The San Francisco call., 1899-12-22
LAWYERS FIND
WEAK PLACES
IN THE CHARTER
Faults Must Be En-
dured Three Years.
TIME LIMIT OF AMENDMENT
Method Of Levying Assessment on
Private Property Contrary to the
Provisions OF the Federal
Constitution.
TIME LIMIT OF AMENDMENT

The rev charter will go into effect or
January 8 two weeks from next MONDAY
Several lawyers OF ability assert that Il
viii on that day place an embargo or
street and sewer Improvements al the ex
pense OF private property such as ha:
not been seen IN this city since the con
sti;ution of 1873 demanded that street as
sessments should be levied in advanc'
of the award OF contract-a provision tha
had 10 be repealed almost immediately
after its adoption
Doubtless this news will spread tubila
ton among the silurians and make glaC
the hearts Of the curmudgeons: but wha
OF the ANTICIPATED era OF progress" which
was 70 appear on Christmas. 1893. as
sort OF in de seicle present TO the people
Of san Francisco2 Instead OF progress be
ing ushered in BY the new charter thre;
years OF stangnation In street and sewer
improvements may result Following !:
the text OF the argument advanced D,
lawyers who predict a period OF stasna
ton:
The second chapter OF article VI os IN.
new charter empowers the Board OF Public
Works 10 recommend. and the Supervisors
20 authorize. the performance Of street work
az the expense % adjacent property. But
the method provided for ievyfng assess
ments and creating liens upon the lots thus
benefited is Unconstitutional and void.
II the case OF Norwood vs. Baker tI-a L.
s Rep 2ss) the United States Supreme
Court-of whose reasoning all the subordi-
nate tribunals Of the country stand In awe
and tremblng-decided that any method OF
levying assessments Tor public improvements
az private expense which does not establish
al equitable spporticnment ot cost according
70 benent is In conflict with that clause Ot
the Federal constitution which forbids a
State 70 deprive a person Of his property
without due process OF law. The new char
ter provides that assessments for street and
~ hail - 49, fN
and district methods without reference 10
the benefits conferred on the property owners
assessed.
Judge Burnett OF the Superior Court Of So
noma County. IN the case Of Singley vs.. The
Peteluma Paving Company. on May "A last.
applied the doctrine Of Norwood vs. Baker 10
California. declaring the assessment system
of the Nrooman act which Is substantially
reproduced IN the new charter. unconstitu-
uona!- This case has been appealed and
will be decided by the local Supreme Court
IN a few months. OF perhaps weeks. There
Is not the slightest doubt that the ruling OF
the Federal tribunal viii Be followed. not
withstanding the frOut-foot method has been
upheld By our Supreme Court on seven dif-
fereut occasions. In the face u seven differ
eut presentations Of the constitutional ques-
tion. beginning in 1855 and ending in 1853
The new charter must. therefore. he
amended or all street work under Il VIII
come q an end the moment the Supreme
Court hands down its decision in the Slngley
case II Will come 20 an end because con-
tractors VIII rot perform contracts under
law which deprtves them OF their lien. and
because property owners will not pay unless
the lien for work performed can be enforced.
But how shall chapter u article VI Of the
new charter be amended Aye" as Ham
let said. there's the rub
Fifteen Per cent of the voters may peti-
tlCn the Supervisors 20 submit % vote OF
the people an amendment. provided they set
forth what they want. but such petit
tlou can Be considered until January S
l--- The state constitution tsectlon :. ar
ticle KID speaking OF treeholder charters.
says,
The charter 60 ratified may b amended
at inter- ais OF not less than two years BY
proposals therefor submitted by the legis-
lative authority OF the city. 10 the quail
led electors thereof. az a general Or special
election. held az least forty days after the
publication ot such proposals for twenty
Gays In daily newspaper OF general circu-
lation ir such city. and ratified b. az least
th-ee-hfths of the qualified electors voting
zs herein PROVIDED for the approval of the
charter"
II an amendment % chapter Of article
VI b submitted and adopted promptly In
January. Ir2. a year must still elapse be-
fore II could he ratified BY the legislature
January, isa Thus three years OF stagua-
tion in street improvements are certain 70
prevail In this city after the decision In
the Sngley case j. handed down.
The ruling or the United States Supreme
Court lr Norwood vs. Baker was made on
December 12 issS. nearly seven months
after the adoption ~ the new charter but
more than a month prior 20 its ratification
bv the LEGISLATURE The case was argued
and submitted however. o year before II
was decided. and u was pending when the
freeholiers framed the plan OF assessment
body has bIun6errd but Il IS immaterlal
now who the person ts