Los Angeles herald., 1907-01-06

prove the same, thereby putting them
In force and operation In violation of
the referendum. BY the prayer Of the
complaint plaintiff seeks the Judgment
of this court declaring said ordinances
to be Illegal and that the clerk and
mayor be respectively restrained from
doing the acts alleged by the complaint
to be intended by them, and that they
be temporarily restrained from doing
said acts pending final hearing Of the
case. Upon the filing of the complaint
this court issued its citation command
ing the defendants to appear and show
cause why the clerk and mayor should
not, pending the action, be restrained
and enjoined from committing the acts
complained of, and until said hearing
they were, by the terms of said cita-
ton, enJoined by this court from doing
said acts.
"The defendants have demurred to
the complaint and have appeared pur-
suant to the citation of the court, but
have filed no answer or affidavit; nor
have they offered any testimony con-
tradcting any allegation Of the COM
plant. Hence, every allegation of the
complaint stands admitted, and the
sole question before the court upon
the hearing of said citation and the
demurrer Is whether or not the COM
plant states a cause of action.
Admit Statement Is False
"For the purpose of the decision Of
this issue at this time the defendants
and their attorneys admit the state
ment in each of said ordinances, to
wit, This ordinance is urgently re-
quired for the immediate preservation
of the public peace, health and safety
Is false. This admission was to be
expected, for one could hardly contend
for the truth of these statements and
expect his sanity to go unchallenged.
For the purpose of the consideration
of this issue the defendants also ad-
NIT that said false statement was in
serted in said ordinances for the pur-
pose and with the intent of depriving
the electors of the city Of the benefits
of the referendum
"There Is a difference of opinion
among intelligent people, who nave
thought upon the subject, as to the
wisdom of a referendum law, 1t being
contended on the one hand that 1t is
entirely inconsistent with the scheme
of representative government, and on
the other hand that 1t serves as a
check upon the conduct of Legislators,
making it possible for the people, in
whose hands the final determination OF
the policy of government must rest, to
defeat legislation which is enacted by
legislators who are false to the inter-
ests they represent. The constitutions
ality of the referendum is also serious
ly doubted by some able members o1
the legal profession. The question OF
policy, however, is a matter resting
entirely with the people; they have de-
clared themselves, and 1t is not now
open for consideration. The constitu-
tionality of the provision is not now
before this court, and If 1t were, the
decision of the supreme court of TINS
state in the recent case in re Pfahle1
decided October 13, 1906) has settled
the matter by upholding as constitu-
tional the initiative provision of the
Los Angeles city charter.
Notwithstanding the defendants ad.
nit the falsity of statements in each OF
said ordinances as to their urgency
and admit that recitations We're in
serted with the intent on the part OF
the council to override the charter pro-
visions and thus violate the very law
by which they are bound, it is insisted
by counsel representing the defendants
that this court is without power to
grant any relief, arguing that the only
remedy which the people have is to
elect new councilmen who will recog-
nize the duty which the fundamental
law of the city imposes upon them AND
restrain themselves from open viola
tion of the law by which they, under
their oaths of office, are bound.
Courts of justice are established ant