Los Angeles daily herald., 1873-10-04
Vested Rights No.

inSHtS Will Niitii q pclSoit 10 INV csteu
by nature; and political rights; or,
such as a person may have acquired
from the political organization. Over
the first class our Government con-
fesses it has no jurisdiction; and the
Constitution of California. and most
Of the States enllmerate n greater or
less number of those inalienable per-
sonal rights emanating from a higher
source than political or Legislative au-
thority.
The Constitution of California says,
that among these inalienable rights
are those of enjoying and defending
life and liberty, acquiring, possessing,
and protecting property. The Consti-
tuition of Maine goes further and de-
clares that all power is inherent in the
peoples; all free governments are
founded on their authority, and instl-
tuted for their benefit; and they have
therefore an interest and indefeasible
right to institute governments, and to
alter, reform, or totally change the
same, when their safety and happiness
require it. The Constitution of Illi-
liois announces these same principles,
and adds: that a frequent recurrence
to the fundamental principles of civil
government is necessary to preserve
the blessings of liberty.
Respecting political or acquired vest
ed rights, there does not appear to be
any we'll defined or generally acknowl-
edged principles or catalogue laid down
by authors on. the judiciary Of this
country. 1t seems that the provision
of the National Constitution prohibit
ing States from passing er post .tacto
law, or law impairing the obligation
of contracts, has not been clearly or
definitely determined. 1t is therefore,
says a writer upon Statutory and Con-
stitutional law, of the highest moment
if possible, to obtain clear idea as to
the nature and extend of the protect
ions which guard our rights of proper
ty from attack under color Of law-tO
determine, in other words, what is "a
vested right. In an opinion delivered
by the Supreme Court of New York,
which opinion was subsequently APP
provingly referred to by the Supreme
Court, that Court said: vested rights
are indefinite terms and of extensive
Specification, not unfrequently resort
ed to when no better argument exists,
i'm cases neither within the reason or
spirit of the principle. But the Court
said also, that private corporations are
the private property of the corpOrators.
They are designed to regulate private
interests. Large investments are
made in pursuance of their authority,
and the tenure by which such corpo-
rate property is held, is like that of an
individual to his farm or his personal
estate, and an invasion of such cor
M stA- power, is like violation OF
Syr te rights. In Massachusetts the
Chief Justice rendered an opinion in
which the court said that rights legal
ly vested in any corporation cannot be
controlled or destroyed by any subse-
quent statute unless power for that
purpose be reserved to the legislature
in the act of incorporation. And the
Supreme Court of the United States,
has laid down the principle that a
grant by the Legislature is a contract
which no subsequent Legislature can
revoke or cancel. This court has also
said that every law, that takes away
or impairs rights vested agreeable to
existing laws, is retrospective and is
generally unjust and may be Oppres-
sive, and is a good general rule that
law should have nc. retrospect. But
there are cases in which the laws may
justly and for the benefit Of the COM
munity and also of individuals relate
to a time antecedent to their COM
mencement.
While the general practice of the
courts has been to interpOse their pow
er in the defense of vested rights
against attacks by the law making
power there has not been q clear ac-
cord as TO what are vested rights.
Sedgwick says that no general rule
can be laid down which will describe
with precision the extent to which
legislative interference with rights or
interests in property under our system
ispermitted, or prohibited. Taking
the conceded power Of the Legislature
over the procedure and remedy, their
right to pass repeating acts, and in
many cases retrospective acts, and /
think the result of the investigation is,
that in no branch of our subject (stat-
utory and constitutional law clear
lines of demarcation are more impera-
lively required nor any more difficult
to establish. Serious embarrassments
present themselves in regard to inter-
ests created by or under legislation,
and many most interesting cases have
been decided as to tho rules to be APP
pliet in, this respect to legal enact
ments. The difficulty of this subject
fully equais lis Importance on the
one hand any interference with right
acquired under existing laws is ~ po-
litical evil and injury, while on the
other, to deny to the legislature power