The record-union., 1891-04-01
these words as actually used by the wit

the jury the Court used this language :
! Other witnesses corroborate in whole or
In part that portion of the prosecutors
statement of the transaction after the con-
| filct had commenced
1t appears the parties came to blows,
We're separated, and then the shooting
| followed. This is the very moment OF
time at which the crime was committed,
| If committed at all, and for the Court to
tell the jury that the testimony of the
witness Potter as to these important mat
| terS is corroborated by other witnesses
surely prejudiced the rights of the de-
fendant TO his great disadvantage, and
violated that constitutional prohibition
/ that juries must not be charged as to
matters of fact.
Upon an examination of the other
points relied upon by appellant, we find
no error.
| For the foregoing reasons let the judg-
ment be reversed, and the cause re-
manded for a new trial.
GARoUTTE, J.
We concur:
HARRISON. j.,
PATERSON, j.
| Filled in San Francisco, March "a. 1891. I
Mandamus.
For petitioners, J. II. Magoffey.
For respondents, c. w. Thomas.
IN BANK.
A. G. RUGGLEs EFT AL,
Petitioners,
VS.. :. ooo
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE No' if'o0o'
| CITY OF WOODLAND,
Respondents.
| MdndGnlaS to compel the respondents
to call and provide for the holding of an
election of city officers.
Prior TO May 8, 1890, the city of Wood
land, in 1olo County, was municipal
corporation under special charter. On
that date proposition to reorganiZe as a
city of the fifth class, under the general
incorporation Act, approved March 13,
1883, was duly submitted to the electors
Of said city and approved by majority
| vote.
Thereafter, on June 16, 1890, at special
| election held in obedience to the proyis-
ions of Section of said Act. the respond
ents and other city officers enumerated
IN Section 75l, :. e., the officers of a city
/ OF the fifth class, were duly elected and
have ever since been acting as such.
The petitioners, who are citizens, tax
payers and electors of said city, have de-
manded that the respondents call general
city election to be held on the second
Monday of April, 1891, for the choice of
successors to themselves and the other
officers enumerated in Section ISL but the
respondents on March 8, 1891, by formal
resolution entered upon their minutes,
refused to call such election, whereupon
this proceeding was commenced.
! 1t Is proper to say that this refusal ofthe
respondents to call an election for the
! choice OF their successors does not appear
to have been inspired by any wish to pro-
/ long their own tenure of office beyond the
term fixed by law, but only by the desire
| to secure an authoritative construction of
| two apparently conflicting provisions of
| the statute in order that the city NAV
proceed regularly and lawfully under its
| new charter.
| By Section of the Act referred to it is
| provided that the officers chosen at the
! special election, to be held within six
! weeks after the vote in favor of reorganiZa-
! ton is declared, shall hold their respective
offices 'onty antil the next general muni-
| cipal election to be held in such city and
county, city or town, and until their sue
! cessors are elected and qualified"
By Section 752 of said Act it is provided
that all the elective officers of cities of
the fifth class shall be chosen at a general
municipal election to be held therein on
the second Monday in April in each odd
numbered year. The Marshal, Assessor,
| ETC., are to hold their offices for two years
| from and after the Monday following the
| day of their election, and the members of
the Board of Trustees are to hold for four
! years from and after the same date, and
until their successors are elected and
| qualified.
So far all the provisions of the statute
are perfectly consistent and unqualifiedIy
| support the contention of petitioners
that an election must be held on the sec
ond Monday of April of this year.
But Section 752 contains a proUiSo that
the first Board of Trustees selected at11Ie,.
the provisions of this A ct shall at their
first meeting SO classify themselves by
lot as that three of their number shall go
out of office at the expiration Of two years
and two at the expiration of four years. -
1t cannot be denied that the respond
ents are embraced by the terms Of this
p1'OUISO, for unqueStionably they are the
first Board of Trustees elected under the
provisions of this Act. But if the Droglso
is construed literally it is directly in con-
f1ict with the provision of Section 4, that
the Trustees elected at the first (the speciaN
election are to hold only till the next gen
eral municipal election, and until their
| successors are elected and qualified.
To reconcile this conflict and to render
the various provisions OF. the Act sensible
and coherent, it is necessary in place of
the words this Act'' in the pr0Uiso. to
read t}.ts section or this chapter. And this
accordS with the evident Intention of the
Legislature, which was that all the elect
i've officers of the city should be chosen
| at the same time, and enter upon their re-
spective offices at the same time. AS to
all other officers except members of the
Boards of Trustees, Education, etc., there
is 10 doubt that they must be elected on
the second Monday of April of the odd
numbered years, and hold their respect
i've offices for two years from the follow
ing Monday. We think it clear that the
Trustees Except those drawing the short
term after the first general election, and
those elected Professionally at the special
election) are to hold four years from the
same date.
From these views it follows that per-
emptory writ should issue as prayed.
So ordered. BEATTY, @. J.
We concur:
DEHAvEN, J.,
MCFARLAND, J.,
PATERSON, j.,
SHARPSTEIN, J.,
GARoUTTE, j.,
HARRISON, j.
Titled March 25, 1891
A,1,>aol ~ of