles. 2 CASES BLACK FRENCH PIREOLA SUIT- INGS, in a large assortment of new designs. 3 CASES BLACK TWINE CHEVIOTS, new styles. CGrnois ORPORAY, < 1892, 0 G 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 121 POST STRE&{, AT AUCTION TUESDAY. TUESDAY AUGUST 17, 1897, At 12 o’clock noon, AT OUR SALESROOM, 638 MARKET SI., Opposite Palace Hotel, San Francisca. Elegant Western Addition Home. NW. corner (No. 2900) Bush and Lyon sts. elegant modern residence of 16 Tooms and bat house finished in natural woods; porcelain batl elegant b.lliard-room: 'ot 25x76 feet. Term: Cash above mortgage 0f $5000. == | Western Addition Investment. E- line (No. 804 to No. §12) Webster st., 25 feet N. of Fulton: improvemen_s consist of 5 cottages of 4 and 5 rooms and bath esch: rents $100 per | month; lot 95 feet front by irregular depth. H Hayes-Street Residence. N.line (No. 806) Haves st., 75:5 feet W. of Webster; 2-story bay-window house of 8 rooms | ard batn; elegantly finished throughout: lot 26x | 100 feet. s Western Addition Cottage. ' N.line (2826) Bush st., 100 feet E. of Lyon: bay-window cot:ages 6 rooms, bath, lsundry - 1o 25X125 feet. Terms: 14 cash, baiance 1, % and § years, 7 per cent. Corner Residence, Western Addition, SE. corner Golden Gate ave. and Scott st.—3- story bay-window house of 9 rooms and bath; 10t | 25x109:6. Golden Gate Avenue Investment, N. line (No. 728) Golden Gate ave, 137:6 E. of Gough st.—Doubie house, with store and iiving- rooms below: 8 rooms ana bath above; rents for $51; lot 27:6x120 through o £lm ave. Mission Improved Property. SE. corner Nineteenth and Hartford sts.—Im- provem-nts, 3 houses; corner house 8 rooms and 2 cottages of 5 and 3 rooms each; lot 76x86, Richmond Cottage. 8. 1tne (No. 1917) Point Lobos ave., 107:6 W, of 8th ave.—Cottage of 6 rooms and bath; stable for 2 horses; lot 25x100. Mission Cottage. 8. line (No. 543) Laidley st., 122:11 NE. v{,haw ne ot Cs Cotiage of 8 room: '::nt:: rom living sprin 0 Mateo electric- Castro-st. cable; lot 50x10C feet. e Inside Property. NW. line (No. 32) Perry st.. 107:8 feet NF. ;m:l 8d st.—2 houses, front and rear: lot 20x80 eel EASTON, ELDRIDGE & CO., Office and Salesrooms 638 Market St. (Opposite Palace Ho.e'.) DR. WONG WOO, CHINI'EE PHYSICIAN AND / surgeon, graduate of the most famous medical coliege in China. bas practiced his profession in nKrancisco for over twenty years with warked success. Thou. 8ands of patients testity o hs skill and knowledge. Nature's own medicines used. Mo minerals. He, cures, not attempts to cure, Kheus matism. Puraivsis, Piles, Dyspep. sia. Consumption. Asthma, Bright's and all Kid- ney DI!_'!I% Biindness. Heart Disease, Diseases of the Throat, Cancer, Tumors and Blood and ~kn Diseases Male and fem«! maladie c- cessively treated and cured. Consultation free. :):;C:;;'lz;l,.y .th‘ Where he may be consuited at e ring the day or eve:in, B 10114 M. 1330 (o Thod p e > Hour—:30 | some street. Menard Women SHOULD USE DAMIANA BITTEES, THE great Mexican Remedy: Health and Birength to the Sexual Ofgans © " Dr. Martin’s GhEAT PAIN GOR A preventive and cure for Rheu- matism, Neuralgis, Pains in Gen- eral, Dyspeps! Sore Throat, Pneumonia, Nervous, Liver and Kidney Complaints, Backache, Burns, Swellings, Colds, Coughs. Colic, Cramps, Bprains, Bruises ‘Wounds, Indigestion, Skin Dis- oases, Excessive Itching and many other complaints. Price: 25c¢, 50c, $! Per Bottle. L. CALLISCH, Wholesale Agent for the Pacific Coast, San Jose, Cal. For sale by all druggists. The trade supplied by Redington & Co., Mack & gioA and Langley & Michae! n Fran- isco. REFEREE'S SALE OF REAL ESTATE, Y VIRTUE OF TWO DECREES OF THE Superior Court_1n and for the City and County of San Francisco, State of California (Depsriment No. 10), the first of which decrees whs made and is dated the 22d day of November, 1895, and the second of which decrees was made and Is da ed the 25¢h day of June, 1897, 2nd both 0f which de- crees were made and entered in an action pe ding in said Superior Court, whereln Adsm Grant s plainiiff and Danfel T. Murphy and others are de- fendants, being case No. 49,033 in the said cou: the undersigned, who was by said court appoint referes in said action, will sell & public auction, at the auction-rooms of 6. H. Umbsen & Co., 14 Hontgomery St in sald City and County of Ssn franclsce, Thl:.ldfl)'. l{lt 2d day of September, A. D. 1887, 12 o’clock noon of that day, to the highest b dd for cash. In lawful money of the United States, and subject toconfirmaticn by sald court, al, that arce Snabet ;‘%utt‘fty and County of San Fran- Clsco, State of Californis, and bounded and pac ticularly described as follows, 1o wit: Commencing &t & po int where the northerly line Intersected by the easterly line of line_of Bush s 3"‘1".’22-"?.,.:'.‘: 187) feet and six (6) Inches; at right l:l;.! lz.nh!fly and parallel with 13:171- some street one hundred ::fln:-h[rx.:’le"::l(n‘lm: &) inches; the! IectaAn I parailel with Bush sireel, gue hun- dred ‘and (niriy-seven (137) feet and slx (5) Lolel b erly side of San 5 Tooe2 Goaunerty along the sasteriy side of San- ‘oné bundred aad thirty-seven (137) to the point 0f cowmence- the bulldings and improve- feet and six (6) (neh ment: together witn hereon. T e purchaser shall take th F. Mc Ahe righL ot JOBN el helrs and_ ssilgns. (0 use he brick wall along the northery line of said 1ot here- 1n described as a party Wi STy ditions of sale—Casi er s e Thiled States of America; ten 1o be pald (0 the ret kent of the purchase price I, B0 Ry ocked f sal e 10m thre purchaser, and the baian-e on con firmation of .g:ncl!“!;r(l ‘4;""""""1' 1897 TGS Bk J » Referee. TONG PO CHY, Successor to DR. LAY PO TAIL graduate o Canton Medical Col- lege. after a very suc- cesstal _practice of many years in China, bas 10.ated in Saq Francisco. The sur- prising and marvelous cures eftected by hi, herbs demonstrxte their potence and his exill. ~ These herbs cure over 400 differens diseases, incuding Bright's Disease, Dia- betes, Consumption, A.ném‘:,, a.m,,u_ e, Cancers, Tumors, Biood, Male and fi:‘.fi.’:fi ien Al persons afiiicted with any Xind of malady whatsover sre invited to call. Office, 727 Waskington Street. Office hours—9 A- M, 10 12, 110 97, oy 0 &