The Lakeland evening telegram. (Lakeland, Fla.) 1911-1922, 1914-01-13
GROUNDS upon WHICH COURT UP
HELD COMMISSION GOVERNMENT
TEXT OF SUPREME COURTS SUSTAINING THE VALIDITY
OF THE COMMISSION FORM OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE
CITY OF LAKELAND
Decision Made Last Friday Affirming Ruling of Hon F. A. Whitney
Which Declared in Effect That the Commissioners Elected
situte Lakeand's Legal Administrative Body

are not In conflict with other organic
provisions; and a grant by the Leg
islature to municipality of the
right to submit to it's electors for
adoption commission form of gov
ernment upon which adoption the
statute by its own terms makes such
commission form operative, does not
appear beyond reasonable doubt to
conflict with any provision or princi-
pie of the State or federal constitu-
ton
/ me above quoted organic provi-
slons of this State contemplate vary
ing powers for different municipali-
ties and expressly authorize the Leg
lslature to prescribe the powers of
municipalities as varying eXigencies
may demand; and such express legis.
lative authority carries with it dis
cretion in comforting powers upon a
municipality that has no limitations
IN the constitution affecting this case
The implied principle that the gen
eral laWmaking power of the d.egisla.
ture may not be delegated, is not vio-
lated in the exercise by the Legisla-
ture of it's authority to prescribe the
powers OF municipality. See City
OF Yazoo City vs. Lightcap, 50 Miss
14S, 33 South
The above stated principle with
reference to municipalities under our
present constitution was recognized
In State VS.. Atlantic Coast Line r
Co., where it was held that the Leg.
lsiature could not lawfully delegate
TO the railroad commissioners power
TO enact a law, or to declare what
the law shall be, or to exercise an
unrestricted discretion in applying a
law; but the Legislature may enact
law complete in itself and author
lze designated officials within def
mite limitations to exercise discre-
tionary authority in effectuating the
law. In State ex rel. Muella VS..
thompson, and other like cases the
State constitution required uniform
system of municipal government.
ana authority conferred upon n mn
hlclpallty to change it's charter
would destroy the organic require
ment OF uniformity as well as in
fringe upon the implied principle an
piled in such cases forbidding dele
cation of legislative power Tho
only limitations upon the lawmakjnr
power of the Legislature are those
contained in the federal and State
constitutions, and it does not clearly
appear that the power of the Lepis-
lature by law to confer upon a mu-
nieipality the authority here con-
tested, is denied or limited by any
provision or principle of the organic
law.
Section 70 of the charter act of
the City of Lakeland, as amended by
chapter GIL acts of l3, does not
prescribe the details of the commits
sion form of government Which It au-
thorizes the city to establish, but it
does prescribe definitely the manner
of establishing a commission form Of
government and provides for the
election of five commissioners "by
popular vote. It is therein express
ly provided that "if majority of the
qualified electors voting at said cleo
tion shall vote in favor of the com
mission form Of government the same
shall become operative and of full
force and effect as a method of gov
ernment for the said city" The ap-
parent intent of the law is that when
the commission form of government
is duly submitted by the DESIGNATED
city authorities and afTirmatively vot
ed for by the electors of the city,
then such form Of government shall
become operative by force of the
statute itself, and that the five com
missioners duly elected as the law
contemplates, shall exercise the au-
thority Heretofore vested in a mayor
and City Council which are the usual
functions of commissioners under a
commission form of plan Of govern
ment in a municipality. Tn other
words the question presented on this
appeal is in effect the power of the
LEGISLATURE to declare that upon the
happening of a certain contingency.
the power vested in the mayor and
City Council shall pass to five COM
missioners. We see no constitution
al objections to the exercise by the
Continued On Page 5.)