The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-09-22
Brown Against Holdover.

sometime ago received a request from
you 70 give my opinion as to whether
NE Tue CITY ofhcers should be elected in No
Nember, or whether under the new consti
tutlon, IN case Utah was admitted into
tne Union they hold over. Having ex-
ahmed the constitution in that regard
Sne scheduie especially, 1 see nothing to
| warrant any possible interference under
any circumstances that the city officers
t hoia asS over fb ! however, took the trouble
Lon. q; D. Hoge upon what ground they
cam that they hold over for two years.
Mayor Baskin pointed to the schedule
| Conlinulng until superseded by the new
constitution, referring to section 10.
naye examined carefully that section in
leference to the other provisions in the
constitution. | am Clearly of the opinion
That the contention of the Hon. Mayor
/ DaSkln is frivolous. The meaning of that
schedule is that officers of municipal cor
| porauonS and all oTher organizations eX-
| listing under the territory shall not be
! at All affected by the change from terri
! torlal to state government. In article II,
| the existing municipal corporations are
! continued the same under the constitu-
ton as under the territorial government
| IN article r. corporations generally are
continued under the state and under the
! territorial government. Probably article
! u IS only designed 10 reach private cor
| poratlonS, but all officers are tC be elected
! under the new as under the old. In an
other article all laws of the territory are
continued in force. If the time of eIec-
non t6d OF 4 ely officers IS in Noyember under
next November will continue under the
IeIrltorlal law. In 10 manner does the
constitution con dIoo change or attempt to change
the election for city officers.
In your last communication you have
put another question to me that L re-
gard as more difficult. I have been LOOK
ing Tor the law that changes the time Of
election from February 10 November
cannot ind any other than that of 1892
page =: which provides for the change
in that act should hold their elections on
the Tuesday next after the first Monday
IN November, 1893. (cee section ~ Section
says nothing in this act shall apply 10
cities of the metropolitan class" As the
word metropolitan" has never been used
IN any of the previous acts on the city
9ueesuon IN Utah, it has no statutory
metropolitan could only be told by ref
erence to the dictionary. What the legfs-
lature meant no man can imagine. We
must consrue the act, however as we
find it, and we must construe it with ref
orence to what has been done. After the
passage of this act, the Hon. Mayor Bas-
Kin, and the other members of the old
board then in existence in 1892. called an
election to be held in November, 1898
recognizing that act as in force and an
plying to the, city of Salt Lake. An cleo
ton was held in Nov emher, 1893, at which
the present council were elected and
Mayor Baskin elected Mayor. And surely
this present board cannot claim that they
were illegally elected or that November
IS not the proper time to elect officers
They have had the term for which thev
were elected. Whether originally. if il
was new question would think that
they could be elected in November or in
February is another thing. I believe it
Is now a new question. I believe that
the conduct and concurrence of all the
as in November. and recommend to you
and the Republican party to put the best
TICKET in the reid, to elect them. and they
will take their seats and the courts will
give them their position In saying this /
DO not express any opinion as to whether
the act of 1858 superseded the prior char
ter; It is immaterial 10 your question
and l reserve my opinion.
Judge Henderson.
Judge II: p. HENDERSON gave his view
q casual examination of the question, and
will say that I do not think there is
anything in the holdover proposition
take the. view that the election should
be held in November.
Judge Bennett.
Answering yours of Aug. 81. have to
My opinion is that in case no election
of city officers is held on the Tuesday
next after the first Monday of November
of this year, the present city officers Will
hold till January ]. 1896. and may hold
the state shall provide for an election to
fill such offices, and the election should |
he had and the offices filled, pursuant to |
such legislative action.
If an election Of city officers shall be |
held in November next the officers will !
hold their respective offices until the
Sa provide for the election tic ' Of c feSs oi
GERS, land fix the time for the commence |
r1ent and duration of their terms" and |
elections shall be had pursuant to such |
. Of he ia 10 lot
One More. Concurrence.
George Sutherland says:
You submitted to me two questions:
first, whether or not the claim of certain |
Of the city officers that no rnunicipai |
election can be held until February next /
under the laws of the territory, is well |
and. second, whether or not in I
the event of statehood the present city |
officers hold over until the state legisla- |
ture makes some provision for city cleo
tons.
II answer the first question in the
upon the language of the act of the legis- |
ature of 1892. The act provides that on
Tuesday next after The first Monday in /
November, 1893, and bienni1lly thereafter, |
an election shall be held in each city, |
etc, to fill all offices, etc.
Section 6 provides that nothing in this
act shall apply to cities of the metropoli-
tan class.
1t is claimed that under this latter sec
lion, Salt Lake city is excepted from the |
PROVISIONS of the law requiring an cleo |
lion in November, 1883, and biennially
hereafter The question: therefore, is
what is meant by cities Of the metropoli- |
tan class. If Salt Lake is city OF the I
class within the meaning of
his act, of course it is not affected by |
the provision of the law requiring cleo
lions in November, and the claim of the
,fty officers that an election should be
leld in February would be we'll founded /
I find no provision of the law whatever,
defining what is a city of the metropolis |
titles are divided into first, second and
bird class. Nowhere are cities of the
metropolitan class spoken of or defined.
AS matter of history, however, | under
stand that at the same session Of the leg
Stature which passed the act in question
bill was passed by both houses defin-
ng and providjn;, for cities of the metro
1olitan class. After the bill last spoken
If passed the Legislature, il was sent to
he governor: and pending his. eyamina-
passed by the legislature. In providing
hat the act should not apply TO cities
If the metropolitan class, the legislature
had in mind its former bill
providing for such cities. The act pro-
riding for metropolitan cities, however
vas vetoed by the governor.
The rule seems to be settled that in ar
living al the proper meaning of an act of
he legislature. We may refer to the his
Dry surrounding it's passage. Following
his rule il is clear that the legislature
Excepting cities of the metropolitan class
rom the operation Of the election law
meant such cities as were so defined by
he bill which was afterwards vetoed by
he governor. There is no need. therefore.
o look beyond this for the meaning OF
his phrase in the election law. AS the
Ill providing for and defining cities of
he metropolitan class never became oper-