The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-11-06
MUST CALL ELECTION.
Supreme Court Decides Against
City in Charter Case.
NEW LAW CONSTITUTIONAL.
F,-aeholders Can Be Elected at Same
Time as Water Election - city
Overruied on Every Point.

The supreme court Yesterday handed
down its decision on the suit Of W. H.
Reeves and others against the city OF &C.
attic 10 test the validity OF the law OF
fss5 providing for the election OF free-
holders 10 revise the charter, thus max
ing il possible to hold the election at the
same time as that on the Cedar river
water proposition. December 10, and 10
have the new charter ready TO be voted
on next March. at the same time as the
people will elect new city officers.
The suit was brought on behalf Of the
twenty-five per cent. Of the quailned Not-
crs VINO petitioned the city council TO call
an election of hfteen freeholders against
the mayor and city council 10 compel
them TO comply with the law of lS13,
which leaves the council no discretion
when such "a petition is presented the
city questioned the validity Of the law
and the council refused 10 call an cleo
ton. The friendly test suit was then
brought Reeves applying to the superior
court 10 issue a writ Of mandamus requir-
ing the city 10 call an election. The city
demurred on the ground that the new law
was unconstitutional. but the demurrer
was overruled and the writ issued The
city then appealed.
The decision of the supreme court
which vas written by Judge Gordon,
Judges Dunbar and Scott concurring, says
In substance.
Upon the part Of the appellants il IS
c9ntended that the act of March 4, 1898.
upon which the respondents seek relief
Is unconstitutional and many objections
are assigned in support Of this contention
The supreme court holds that the only
ones inviting extended notice are these
First-That II is delegation Of legisla-
tive power without constitutional sane
ton All doubt Of the power of cities
Of this state having a population OF Z0,oo0
10 frame charters for their own govern
ment Is, in the Judgment of the majority
Of the court. removed by the express IAN
g3Iage Of section .. article II of the state
constitution
The. second objection is that the consti-
tuition points out the only method by
which the charter may be amended. viz,
bv PROPOSALS submitted by the legislative
authority of such city TO the voters. Inc
court is Of opinion that the mode pointed
out by section 10. article II, OF the consti-
tuition is not TO ne construed to exclude
every other method.
The third objection is in effect that the
constitutional provision is not directory
hut permissive, and vests discretion IN
the city council as 10 whether ii VIII call
an election TO frame charter, and such
discretion cannot be controlled by leg.sla-
tive action The court holds that neither
the constitution nor the act in question
compels the voters TO adopt a new char
ter. but this act affords them an oppor-
tunity TO do 50 without regard 10 the VIII
of the council in which provision the lesis-
lature did not transcend its constitutional
functions.
The fourth objection is that the power
10 adopt charter for its own government
has once been exercised by Seattle. hence
this power is exhausted. The supreme
court thinks this power Of the people to
form charter for themselves is con-
tlnuing right and not exhausted because
once exercised.
The last objection is that the c0nstitu
tional provision is self-eXecuting and legis-
lative interference unauthorized. This
cannot he upheld. and the supreme court
holds that the conclusion reached by tho
lower court was right and the judgment
viii bo affirmed
As the charter requires thirty days no.
notice must begin 10 appear by November
- In order that the freeholderS may be
elected al the same time as the vote is
taken on thc Cedar river water question.
A. the council b. % hold "a special session
this afternoon there VIII be no difficulty
about this. if the decision arrives in time.
The new law requires the frceh0lders %
begin worN within ten days after their
election. 8nf fo complete within sixty
DAYS more. This gives thrm fli February
Us fT#. ta prepare the charter. hat % IS
possible fhsy mas finish thr.r work in
tme -1 haN. .He a4Eertis. meats Published
far thirty DAYS rrHr t1 fhr regular City
election ana 20 hsNc t.e now charter voted
or in March.