The herald., 1896-04-19
THE STREET BOND ACT

The decision Of the state supreme
court affirming the constitutionality of
the street improvement bond act has
been a long time coming. but now that
we have it lot of people will breathe
easier. The bulk of the legal opinion
of the state has been in favor of the con-
stitutionality of the act. but so long as
it remained unpassed on by the highest
judicial tribunal of the state there ex-
listed an element of doubt that seriously
impaired the negotiability of the bonds
issued in accordance with its provisions.
The courts opinion, written by Justice
Temple, is full and exhaustive, and ana
lyzes the leading contentious against
the act in an exceptionally able way.
The court views the bonding of the prop
erty, for the cost of improving the street
in front of it, as kind of taxation.
and holds that it is entirely within the
province of the legislature to thus at
tain the end desired. AS to whether
the method adopted is the best, the
court is not empowered to decide, the
subject being one exclusively for the
legislature to deal with. Justice Tenn
pie, however. takes occasion to say that
he considers the law "unwise and alb
solutely incapable of beneficial opera
ton" The justice is not alone in this
opinion by good deal. A very liberal
proportion of the people who have given
the subject of stimulating street i'm
rrovements careful study are convinced
that a more equitable mode and one less
open to abuse might be devised. There
is little doubt about some fragrant out
RACES being perpetrated under the
street Improvement law. One does not
need to so outside of Los Angeles to
find instances of the kind noted. jobs
for the improving of streets under the
bond act have been time and again
worked through that resulted in the
bonding of property for sums far in
excess of it's actual value even after the
street Improvements We're made. The
effect in such cases has been to trans
fer the property to the contractor doing
the work for the bonds.
On the other hand, there is little doubt
about the act promoting street improve
ments in localities where they We're
desired by the public in general and the
property owners in particular, but
where it would have been impracticable
to have secured them without the bond
act or some equally effective piece of
legislation. People owning property on
unimproved streets have been glad to
grasp the chance of grading, curbing
and sidewallling these streets on the
easy terms proposed.
An immediate and pleasing effect of
the decision VIII be to reduce the cost
of making street improvements under
the bond act to practically cash basis.
Because of the inability to negotiate
bonds without a more or less heavy dis
count in the absence of supreme court
decision affirming their validity, con-
tractors bidding for street work have
really had two prices-one for cash and
one for bonds. With the status of the
bonds settled they will, in all cases
where the value of the property just-
fles the improvements, be nearly or
quite as acceptable as cash.
Whether the act be the best that could
be devised for the purpose of facilitat-
ing street improvements or not, the de-
cision in it's favor will unquestionably.
in the growing communities of the
state, stimulate work of the kind.
That was an exciting episode in San
Francisco, a few night ago. when
burglar was attempting entrance to