The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-11-26
STEP DOWN AND OUT
Continued From First pare.

be able to secure payment for such
work unless the common council shall
direct the same to be paid out of the
general fund. The contracts for the
doing Of such work being ultra wires
no action would lie against the city to
recover thereon, but the improvements
having been made and the CITY having
received the benefit, there would doubt
less be no objection, to the city ap-
propriatfng q sufficient amount to nav
the contractors for the work actually
performed. ste
ION the other hand. there have been
a great many acts performed by the
commissioner which have simply been
advisory to the council, where the coun-
Gil has possessed final and ultimate
authority in the premises and where
the acts of the commissioner have
amounted to no more than a recommen-
dation of a. committee of the council.
In such cases, the council having COM
plete authority, it's actions would not
be held invalid for the reason that 1t
had asked for and received the recon-
mendation of the commissioner.
1.-The amount which the city loses by
the attempted enforcement of the act
can only be computed by the financial
officers Of the city, but viii doubtless
amount to a large sum-
1t Is confidently expected that Mr..
III.
In fact, it is said that 1t was under
stood when he took the commissioner
ship that he should be. appointed In case
the courts decided that he could not
hold the Office. March /, 1897, Messrs.
German and Quinby will retire from
the board and two Republicans win
be appointed in their places. On the
best possible authority, it is stated
that Assemblyman Mabon has been
promised one of the places, and if Cope
land gets the other, the matter Is SET
tied. 1t may be considered settled. and
that way now.
Following is the syllabus of the SUI
preme court with the decision in full:
State ex rel. H. W. Childs, attorney general.
Richard L. German ct al, REALTORS, vs.
John Copeland, respondent.
Held, local option law granting charter
powers to all the cities of certain class
TO take effect in each city only upon the
SO and "a of article Of the constitution, pro-
hibiting special legislation as to cities and
requiring all laws as to the same to be uni
form in their operation throughout the state.
cities cannot be partially repealed by spe-
cfal law. and the same result cannot be ac-
complished by local option law which has
merely the same effect
Held accordingly, that chapter 228 Laws
OF 1895, is Unconstitutional.
The distinction noted between such a local
option law, granting such charter powers
and local option law granting power to
adopt mere bylaw or ordinance, the pro-
visions Of which are prescribed by the legis-
lature. Writ of custer granted.
In the opinion Judge CAVITY says:
Chapter 22S. General Laws 1896, is general
Tn form. providing that in cities of over 100
QUO inhabitants the department Of public
works shall consist Of three branches. an
engineering department, a Commissioner of
public works and a board of park commits
sioneFs.
1t provides that the head of the engineer
Ing department shall, be appointed by the
mayor on the second Tuesday in June each
even numbered year, and shall hold ONCE
Tor two years. 1t also provides for the ap-
pointment at the same time of the commits
sloner- OF public works, who Is to have charge
OF all improvements which the civ council
snail order He Is made a standing arbitrator
proceedings instituted by him and to assess
speclai tax on property specially benefited
for to pay such damages.
AFTER relating the provisions as to park
boards, the opinion continues:
Inc only two cities in this state having
over AoV,oo0 inhabitants have been operating
unuer charters consisting OF various special
laws enacted before the amendments to the
constitution prohibiting special legislation
were adopted.
The city of St Paul has for many years had
laws which consisted of five members whose
duties were somewhat similar to those i'm
posed upon the commissioner of public
WORKS under said chapter 228.
July II, 1895, the city council Of ST Paul
ADOPTED this act, and the mayor appointed
the respondent commissioner of public
Sns under the act. -Four members of the
o1u BOARD refused to surrender their office,
ana writ of quo warranto was issued nv
this court to determine by what warrant the
respondent claims the Office
1t is claimed by REALTORS that said ebsnter
zzS Is special law and contrayenes the con
stitutionai amendment Of 1891, and is uncen-
stItnnonal because it applies only to such
cities as adopt 1t, and therefore NAV mt ha
CT uniform operation throughout the state as
required by said amendment
In order that the decision in this casa NAV
somewhat carefully the question Of the con-
stltntionaIity OF local option laws
IL is generally held that law cannot he
PASSED 70 take effect If the voters of the whole
state so decide, and that such a law cannot
De npneld on the theory that it Is A law
passed to take effect ppon condition. thai
IL no Is merely an attempt to delegate Legislative
Said constitutional amendment NJ 1901 nro-
yides VI 1851 pro-
The legislature shall pass no local or ana
clal laws regulating the affairs Of or incor
any COUNTY eitE OF changing q nsoI The lines of
ever, that the inhibittons tof special laws lsws
IN this section shall not be construed to pre-
the subjects enumerated - The IaolsIa{rra
may repeal any existing special or local law
put snail not amend, extend, or modify any
o oa sne same me legislature shall provide
general laws for the transaction of any busi
ness that may be prohibited by section / of
THIS amendment, and all such shall be mil
form IN their operation throughout the state.
is local option constitutional? Is such
general local option law one having a uni
form operation throughout the slater How
can law which goes into effect in one city
ana not In another of the same class have .
uniform operation Throughout the stata9
1t seems to us that the legislature cannot
or1ng ABOUT diverse charter powers in differ
eht cities by enacting any such local ontion
laws which may result in giving diGeran+
charter powers unless the same result can
De accomplished by a direct unconditional
law; me new possibility that all the cities
OF the class may adopt the law will not save
It. 1t must appear at the time the law is
passed that ii will have a uniform onera-
tlon throughout the state. that is, that it
Will take effect in all cities of the class and
that the class Is a proper one. The uniform
operation OF the law cannot be left to any
future contingency.
Let us now consider the character of local
option legislation with reference to this Con-
stttutional amendment.
There is vast difference between delerat
Ing to some local body the power to adopt a
Charter and the power to adopt bylaws ar
ordinances. Suppose for instance, that a.
law, general in form, passed as to the
Charter OF the cities in certain class that this
Law created some local body in each city and
gave 1t generally large number of dssig-
mated powers (such as are usually given to
such cities by their eharter), and authorized
this local body to exercise these pewers M
It saw fit, to designate such other ofacers. as
IT saw fit. and to define their powers and
manner of election and appointment but pro-
vided nothing more in detail Such a charter
even for the class of larger cities, might be
written on four or five pages. But would
such nebuious skeleton charter be oonsti-
tuuonal? Would 1t not be likely to result in
q greater diversity of local laws, be less uni
form In Its operation and far less limita-
ton on the local authorities than a law or
three or four laws. general in form, which
provided three or four different kinds of char
ters and left it to each local body to adopt