Amador ledger. (Jackson, Amador County, Calif.) 1875-19??, 1900-12-14
RULING ON LIEN LAW.
Judge Belcher, of San Francisco, Makes
an Important Decision,

Judge Belcher, of San Francisco, Makes
an Important Decision.
In the Superior Court of San Fran
cisco Judge Belcher filed an opinion
last Monday, that will come as sur
prise to the legal fraternity. The eff
feet of the decision is to virtually de-
clare unconstitutional Section 1894 of
the Code of Civil Procedure which re-
lates to mechanics liens. The opinion
sets aside the practice of years, and if
sustained by the Supreme Court will
make quite difference in future pro-
cedure.
The section in question provides for
the rank of liens against property in
the following order:
1. All persons performing manual
labor in, on or about the same.
2. Persons furnishing materials.
3. Sub-contractors.
| 4. Original contractors.
And in case property is sold to satisfy
liens the proceeds must be applied in
that order, instead of pro rata.
| In the case at bar several lien holders
embracing the classes given above, had
consolidated their suits, in order to
test the validity of the law. In rem
dering his opinion Judge Belcher said /:
In this consolidated case the first
and second classes would take all of the
fund, leaving nothing for the third and
fourth class if the statute must be fol-
lowed. Certain of the lien claimants
commended that the section is uncon-
stitutiOnal, and in my estimation that
contention is sound.
The Constitution provides art. Xxx,
Sec. 15) that: sMechanics, material
men, artisans and laborers of every
class shall have lien upon the prop
erty upon which they have bestowed
labor or furnished materials, for the
value of such labor done and materials
furnished, and the Legislature shall
provide by law for the speedy and
efficient enforcement of all such liens. -
By this constitutional provision a
direct lien is given to mechanics,
material men, artisans and laborers,
and nothing is left to the Legislature
save the duty of enacting measures for
the enforcement of the liens given.
The Legislature was not authorized to
declare which of these classes, to the
exclusion of the others, should be paid.
To the contrary, the Legislature was
given power, or rather it was directed
to provide by law for the speedy and
adequate enforcement" of the liens al
ready given. By the Constitution the
liens of all the classes mentioned stand
upon the same plane-are equal before
the law, and the Legislature had nc
power to enact that one class should be
paid in preference to another. 1t fol,
lows that Sec. 1894, G. G. p, is uncon-
Institutional to the extent that it at
tempts to create preferred classes oil
lien claimants.
The constitutional protection is ex-
tended to mechanics, material men,
artisans and laborers of every class ~
These protected classes do not embrace
contractors or sub-contractors. A con-
tractor or sub-contractor might chance
to be skilled in the practice of some
mechanic art, but his contract or SUBJ
contract would not necessarily call for
the display of mechanical ability, and
therefore do not see how either could
be said to be embraced within the
denomination mechanics" Certainly
they are not embraced within either oil
the other three classes. A corporation
might be contractor or sub-con-
tractor, but, clearly, corporation, in
this particular, is not within the con.
stitutional intendment. In my judg.
ment, therefore, theliens of contractors
or sub-contractOrs must depend upon
the force and effect of the general law.
All the lien claimants proved their
claims, or they were admitted, and
they are to be treated with perfect
equality"