The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1882-08-06
The petersburg Middle.
!, p.,.rshurg ADpedl Saws |:


former on one point In which, II our con-
.emnorary did not err, we should have been
very derclicf TO our duty as independent
Journalists for not having directed attention
10 the infraction of the law. Speaking OF
the circumstances under which Mr.. Har-
grave was elected 10 the Council, the DIS
patch saws: sRecollect the words OF the
ordinance are, rs we have said. that "thir-
teen members OF the Council shall be q
ouorum.v' In view OF recent occurrences
we very much wish these were the words
of the charter; but the fact is they arc not.
Section Of chapter Ill. says "a ndyortfyof
the members OF the Council shall constitute
a quorum for the transaction OF business
at the time OF Mr.. Hargrave's election
there were only twenty-thTee members OF
the Council, and consequently 1t was neio
that twelve were majority"
We quoted the very words OF the Peters
burg ordnance. The appeal replies that
we are In error, and quotes the words OF
the charter. Certainly we committed no
error. since. as we have said, we quoted
the language OF the ordinance itself.
However, though we committed no error
we concedc that the appeal has raised a
different question from the one we dis
c,,ssed. Let us look into ii.
The charter says that ga majority oi
the members OF the Council shall consul
tnte n quorum for the transaction OF busi-
ness. OF course the charter Is Oh hisnei
authority than the ordinance, ana II the
two conflict the former overrides the lat
ter. But it Is for the courts, not the Coun-
c;,. IN decide that the two conflict. what
does the charter mean by the words . ma
iorityo2 The Council itself construed us
meaning to be "thlrteen members" isn't
the Council itself bound by that construc-
tionp Who else was authorized to carry
out the provisions OF the charter: rha'
body had as full power to legislate unoef
the provisions Of the charter and to con-
strue the provisions Of that charter Tor IL
self rs the General Assembly OF Virginia
has 10 legislate under the provisions OF the
State Constitution and to construe the pro-
visions of the State Constitution for itSeli.
There is no doubt so far.
But the courts are authorized to con-
strre the laws Of the State rs well as the
ordinances Of every city. Ii they find the
State laws unconstitutional, they adiudge
them to be null and void. II they find
that an ordinance violates or misconstNe,
the charter, they pronounce the ordinance
null and void. We repeat, therefore, that
IL was not for the Council to decide that
the ordinance was contrary to the charter
viii the Appe0I contend that the Council
can violate an ordinance OF the city on the
ground that it is violatiye of or incOnsist-
ent with the charter! We deny this pro-
position in toto. The General Assembly
cannot render Il law null and void by sim
ply disregarding it and treating it with
contempt. Both houses OF the Virginia
Legislature at its last session withdrew
from the Governor railroad bill, and
treated it as il il were nothing worth, but
the Court of Appeals has decided that
dead bill TO be a living law. The Gen
cral Assembly as a body is as much
bound TO conform to a law upon tho
statute-book until it is pronounced un-
constitutional by the courts as is any in-
diyldual member OF that body. Don't
misunderstood us. We don't say that
the General Assembly cannot repeal
any law it chooses to repeal; but we do
say that until law is repealed, or, ii not
repealed, until it is pronounced unconsti-
tutional by the courts, it binds the con-
science of every member OF the General
Assembly, and binds the General Assem-
bly, itself. Precisely so with city council
When city council passes Il law "a city or.
iinance is nothing but a city law that law
stands good until it is either repealed by
the council or pronounced contrary to tie
charter by the courts. As it will not do &c
permit the General Assembly to disregard
Il State law upon the preteXt that il is un'
constitutional, so il will not do TO permit 9
city council to disregard city law upOr
the pretext that it is contrary to or incon
sistent with the charter.
But what is majority OF the Petersburg
Council? The Common Council consists
under the charter OF twenty-fOur mem
bers-four from each ward. Can twelv
ever be ga majority" OF twenty-fOur? o
course not. Can the Council consist o
less than twenty-four members Not I'm
der the charter. II it can consist OF les
than twenty-four members, 1t will be I'm
der the common law, or some other law
not under the charter, which provides eX
pressly that "the Common Council OF th
CITY of Petersburg shall be composed @
four members from each ward" Their
are six wards. II you appeal to the yer
words of the charter, you must be bourn
by its very words. The Council under
stood this principle and was governed b
it when ii passed the ordinance proyidin
that thirteen members should constitute
quorum.
The reductiO dd dbSurdtnn is that
twelve members can ever be "a majority
OF the City Council Of Petersburg, an
number might be ga majority" III all TIL
Democratic members had resigned on tn
LIST OF July, as they might very well hav
done, there would have been but twely
members left Would seven have const
tuted ga majority" Of the Council With
the meaning OF the charter? Ii not, VII
not, supposing that twelve can be q hi
jorlty when one member has resigned?
------ ----
After all, the fundamental truth in pol
Ties and finance remains the same, and n
raScalities OF corrupt and silly congress.
men can avail TO change it:
The interldt-reUenue system ought TO ]
f31firpI1f abolished As,e KorLa C,,.