The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1893-04-11
VALLEYS COUP D'ETAT


of the water-rate ordinance was to be read
drew more than usually large crowd to
the chambers of the Board Of Supervisors
last night.
The general expectation was that the veto
would stand. 1t had been whispered around
that only eight members stood solid for the
measure. and that the efforts to pull over
james had not been successful 1t WAS also
known that the rates adopted were viewed
fayorably by the Spring Valley Water Com
pany.
The impression prevailed, therefore, that
in case ninth Supervisor was not secured
10 secure the necessary three-fourths vote
to override the veto tile company would
be in a hard fix.
This Impression, however, was wrong.
The ninth Supervisor was not secured. and
yet the veto was knocked out as completely
as a canuon-ball would knock out piece
Of wood in its way.
By the time the Supervisors got through
with Mayor Ellert's veto there was nothing
left Of it. To all intents and purposes it
might as well have been thrown in waste
paper basket
TIE way the thing was done. however,
was remarkable, nay, most extraordinary,
and shows how deep some men think when
an iusuperRbs difficulty confronts them.
Spring Valley by coup d'etat rescued
victory from defeat, but the Supervisors in
accomplishing this feat for them reyolu-
tiOuized the traditions custom and practice
Of the board since its organization.
When the Mayors veto was read at the
beginning OF the session, with the other
communications, Mayo Ebert said:
III there IS no objection, LEI 1t take the
usual course. 1t IS so ordered.
4 few minutes later Supervisor Rogers
rose and moved that the veto be placed on
file.
Supervisor James amended by moving
that it pass to print.
Mayor Eller,-This ordinance IS in the
nature Of a law. It must be passed TO print
and have SO ordered. There was TO OBJ
lection then. You are out of order, Super
visor Rogers.
The member for the Second took his seat.
Things began 10 look blue Tor Spring
Valley. and Supervisor Rogers brow
steamed with pers piration, as be sat
deeply cogitaJiug what kind Of a wooden
horse lie could lead into the enemy's camp.
And lie finally succeeded in a way that sur
puSed everybody.
When the new business was reached.
Supervisor Rogers threw bOmbshell in the
roard that startled everybody when he in
troduced a long resolution stating that the
order fixing water rates having been duly
passed 10y the Board OF Supervisors by a
majority Of the votes II was not subject to
the veto OF approval OF the Mayor or TO the
further consideration OF The board. Accord
ing to the resolution the sole jurisdiction
and power of fixing water rates in this city
is vested 10y article NV, section LOT the con-
sliiutiCn IN the Board Of Supervisors WI tn
ont the right Of approval or veto of the
Mayor.
Tie resolution concluded by setting forth
that the veto of the Mayor was without
legal force and effect, and that the board
take no action thereon.
Everybody stared at the advocacy OF this
remarkable doctrine, without precedent,
and revolutionary Of the boards practice
for years. You could have hung pair Of
scissors on the eyes of some Of those pres
ent, they bulged out SO.
Supervisor Denman was on his feet in
al IN ant. and moved the resolution be re-
ferred to the Committee on Water and
Water Supplies.
lie motion was lost, Supervisors Ken
nedy Dundon, Hinton and James alone
voting for it.
Supervisor Rogers stated that be had
given the subject much thought, and wanted
10 speak on the question. Ihereat he pulled
from his pocket long document, which
was typewriter, and prepared to read
what he called the legal opinion he had pre-
pared. H said:
1T appears that the power Of fixing water
rates in the city and county of san Fran
cisco Is expressly vested by the constitution
in the Board Of Supervisors Of that munich
patty. In this organic law, which provides
for the fixing of water rates Ia all cities
this State, no reference is made to the
Mayor or other chief magistrate of the mn-
nicipatiy, but the sole power upon this sub
ject is vested IN the Board of Supervisors
or council or other governing body
"While the Mayor of the city and county
Of san Francisco IS by the consolidation act
made ex-officiO president of the Board of
sup ryisOrs, and is authorized TO preside
over all sessions of the board the statute
expressly denies him the right to vote in its
deliberations. He is, however given the
power in certain specified cases to approve
or veto ordinances or resolutions of the
board.
Il find no phrase or language in the con-
stitution appropriate 10 the idea that the
Mayor is to have any voice in the fixing of
water rates; on the contrary the language
used is only consistent with the intention
10 vest in the Board of Supervisors the sole
control of the question.
The power of the Mayor to act il this
matter cannot he implied or presumed. The
word approved is not used iu our c0nsti-
ton, nor IS any, word or phrase used which
veto The ordinance fixing water rates"
supervisor Rogers held that this con-
struction Of the constitution was sustained
by the decision Of the Supreme Court in the
ease II the Spring Valley Water Works vs.
the City and County of San Francisco, 50
Cal 266 In that case the member of the
board were made parties defendant, but the
Mayor was not joined as a defendant. 1t
WAS hhJrtLtl 10 Dl inE ueleNuanLS tnat the
Mayor should have been Joined as a Dartv
Co-defeudant with the members of the
Board Of Supervisors
The court Oyerruled this objection, hold
ing that the Mayor was not a necessary
party. Supervisor Rngers held that If the
Mayor has the veto power, he was cutie
necessary a party defendant as were the
members Of the board. He concluded by
saying that his resolution was based upon
the legal proposition that the Mayor has no
power TO either oppose or veto a water ordi-
nance. The action OF the board is complete
aud beyond appeal.
he therefore asked that his resolution
pass declaring that no action be taken or
the Mayors veto, saying that if there was
any doubt the matter could be brought TO
the Supreme Court and quickly decided.
Supervisor Hinton replied to the memler
from the Second. He SAID that to rush such
a resolution through was an act of indecent
haste. 1t was against all the traditions Of
The board and too revolutionary in char
acter. Nobody had ever doubted before
the power Of the Mayor to exercise his veto
right. The wisdom of ages had established
tie veto power as check on the tyranny of
majOrities.
81 tAlHk this resolution" said Supervisor
Hinton, should have come from the Spring
Valley Water Company, but it has come
from a lawyer OF this board who is adyo-
eating that company's case with as much
skill as Mr. HerlD himself. l think the
best course to pursue is to refer the matter
to the City and County Attorney for his
opinion. lie is our legal adviser, and it is
no more than proper that we should solicit
lis legal aid on such delicate point as the
one raised by Supervisor Rogers"
Supervisor Deuman launched his argu-
mrntatiVe batteries against the resolution.
lie said:
Il think Spring Valley made a mistake.
and think We will all make mistake ii
we Try to overreaeh ourselves in this way.
i is a very unwse thing to attempt TO over
throw the traditions and preeedenis of the
board. The Supervisor says. Let the Su-
Dreme Court pass upon the natter Now.
who is going to take the case TO the Supreme
Court? The Spring Valley Company won't
take II there, because they are satisfied with
the ordinance. The majority uf this board
are not going TO take it there, because they