The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1886-05-15
OPENING SKIRMISH'
ON THE POLICE AND FIRE BOARD,
The Argument In tho Circuit Court on a Side
IsSuo-IS the law under which tho Pro-
cssdinE lies q Valid Act9 Able
Speeches ON Both sIdsS of the Case.

cssdiug lies a Valid Acts = Able
Speeches ON Both sides of the Case.
The petition OF Jerry Shepherd and
others, taxpayers OF Wheeling, to amend
the ordinance establishing the Board
OF Commissioners Of the Police and
Fire departments Of the city Of Wheeling,
passed by the City Council last January,
came up for consideration before Judge
Jacob, presiding justice Of the Circuit
Court, yesterday, the pending question
being the motion by the counsel on behalf
OF the city to dismiss the petition on the
ground that the act Of 1875, under which
It is brought, Is unconstitutional.
TheaCtrefsrred to Chapter 72 Of the Acts
1870 Is entitled San act to authorize Ger.
tain laws and ordinances to be superseded
and annulled." 1t provides that any levy
laid by q city or town council or a board
Of education Of an independent school
district, may, II illegally laid, be set aside,
superseded and annulled by the Circuit
Court on motion OF ten taxpayers affect
ed; and adds (thia being the clause under
which the present petition is 6led):
"Upon like petition any ordinance OF q
city, town or village, made contrary to
law, the Circuit Court may s%upercede, re.
woke and annul the same."
The peculiar grammatical construction
OF this sentence received its due share Of
attention during the discussion.
TECHNICAL DEBATE.
The city ia represented In tho matter by
Col. George b. Caldwell, Fl. NJ. Russell, Esq,
and City Solicitor 0'Keefe, and the peti.
TONERS by ex.Judge Melvin and Hon. r.
G. Barr. City o~liCials, members OF the
bar and OF Council, and citizens generally
to the number OF one hundred or SO OF.
tended the proceedings yesterday and
were interested listeners TO the argument.
Mr.. O'KeefFe and Col. Caldwell made
arguments at the forenoon sitting, holding
that the matter contained In tho act was
not in keeping with the title; that the
enactment did not fulfill the rule that q
law must contain but one general subject,
which must be fairly set forth in thetltle,
and that 1t was invalid because 1t aimed
to confer upon q court a p%rerogative Of
the legislative branch Of the government,
They read numerous decisions sustaining
their view, and held that the pending
proceeding should be quashed, being
taken under an act which was unconsti.
~tutional and void. Col. Caldwell held
also that the word Certain" In the title
was misleading; that 1t implied that the
laws and ordinances we're particular
laws and ordinances, definitely fixed and
reCited by the act that the laws and ordi.
nanCes were uncertain, and not certainly
known, and therefore tho word certain"
was inadmissible.
Judge Melvin took the floor In the
afternoon, and In the course OF his re-
marks ridiCuled the point made on the
word Certain - such a point, he said, had
never been raised even in Marshall
county.
THE Acr DEFENDED.
Judge Melvin held that whatever might
be true OF other portions Of the act in
question, the provision under which the
action to invalidate the Fire and Police
board ordinance was brought, was Ger.
tainly constitutional. 1t merely prescribeH
the method Of declaring invalid ordinances
to be invalid; 1t allows persons presumed
by the law to have an interest In the ques'
ton at issue, to take steps 10 ascertain II q
given law Is valid or void. The title Of an
act need not be an index 10 the contents
Of the act 1t must be a fair statement OIL
It's purpose and effect, and that Is all. A
court will therefore be liberal; II Ia fol
the Legislature to choose the Language II
shall use, and the courts will not crittciBe
that language unless It misleads or may
mislead some person. 1t is only necessary
when an act has but one general purpose,
that this purpose be- fairly stated Ia the
title, and the act is valid unless 1t contains
matter inCoDgruous with the title. He
read authorities sustaining this view and
alleged that there have been few cases In
which an objection 10 the validity Of an
act on account Of the faulty character oil
the title had been successfully %interpOsed,
and that where 1t had the act 30 annulled
had been so inCongruous In part with the
title as 10 be misleading and unfair.
EFFEcT or hi LAW.
Mr.. Barr followed Judge Melvin. He
addressed himself To the points at issue In
general, and particularly 10 the argument
Of the other side that the ordinances Of a
city were the product Of the Legislative
function oil the State, and therefore could
not be interieted with by the courts ex.
Cept when they illegally worked an injury
to q citizen. MI. Barr held that II Il be
admitted that q court has the power 10 de.
clare an ordinance invalid, the only ques.
ton left lie, how7 and he maintained that
the Legislature had the power 10 pre-.
scribe generally the methods by which q
court can exercise is Jurisdiction. He
fidiCuled the proposition that a citizen
must wait Until he had suffered by the
illegal operation OF q law before he had d
right 10 test the validity Of the Law In the
courts,
Mi. Barr held that any invalid law
might aud necessarily must injutlously
affect citizens. Mr.. Russell took issue
with him, saying an invalid law might
never be enforced. Mr.. Barr answered
that the presumption was that all acta
were TO be enforced, and the courts had
no right 10 presume that the Legislature
was doing q foolish thlng-pasSihg laws
which wete not 10 have elect.
Judge Jacob asked what effect o de.
Cision could have. No parties we're
before the court. II tile law was
invalid II was invalid al milo. Could
q decision Of the court Affect lie
force Or validity Would IN officer OF
party enforcing the ordinance after such q
declaration proceed at greater peril than
MI, lar said II an attempt we're made
10 enforce N ordinance declared invalid,