The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-06-06
LEGALITY OF
THE CHARTER
IS ATTACKED
Action Is Brought by
M. F. FragIey.
VARIOUS DEFENDANTS NAMED
ALLEGATIONS MADE THAT 1T IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
A. Ruef and T. V Gator Appear as
Attorneys, With John CARRIER
and E. S. Pillsbury as
Counsel.
VARIOUS DEFENDANTS NAMED
ALLEGATIONS MADE THAT 1T rs
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Contrary TO expectations. the action OF
the officials who claim 10 be not city and
county but county officers against the
charter was not filled yesterday, but an
other action of greater Importance, Oh
rected against the new organic law Of the
city and having as its object the inval-
dating of the charter in toto, was made
of record. NJ. F. Fragley. Superintendent
of Streets, appears as plaintiff in the ac-
ton. although it is understood that each
official now holding Office within
the municipality or under the CONSOLE
dation act is lending his support. 1t is
directed against the Board of Election
Commissioners, James D. Phelan Frank
lin K Lane Asa r. Wells, Edward /.
Sheehan and Charles S. Tilton; James ID.
Phelan as Mayor, Jacob Steppacher as
Registrar, Asa R. Wells as Auditor and
l. j. Truman as Treasurer, for the pur-
pose of enjoinng them from holding or
conducting a primary election on August
s, or at all, or a municipal election on No
Tember under the provisions of or as
provided by the charter. Without an
election it is obvious that all officials nov
in office will hold over for their full terms
held that they may mold the charter will
fall and this is the object of the present
battle of its enemies.
In fact the battle to invalidate the
charter is on in earnest, and every tech
nicality known to the law will be used by
the strategists of the local bar. In lntro,
duction OF the complaint the plaintiff
makes known the status of himself and
the various defendants in the community.
Then he enters into the law upon which
the fight on the present suit Will be prose
cuted. A synopsis of these points, which
cover several pages, brings the points up
and centers them on the validity and con-
stituttonality of the special election Ivy
virtue of which the Board of Freeholders.
which framed the charter, were chosen,
and also the election at which the people
voted for and accepted the same. On this
point the complaint reads: Plaintiff is
Informed and believes and alleges that
the act of March 81, 1897, under which
both of the special elections of December
q, 1897, and Of May 26, 1898, were so as
void by reason that it is contrary to the
provisions Of section 6 of article IL
of the constitution of California, and is
also for other reasons unconstitutional
and void For these reasons it is al
legged in the complaint that the approval
of the charter by the Legislature was il
the instrument Is not charter of the
city and county, but is an invalid instru-
ment. wholly illegal, null and void, and
of no force or effect.
Notwithstanding the fact that the char
ter is void, the complaint continues. the
defendants will proceed TO hold and con-
duct the elections stated and will incur
expenses therefor exceeding. the sum Of
$35 5000. which will be allowed by the Au-
ditor and paid by the Treasurer. Where
fore the plaintiff prays that the Mayor he
enjoined from issuing an election
proclamation as provided by the charter,
that the Election Commissioners be re-
strained from holding such elections and
that the Auditor and Treasurer be also
included in the judgment of the court
A. Ruef and Thomas V. Gator appear as
attorneys for Superintendent Of Streets
Fragley and John CARRIER and Z. S. Pills
bury are associated as counsel These
men are confident that under the points
named a successful fight against the
charter will be waged. notwithstanding
Lane who is a member of the Election
Commission, that the points are far
fetched and that the charter will stand
ali assaults that may be made upon its
validity.