Los Angeles daily herald., 1876-06-20

corporations IS supreme ana trans
cendent.n The principle seems to be
that such corporations have no vested
rights conferred upon them for civil,
political or administrative purposes.
Decisions to this effect have been rem
dered frequently and all over the
country, until they are too numerous
for citation. The supremacy of the
legislative authority over municipal
corporations is not, however, in all re-
spects unlimited; but the limitations
must be sought either in the National
or State constitution, and if not there
found, in terms or by fair implication,
they do not exist. This brings us to
the case under investigation. Are the
provisions of the Act in question
within the constitutional inhibitians?
Section 81, Article w, of the State
constitution, reads as follows: "It
shall be the duty of the Legislature to
provide for the organization of cities,
incorporate villages, and to restrict
their power of taxation, assessment,
borrowing money, contracting debts,
and loaning their credit, so as to pre-
vent abuses in assessments and in
contracting debts by such municipal
corporations Section 9, Article XI,
of the constitution of California, is as
follows: "Each county, town, city
and incorporated village shall make
provision for the support of its own
officers, subject to such restrictions
and regulations as the Legisla-
ture may prescribe" "All officers
whose election or appointment is not
provided for by the Constitution, and
all officers whose offices may hereafter
be created by law, shall be elected by
the people or appointed, as the Legis-
lature may direct" Art. XI, Sec. 6,
Constitution of California. Both the
National and State Constitutions con-
tain provision "that no law impair
ing the obligation of contracts shall
ever be passed. The provisions
above cited are the only Constiuu-
tional provisions which have any
bearing upon the case at the bar. 1t
Is clear that Sec. 81, Art. XI, of our
Constitution, vests in municipal cor
porations the power of taxation, as
ing debts and loaning their credits,
subject to the restriction of the Legis-
lature, and this restriction exists so as
"to prevent abuses in assessments and
in contracting debts by such munich
pal corporations.
/. The Act creating the Board of
Public Works for the city of Los An
geles vests them with che power of
making contracts and creating debts
for the city. In doing this, the Board
of Public Works in effect exercises a
power of taxation. The vital question
comes now, can the Board exercise
this right constitutionally? 1t is con-
tended, on behalf of the city, that the
Legislature of California cannot exer-
else its power so as to conrpel amunic-
ipal corporation to incur debt with
out the consent of such municipality;
that the exercise of such a power is
contrary to the genius of our institu-
tions, and contrary to the representa-
tive character of our government;
that it violates the great principle of
local government, and that the
Constitution intended to prohibit the
Legislature from usurping the func-
tions of municipal bodies by taking
upon itself through its constituted
agents, against the will and without
the consent of the municipal authori-
ties, the performance of duties which
pertain only to the municipal body
Itself. In support of their views 81
Illinois and % Michigan are cited.
However much in sympathy l may be,
personally, with the sentiments ex-
pressed by counsel for the city, am
unable to agree, judicially to their
propositions, because it is now beyond
my power so to do. This is not an
open question in this State. 1t has
been settled by numerous authorities
in California that municipal corpora
tions are but subordinate Subdivisions
of the State government, which may
be created, altered, or abolished, at the
will of the Legislature, which may en-
large or restrict their powers, direct
the mode and manner of its exercise,
and may define what acts they may or
may not perform, subject, no wever, to
the limitation that the Legislature
cannot direct, the performance of an
act which will impair the obligation OF
contract. 1t is settled in this State
that the Legislature may apportion
local powers among the municipal
corporations, and that the agents who
administer the affairs of a municipal
ity derive their power from the Legis-
lature, and can only act in obedience
to Legislative authority; that the
original power to control as well as to
create them, therefore, is in the Legis-
lature and that the Legislature can as
well Immediately direct the use and
disposition of public property, as a
general rule, as it can Immediately do
this by appointing, or providing for
the appointment of agents. or giving
authority for that purpose. In other
words, what the Legislature can au-
thorize to be done, it can do itself.
The Constitution of the State confers
upon the Legislature all legislative
power (Article ", Sec. y and if an
act is within the legitimate exercise of
that power, it is valid, unless some re-
striction or limitation can be found in
the Constitution either in terms or by
fair implication. There is no prohibi-
ton in that instrument against the
creation by the Legislature of every
conceivable description of corporate
authority, and when created "to en-
dow it with all the faculties and attri-
butes of other pre-existing corporate
authorities" 1t follows, if L am cor
rect in what have already stated,
that the Legislature, in pass
ing the Act which created the
Board of Public Works, so far as said
Act conferred upon said Board the
power of incurring debts without the
consent of the municipality, acted
within the constitutional provisions,
and is valid to that extent. 1t is too
late in this State to put any other con-
struction upon the constitution with
out disturbing many vested rights.
With the expediency or policy of the
purpose of the Act the judiciary have