§§ 635j-6351 (144) VIOLATIONS OF ACT-PENALTY FOR. [Pt. III upon the complaint of any holder of any bond or bonds, debenture or debentures [,] certificate or certificates of investment by whatever name they may be known or designated, make any examination of the affairs of any corporation, company or association doing business within this state as an investment company as herein defined, and inquire into the investments of the reserve fund of such corporation [,] company or association and if upon such examination it shall be ascertained that any corporation, company or association so doing business has not assets to equal in value the total amount of reserve as in the last section required with interest thereon at three and a half per cent per annum compounded annually from the time of the sale of such bonds, debentures or certificates of investment, he shall commence an action in the name of the people of the State of California to restrain and enjoin said corporation from doing business and unless said reserve is made to equal the amount required before judgment is rendered in said action, judgment shall be rendered restraining and enjoining said corporation, company or association from doing business within this state, and he shall in his discretion institute proceedings against such company, corporation, association, copartnership or individual to have it declared bankrupt. History: Enacted March 18, 1905, Stats. and Amdts. 1905, p. 160. § 635j. VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT. PENALTY. Every, officer, agent or representative of any corporation, company or association doing business within this state as an investment company as hereinbefore defined, who shall place or sell any bond or bonds, debenture or debentures, or certificate, or certificates of investment of any company that has not complied with the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars, and not more than five hundred dollars, for each offense, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than thirty days, nor more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. History: Enacted March 18, 1905, Stats. and Amdts. 1905, p. 160. § 635k. NOT TO DO BUSINESS UNTIL DEPOSIT IS MADE. No person, firm, corporation, company, copartnership or individual shall issue, sell or dispose of any species of bond or bonds, debenture or debentures, certificate or certificates of investment on the partial payment or instalment plan whereby the holder or holders of such bond or bonds, debenture or debentures, or certificate or certificates of investment are or may become entitled to claim and receive from such person, firm, company, association or copartnership a return either at a definite or indefinite time in cash, or in merchandise, or in property, for the payment of instalments so paid, and wherein or whereby the holder may be subject to a fine or penalty or forfeiture for non-payment of such partial payments or instalments, without having complied with the provisions of this act and first made the deposit required by section 2 [§ 635b] of this act. History: Enacted March 18, 1905, Stats. and Amdts. 1905, p. 161. § 635 1. APPLICATION. All provisions of this act providing for the making of said deposits, the exchange of securities and the penalties for selling said bonds, debentures or certificates shall apply to all persons, corporations, associations, firms or copartnerships engaged in the business of investment companies as herein defined. History: Enacted March 18, 1905, Stats. and Amdts. 1905, p. 161. ARTICLE XVII. FISH COMMISSIONERS. § 642. General duties of. § 643. No compensation. § 642. GENERAL DUTIES OF. It is the duty of the fish commissioners: 1. To see that the laws for the preservation of fish and game are strictly enforced; and for that purpose they may from time to time employ such assistants as they shall deem necessary, which persons so appointed as assistants shall have all powers and authority of sheriffs to make arrests for violation of such laws throughout the state. 2. To establish fish breederies for stocking the waters of this state with foreign and native fish. 3. To purchase and import the spawn or ova of fish suitable for food. 4. To stock with such spawn the waters of this state. 5. To employ persons skilled in fish-breeding to assist them in their duties. 6. To furnish plans for and direct and compel the construction and repair of fish ladders and ways upon dams and obstructions. 7. To provide for the distribution and protection of game birds imported into this state for purposes of propagation. 8. To report biennially to the governor a statement of all their transactions and disbursements. History: Enacted March 12, 1872; amended March 28, 1878, Code §643. NO COMPENSATION. The commissioners receive no compensation. History: Enacted March 12, 1872. Pol. C.-10 § 654. CHAIRMAN. [SECRETARY, DUTIES OF.] The governor, and in his absence the secretary of state, is chairman of the board of examiners. The governor shall appoint a secretary, to hold office during his pleasure, whose salary as secretary and ex officio member of the board shall be three thousand dollars per annum, payable as the salaries of other state officers. He is an executive officer attached to the governor's office, and is authorized to administer oaths, and shall perform such duties, other than secretary, as may be assigned to him by the governor, from time to time. History: Enacted March 12, 1872; amended March 9, 1887, Stats. and 1. Applied, cited, construed, referred to. 4. Duties of controller. 5. Duties of secretary of state. 1. APPLIED, CITED, CONSTRUED, REFERRED TO, etc., in: Love vs. Baehr, 47 Cal. 364, 370 (referred to); Lewis vs. Colgan (Cal. May 18, 1896), 44 Pac. Rep. 1081, 1082 (referred to). 2. ACT CREATING BOARD OF EXAMINERS IS VALID, and hence controller is not authorized to issue warrant for pay ment of claim until it has been approved by such board.-Ross vs. Whitman, 6 Cal. 361, 365. 3. DUTIES OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL HAVE NO RELATION to duties of members of board of examiners under this chapter, and hence he is entitled to additional salary therefor. - Love vs. Baehr, 47 Cal. 364, 370. 4. NOR DO DUTIES OF CONTROLLER.Green vs. State. 51 Cal. 577. 5. NOR DO DUTIES OF SECRETARY OF STATE.-Melone vs. State, 51 Cal. 549, 550. § 655. MEETINGS. The semi-monthly meetings of the board must be held at the state capitol on the first and third Mondays in each month. History: Enacted March 12, 1872. § 656. RECORDS. The board must keep a record of all their proceedings, and any member may cause his dissent to the action of the majority upon any matter to be entered upon such record. And all claims must be entered on the minutes of the board before the same shall be acted upon. History: Enacted March 12, 1872; amended March 30, 1874, Code Applied, cited, consirued, referred to, etc., in: Oakland Paving Co. vs. Tompkins, 72 Cal. 5, 9, 1 Am. St. Rep. 17, 12 Pac. Rep. 801 § 657. RULES AND REGULATIONS. The board may, in writing, establish rules and regulations not inconsistent with law for its government. History: Enacted March 12, 1872, founded upon § 13 Act April 21, 1858, § 658. WITNESSES. The chairman may issue subpoenas and compel the attendance of witnesses before the board or any member thereof in the same manner that any court in this state may; and whenever the testimony of any witness against a demand pending before them is material, the chairman must cause the attendance of the witness before the board, or a member thereof, to testify concerning the demand, and the board may make a reasonable allowance therefor, not exceeding the fees of witnesses in civil cases, which must be paid out of the appropriation for the contingent expenses of the board, but in no instance can an allowance be made in favor of a witness who appeared in behalf of the claimant. History: Enacted March 12, 1872, founded upon § 12 Act April 21, 1858, 1. Applied, cited, construed, referred to. 1. APPLIED, CITED, CONSTRUED, RESullivan vs. Gage, FERRED TO, etc., in: 145 Cal. 759, 766, 79 Pac. Rep. 537 (construed with other sections). 2. CONSTRUED WITH § 666 TO GIVE BOARD OF EXAMINERS UNLIMITED POWER то INVESTIGATE MERITS OF As to use of personal knowledge of member of board, see post § 666 and note par. 2. $659. DEPOSITIONS. Each member of the board may take depositions, to be used before it. History: Enacted March 12, 1872, founded upon § 13 Act April 21, 1858, § 660. PRESENTATION OF AND ACTION ON CLAIMS FOR WHICH APPROPRIATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE. Any person having a claim. against the state for which an appropriation has been made, may present the same to the board in the form of an account or petition, and the clerk of the board must date, number, and file such claim, and the board must allow or reject the same in the order of its presentation. The board may for cause postpone action upon a claim for not exceeding one month. History: Enacted March 12, 1872. 1. Applied, cited, construed, referred to. 3. Same Prescribes powers and duties of 4. Same-Transactions of board of trustees of state library not claims. 5, 6. Determination as to claims. 7, 8. Judicial body. 9. Mandamus to compel action. 10. Presumption. 11. Review of action of board of examiners. 1. APPLIED, CITED, CONSTRUED, REFERRED TO, etc., in: Lawrence vs. Booth, 46 Cal. 187, 190 (construed and applied), Board of Trustees of State Library vs. Kenfield, 55 Cal. 488, 489 (construed); Proll vs. Dunn, 80 Cal. 220, 223, 228, 22 Pac. Rep. 143 (referred to); Ingram vs. Colgan, 106 Cal. 113, 126, 46 Am. St. Rep. 221, 38 Pac. Rep. § 661 (148) PRESENTATION OF CLAIM-APPROVAL AND WARRANT. 315, 39 Id. 437, 28 L. R. A. 187 (referred to); Sullivan vs. Gage, 145 Cal. 759, 765, 79 Pac. Rep. 537 (cited). 2. CONSTRUED.-Board of examiners is required to audit claim whether appropriation has been made for claim or not.Lawrence vs. Booth, 46 Cal. 187, 190. 3. Prescribes powers and duties of board of examiners, with subsequent sections.— Sullivan vs. Gage, 145 Cal. 759, 765, 79 Pac. Rep. 537. 4. Transactions of board of trustees of state library are not claims within meaning of this section, and hence are not required to be presented to board of examiners.Board of Trustees of State Library vs. Kenfield, 55 Cal. 488, 489. 5. DETERMINATION AS TO CLAIMS.— It is duty of state board of examiners in passing on claim against state to consider all facts appearing on face of claim or otherwise brought to attention of board. It is not necessary that board should go through form of trial with formal introduction of evidence.-County of San Luis Obispo vs. Gage, 139 Cal. 398, 403, 73 Pac. Rep. 174. 6. Allowance of claims for bounty for coyote scalps must be made on certificate issued by board of supervisors alone, though board of examiners might hear additional evidence. Determination of genuineness of claim is left to board of supervisors.-Bickerdike vs. State, 144 Cal. 681, 687, 78 Pac. Rep. 270. [Pt. III. conferred on it by law of its creation, and in its relation to several departments is simply local board exercising limited powers. Officers composing board do not carry with them for exercise therein powers conferred upon them by constitution or general law, but only such as relate to them in their capacity as members of board.-Lewis vs. Colgan (Cal. May 18, 1896), 44 Pac. Rep. 1081, 1082. 8. In matter of approving and rejecting claims against state, board of examiners acts judicially, and its decision in cases where it has jurisdiction is not subject to collateral attack.-Cahill vs. Colgan (Cal. Nov. 22, 1892), 31 Pac. Rep. 614, 617. As to action of board as judicial, see post § 664 and note pars. 4, 5. 9. MANDAMUS TO COMPEL ACTION by board of examiners on claims presented will not be issued unless facts are particularly set forth showing that board ought to allow such claims and that its refusal would be abuse of discretion.-County of San Luis Obispo vs. Gage, 139 Cal. 398, 402, 73 Pac. Rep. 174. 10. PRESUMPTION is that board of examiners in considering claim acted on and considered all facts appearing on face of claim and all other facts of which it had satisfactory knowledge having any bearing on its validity. Thus, if board was satisfied that claim in controversy was barred by statute of limitations, and nothing appeared in record to contrary, it must be presumed that it was rejected for reason that it was outlawed.-County of San Luis Obispo vs. Gage, 139 Cal. 398, 403, 73 Pac. Rep. 174. 11. REVIEW OF ACTION OF BOARD OF EXAMINERS will not be had by courts, except where there has been plain abuse of discretion.-County of San Luis Obispo vs. Gage, 139 Cal. 398, 402, 73 Pac. Rep. 174. 7. JUDICIAL BODY.-Board of examiners is not in any proper sense judicial body; when board, pursuant to statute, examines, audits, adjusts, and allows or rejects claims against state, its acts are SO far of judicial character that their decision as to facts is conclusive unless reversed on appeal. It is creature of statute, possessing no authority except that § 661. SAME. [APPROVAL AND WARRANT.] If the board approve such claim they must indorse thereon, over their signatures, "Approved for the sum of dollars," and transmit the same to the office of the controller of state; and the controller must draw his warrant for the amount so approved in favor of the claimant or his assigns in the order in which the same was approved. History: Enacted March 12, 1872, founded upon § 10 Act April 21, 1858, 1. Applied, cited, consirued, referred to. 3, 4. Controller concluded by decision of board. 1. APPLIED, CITED, CONSTRUED, REFERRED TO, etc., in: Proll vs. Dunn, 80 Cal. 220, 223, 228, 22 Pac. Rep. 143 (construed and applied); Cahill vs. Colgan (Cal. Nov. 22, 1892), 31 Pac. Rep. 614, 617 (construed); Ingram vs. Colgan, 106 Cal. 113, 126, 46 Am. St. Rep. 221, 38 Pac. Rep. 315, 39 Id. 437, 28 L. R. A. 187 (referred to); Sullivan vs. Gage, 145 Cal. 759, 765, 79 Pac. 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM BY IMPLICATION INDICATES THAT THERE WAS SPECIFIC APPROPRIATION for payment of such claim.-Proll vs. Dunn, 80 Cal. 220, 228, 22 Pac. Rep. 143. 3. CONTROLLER IS CONCLUDED BY DECISION OF BOARD of examiners as to amount of claim where there is no question as to whether claim or approval thereof was fraudulent or result of mistake, or whether board had authority to audit claim |