PUBLIC OFFICERS (Continued).

or resigns, the authority of his deputy ipso facto ceases upon the happening of either event. (Id.)

7. LEGAL REQUIREMENT AS TO PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES PERFORMANCE BY DEPUTIES.-When the law says that certain duties shall be performed by a certain specified public officer, it is meant that such officer and no other person is charged with the performance of such duties, and when performed, whether personally by the officer himself or by an authorized deputy under him as such officer, the law regards such duties as having been performed by the officer upon whom it has expressly placed that burden and not by a deputy in the office. (Id.)

8. COMPENSATION OF PUBLIC OFFICER CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTE.— Where the statute provides for the compensation of a public officer and further provides that such compensation shall be in full payment for all services of any kind and description rendered by such officer as such, there can be no other meaning to the statute than that the compensation so provided for shall be in full for all services required to be rendered by the officer, whether such services are rendered by the officer himself or by an authorized deputy. (ld.)

9. RIGHT OF DEPUTY TO RECOVER COMPENSATION.-Where there is no law providing compensation to be paid to a deputy under a public officer out of the public treasury, such deputy is not entitled to and cannot legally claim compensation to be so paid, nor can his principal claim the right to be paid compensation for such deputy. (Id.)

10. COUNTY SURVEYOR-SISKIYOU COUNTY-COMPENSATION OF DEPUTY. The law contains no provision for the payment of compensation to a deputy in the office of the county surveyor of Siskiyou County out of the pubic treasury. (Id.)

11. EXPENSE OF CONDUCTING OFFICE-COMPENSATION FOR DEPUTY NOT INCLUDED.—The county surveyor of Siskiyou County cannot demand the payment of six or ten dollars per diem for services performed by each or any of his deputies upon the theory that such per diem constitutes the expenses necessary for conducting the duties of his office as the law requires. (Id.)

12. INSUFFICIENCY OF COMPENSATION - STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION NOT CHANGED. The fact that the compensation allowed the county surveyor by section 4044 of the Political Code is wholly inadequate in proportion to the duties required to be rendered by him cannot be made a just basis for a construction of said code section contrary to the plain language of the statute and manifest intent of the legislature. (Id.)

PUBLIC OFFICERS (Continued).

13. NEGLIGENCE BY PUBLIC OFFICERS-LIABILITY FOR.-Where the power to do an act exists, though its performance is left to the discretion of the officer, if he acts in execution of such discretion his liability would be the same as in the discharge of a mandatory Guty, and if he performs the act or discharges the duty in a negli gent manner, he would be liable in an action for damages by a person injured thereby. (Dillwood v. Riecks, 602.)

See Parties; Road District Improvement Act, 2; Street Law, 28.

PUBLIC POLICY. See Divorce, 14.

QUIETING TITLE.

1. DEEDS

DELIVERY-INFERENCES-FINDING.-In an action to quiet title to certain real property claimed by the defendants under deeds alleged by plaintiff not to have been delivered, if the evi dence upon the question of delivery is such that different inferences might reasonably be drawn therefrom, the finding of the trial court is conclusive. (Avery v. Avery, 100.)

2. PERSONAL PROPERTY.—An action to quiet title to personal property does not lie. (Hale v. Kennedy, 398.)

QUO WARRANTO. See Municipal Corporations, 2.

RAILROADS.

COMMON CARRIERS-ERROR IN ISSUING OF TICKET-RIGHTS OF PASSENGER. If a railway company makes a mistake in the issuing of a ticket to travel from one point to another on its line of railway, the passenger has his redress for that wrong, but he cannot demand of a conductor, who has no knowledge of the facts, that he be carried on the insufficient ticket, without showing that his possession of the insufficient ticket was due to the fault of the railway company. (Squires v. Southern Pacific Co., 459.)

See Negligence, 20-22, 46; Waters and Watercourses.

RATIFICATION. See Street Law, 10.

RECEIVERS. See Divorce, 5.

RECLAMATION DISTRICTS.

1. COLLECTION AND PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS IN INSTALLMENTS— CODE PROVISION MANDATORY.-The provision of section 3466 of the Political Code requiring assessments of reclamation districts to be collected and paid in separate installments is mandatory, and boards of trustees of reclamation districts have no discretion to determine whether an entire assessment shall be made collectible and payable at one time or in separate installments. The only

RECLAMATION DISTRICTS (Continued).

discretionary power vested by the section in that connection relates to the amounts of the installments and the times of their payment. (Reclamation Dist. No. 785 v. Lovdal Bros. Co., 271.) 2. ASSESSMENT LAWS IN INVITUM-SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE NECESSARY. The assessment of lands for reclamation purposes is a species of taxation, and the rule that all laws authorizing the taxation of the property for public purposes are in invitum, and their provisions, therefore, to be strictly construed and pursued, or at least substantially so, is no less applicable to a case of an assessment of lands in reclamation districts for reclamation purposes than to laws authorizing the taxation of property for general governmental purposes. (Id.)

3. SPECIFICATION OF MANNER OR METHOD OF COLLECTION-SUBSTANTIAL DEPARTURE-ASSESSMENT ABORTIVE.—Where the provisions of law by authoity of which districts are formed for the purpose of reclaiming lands situated therein specify the manner or the method of assessing such lands for the purposes of raising funds with which to carry out the purposes of the district, such manner or method of proceeding must be observed with substantial strictness. A substantial departure from the method specifically pointed out by the statute for raising the money for the purposes of the district will render the assessment abortive. (Id.)

4. INSTALLMENT REQUIREMENT

SUBSTANTIAL PROVISION.-The right of the owners of lands within reclamation districts to have assessments levied against such lands for the purposes of such districts made collectible and payable in separate installments is a substantial one expressly given to them by the legislature for their benefit and convenience. (Id.)

5. ACTION TO FORECLOSE LIEN-INSUFFICIENT COMPLAINT-DEMURRER -TRIAL EVIDENCE- NONSUIT.-The complaint in an action to foreclose the lien of an assessment levied for reclamation purposes fails to state a cause of action where it shows that the trustees attempted to call in the entire assessment at one time, instead of calling the assessment in separate installments. Where a demurrer to such complaint is overruled and the cause tried, and the evidence at the trial shows that the trustees failed to order the assessment to be collected and paid in separate installments, a motion for nonsuit should be granted. (Id.)

6. ACTION TO VALIDATE ASSESSMENT-LIS PENDENS.-In an action under section 3493% of the Political Code to determine the validity of an assessment levied for reclamation purposes, it is not necessary to file a notice of the pendency of the action. (Id.) 7. SUMMONS-COMPLIANCE WITH CODE SECTION- JURISDICTION.-In an action under section 3493% of the Political Code to determine the validity of an assessment levied for reclamation purposes, the omission to direct in the summons, as required by said sec

RECLAMATION DISTRICTS (Continued).

tion, that the defendant "answer the complaint within ten days after the service of summons, if served within the state," does not deprive the court of jurisdiction where the summons issued and served directs the defendants to answer the complaint within ten days "if served within the county-if served elsewhere within thirty days." (Id.)

8. NATURE OF JUDGMENT SUBSEQUENT PURCHASERS.—' -The action in a validation suit being in rem, the judgment is binding upon the lands assessed and concludes all subsequent purchasers. (Id.) 9. JUDGMENT IN VALIDATION SUIT-EVIDENCE-WAIVER OF ESTOPPEL.In an action to enforce the payment of an assessment levied for reclamation purposes, the plaintiff does not waive the estoppel created by the judgment in a previous validation suit by introducing evidence in support of the issue raised in that suit. (Id.)

10. PRICE OF WORK-ESTIMATE AND PRICE PAID-DETERMINATION OF PRICE AND CONFIRMATION IN VALIDATION SUIT-RES ADJUDICATA.— Where a land owner, although duly notified of an action to determine the validity of an assessment levied for reclamation purposes, defaults or makes no appearance therein, he cannot, in a subsequent action to enforce the assessment against his property, show that the price paid for certain work was in excess of the estimated cost thereof, the question of the price of such work having been determined by the trustees of the district and the supervisors of the county and their determination confirmed by the validation suit. (Id.)

11. VALIDATION SUIT JUDGMENT RES ADJUDICATA.-The judgment in an action under 34931⁄2 of the Political Code to determine the validity of an assessment levied for reclamation purposes is res adjudicata as to all matters contained in the statement or report to the supervisors by the trustees showing the plan of the proposed reclamation work and estimates of the cost thereof, and is not subject to collateral attack. (Id.)

12. IMPROPER USE OF FUNDS-VALIDITY OF ASSESSMENT.-An assessment for reclamation purposes cannot be declared invalid because the trustees of the reclamation district have misused a part of the money in payment of a judgment obtained against them individually. (Id.)

RECORDATION. See Contracts, 1; Notice, 1.

RECORDS. See Appeal, 1, 3, 4.

REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS.

1. INTENT OF PARTIES ADMISSIBILITY OF PAROL EVIDENCE. In revising a written instrument, the court may inquire what the in

REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS (Continued).

strument was intended to mean and what were intended to be its legal consequences, and is not confined to the inquiry what the language of the instrument was intended to be; and evidence of the purpose of the agreement, and of the negotiations leading up to its execution, is admissible for the purpose of showing what the parties intended. (Roush v. Kirkman, 115.)

2. CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE-APPEAL-REVERSAL.-While the evidence making out the mistake in an action to reform a contract on the ground of mutual mistake must be clear and convincing, where the evidence which tends to prove the mistake, standing alene, uncontradicted, is sufficiently clear and convincing, the appellate court cannot reverse the judgment of the trial court on the ground that such evidence is contradicted by other evidence. (Id.)

3. ACTION ON NOTE-REFORMATION OF CONTEMPORANEOUS CONTRACTPAYMENT BY AGENT- - EVIDENCE JUDGMENT.-In this action on

a promissory note by an alleged assignee, the defendants having by cross-complaint set up a cause of action for the reformation of a contract made contemporaneously with the execution of the note, and having alleged payment of the note in accordance therewith by the parties named as cross-defendants, the court, having found that the money paid by the plaintiff to his assignee for the note was paid by him as the agent of one of the crossdefendants, who was jointly liable on the note as guarantor, was correct in holding that the transaction amounted to payment under, and in accordance with, the terms of the reformed contract. (1d.)

See Pleading, 1.

REMEDIES. See Assumpsit; Fiduciary Relations, 2, 3: Pledge, 3; Taxation, 1.

REPRESENTATIONS. See Criminal Law, 73; Vendor and Vendee, 2.

RESCISSION. See Agency, 4; Contracts, 36, 40, 45; Fiduciary Relations, 3, 5.

RES JUDICATA. See Appeal, 24; Divorce, 6; Reclamation Districts, 10, 11.

RESTORATION. See Fiduciary Relations, 6.

RESTRAINT ON ALIENATION. See Deeds, 3-5; Trusts, 5.

RESTRICTIONS. See Deeds, 2.