Los Angeles daily herald., 1889-03-03
SUNDAY, MARCH ), 1889.
suprenna Lex.


A great deal of loose talk is now in
dulged in about the new Charter and its
constitutionality. An idea seems to have
pervaded certain minds that, if any por-
ton of that instrument fails on account
of conflict with the Constitution and the
general laws of the State, the whole
measure, ipso facto, becomes a nullity.
It is some untenable notion of this char
acter which has given birth to the alb
surdity that the newly elected
municipal officers may be kept
out of the places to which
they were emphatically chosen by
the suffrages of their fellow citizens. 1t
is not pretended that that portion OF the
Charter under which the election was
held is invalid, but it is claimed that be-
cause the Legislature passed it by reso-
luton it has not become law. This
claim would hardly be countenanced by
any court. The Constitution does not
require that City Charters shall be rati-
fed by bill. A resolution of the Legis-
lature is sufficient. The Constitution
simply declares that Charters that have
been adopted by majority of the quail
fed electors of cities shall be ap-
proved by a majority vote of the men,
bers of each House of the Legislature,
when they shall become the organic
laws of such cities, and supersede all ex-
listing charters of the same. 1t makes
no difference, as far as the validity of
the act is concerned, whether such ap-
proval is made by bill or resolution, so
long as a majority of the members of
both Houses have placed them
selves on record to that effect.
The Charter having been ap-
proved by the Legislature, in confor-
nance with the provision of the Consti-
tuition, the election held under it was
legally held, and tie officers elected at
such election were legally chosen. If
the present members of the city govern
ment, or any of them, enter upon a con-
test of this character, they will, in our
judgment, commit grave error.
1t is not gracious act to question the
will of the people when that will has
been clearly and unmistakably ex-
pressed, as it has been both in the adop-
tion of the Charter and in the election
held under it. An appeal from the
judgment of the people, when in
dubitably expressed, is anti-demo-
cratic, and the HERALD begs TO be ex-
cused from taking any part in furthering
such a proceeding. The people cj Los
Angeles voted to adopt the Charter, not.
withstan ding that we pointed out its de-
fects in good season. We bowed to their
decision. The people have elected new
set of city officers under the provisions Of
that Oh arter by very pronounced ma
jority. We again bow to their decision,
and we believe that the men who talk
about resisting in the courts the installa-
tion of the new officers are yielding to
unwise counsels.
The Democratic convention, in its
platform, declared that the party was in
favor of carrying out the provisions of
the new Charter in their spirit and in
tent. The HERALD does not believe in
deception. The party formulated that
declaration, the HERALD accepted it at
the time as principle governing the
party, and believes in keeping faith. 1t
was pledge given by the party to the
people, and that pledge is just as binding
on it to-day in it's defeat as it would have
been had the Democratic ticket been
elected. We have no more right to
ge back on that pledge now than
we would have had, had the people
entrusted us with the new city govern
ment. II it would have been an act of
bad faith to have violated that pledge if
entrusted with the offices it would be
equally an act of bad faith to try to rem
der the Charter abortive because our
party was not entrusted with those
officers.
There are doubtless defects and provis-
ions of doubtful constitutionality in the
new Charter but each of these will have
to be passed upon by the Courts when
they are properly brought before them.
There is no way in which the instrument,
as whole, can be tested be-
fore the Courts, and if there were,
we would not favor putting it
to such test. The people have shown
that they wanted the charter and the
officers who have been elected under it,
and we believe that the former should
be put fairly on its trial, W. lie the latter
should be permitted to enter upon their
duties free from anything like pettifog-
ging distractions.
PIGGoTT has done the bsst thing he
could have done under the circum-