The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-03-15

| '''iN hiS ~ bt NiliOul ltSuIllllE Illt
TRADE.
Mr.. Lyon with his colleague. NIr. Me-
Mullen. came i'm after the argument
had opened and was not introduced
to the court until he took his position
in front of the bcnch to commence his
remarks. After announcing that he
represented Mayor Wyman. of Ale-
gheny. Mr.. Lyon proceeded to say:
Before entering the second class. Al
legheny was city of the third class.
acting r1ainly under special legislation.
The present code Of third class city
laws was adopted while Allegheny was
In the second class. The Nuehlbron-
Eer bill, IN its twentieth section, pro-
Nidea that cities of the second class.
which have passed from the third class,
can retain such of their third class city
laws rs arc not inconsistent with TIE
new second class law. If Allegh anr
retains some of her old third class laws
and Scranton retains some of the new"
er third class code, we will have three
cities OF the same class working under
different laws. The constitution says
all laws relating to u class shall be uni
form.
In Pittsburg and Allegheny the cour-
ellis appoint subordinate officers The
constitution says the right of removal
shall lie in the power that appoints
The Muehlbronncr act attempts to
transfer this power 90 the recorder
Councils alone can remove the officers
they appointed and To attempt TO
transfer their power is unconstitu-
iionll.
Mr Lyon was prepared to attack the
clause of the bill empowering the GOV
lnOr To- appoint for a torn beyond
an intcIvC ming election. when Judge
Arc hbald informed him that his col
league, Mr.. Burns. had admitted that
this contention was not borne out ny
the Supreme court decisions, whereat
Mr. Lyon Withdrew.
Arguments for the Bill.
City Solicitor Nosburg then began
The principal argument for III" re-
spondent. lie preiaccl 1t by m"kIhG
an incidental answer TO MI. Lyon
contention regarding tho transfer or
the power of removal. pointing OF,
;hat councils do not appoint. but elect
After which he went on To say
The federal constitution confers upon
congress certain prescribed rights. 1he
state constitution confers on the leR'-
lature all powers not specifically pro-
| ElDltpu. IN IllSSlhS Nll' ALUMNI
bill the legislature did not transcend
any or the constitutional RESTRICTIONS
and consequently the act Is Vaiid.
If has becn held over and over again
that one point of an act may be de-
fective without destroying the whole
There may be some minor flaws IN
the body of this bill. but they arc not
such as would invaidate the act or
destroy its efficiency. 1t il good act
and it's main machinery is wholly III
conformity with the constitution,
In January of this year, Scranton
| became q city Of the second class.
Upon the receipt of the governors GER
tificatc, ex instanti We became city
of the second class. It is conceded in
the attorney generals suggestion that
Scranton. on March :. was a city OF
the second class.
Have the rights of this municipality
been infringed? A municipality is an
, agent of the state. The state can gov
crn a city direct if it so desires. The
state is the fountain-head of the city's
power. A city is powerless without its
power of attorney from the state
Having the right to confer modify ol
!; change this power. it has the right to
take it. or any part of 1t, away.
Creature of the State.
The United States Supreme court
said of Baltimore city: 1T Is crea-
ture of the state, and the state may
govern in local territory rs it does in
the state ut large" We have Pennsyl-
vania decisions along this same line
In Thompson against the Common
wealth. the supreme court said that
municipal officers are only the crea'
lures of the state and the breath that
gave them life can blow it out In tho
case of Dondhoe against Roberts, where
IL tax receiver succeeded to dcin
. qucnt tax collectors functions. Tho
Supreme court expressly held that tn,
legislature had right To cut the col
lector's term and deprive him of tn,
emouments.
The incumbent of a municipal office
has no vested right. He is the creatur,
Of the Legislature. The governor car
appoint "A chief executive of a city per
potually.
: 1t has been contended that there ha,
been no change made in the office %
chief executive, except in name. Thi
is unwarranted. as n comparison of th'
acts will show. The recorder has NJ
| Veto power, Ills power OF appoint
ment is immensely enlarged He il
given extended control over heads o
departments. He Is clothed with tn
fun powers of Il justice of the peace
=, He must furnish a heavy bond. Th'
legislature has abolished the office q
. mayor and created a new one know
=, rs recorder. and that is just what tn
supreme court says il can do.
, There is no inherent right in
= municipality to elect officers. The onl,
!, reference made by the constitution L
municipal elections is To say that |
such are held they shall be held ol
the third Tuesday of February. Their
is nothing i'm the constitution, cX
- pressed or implied, to prevent the leg
= iSlature from giving the governo
= power to govern cities permanently.
. Temporary Expedient.
t. As to the schedule, ii Is merely
temporary eXpadient devised for tn
I purpose of putting the new govern
mcnt in operation. Judge Cooley say
4 in the case oc The People agains
Hurlburt: ''Thc legislature can max
temporary appointments and othe
; provisional arrangements for inaugur
t ating new form of government; In
u Inauguration can only be effected wit
: the assistance Of a guiding hand"
: The contention that the governor ca,
y not appoint a recorder for two years
/; not seriously insisted upon by the on
I position. Article w, Section s, of tn
= constitution says the governor shal