troller, prior to the general biennial election at which a governor and other state officers are to be elected, could not deprive the people of the right to elect a controller at such election, whatever other effect the appointment might have. Brooks v. Malony, 15 Cal. 59.

SECTION 21. The governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, controller, treasurer, attorney general and surveyor general shall each, at stated times during their continuance in office, receive for their services a compensation, which shall not be increased or diminished during the term for which they shall have been elected; but neither of these officers shall receive for his own use any fees for the performance of his official duties.

The Political Code (Sec. 408) prescribed the duties of the secretary of state, but it also created a board of examiners, and made the governor, attorney general and secretary of state members of the board and fixed a salary to the attorney and secretary for their duties as such members. (Sec. 684 Pol. Code, repealed 1880.) Held, the legislature may devolve on said officers the performance of services foreign to their office and allow a salary therefor in addition to the salary as such officers. Melone v. State, 51 Cal. 549, (affirming Love v. Baehr, 47 Cal. 364.)

As to controller, Green v. State, Id. 577. The act creating the board of examiners was constitutional. Ross v. Whitman, 6 Cal. 361; act of April 16, 1856 (Stats. p. 100.)

ARTICLE VI.

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

SECTION 1. The judicial power of this state shall be vested in a Supreme Court, in district courts, in county courts, in probate courts and in justices of the peace, and in such recorders' and other inferior courts as the legislature may establish in any incorporated city or town. [Amendment ratified September 3, 1862.]

[ORIGINAL SECTION.]

SECTION 1. The judicial power of this state shall be vested in a Supreme Court, in district courts, in county courts and in justices of the peace. The legislature may also establish

such municipal and other inferior courts as may be deemed necessary.

[Decisions relating to the jurisdiction of the several courts rendered since the adoption of the codes (1873) will be found herein under appropriate sections. The annotated Code of Civil Procedure, published by the code commissioners, sections 33 to 133, and also Parker's Practice Act contain abundant citations prior to 1873, and, with a few exceptions, it is unnecessary to insert such in this book.]

The municipal criminal court in San Francisco, established in 1870, (Stats. p. 528) is a "constitutional" court. The fact that said court does not provide for an appeal to the county court does not render the act unconstitutional. If the reference to such appeal in section 8, article VI, is self-executing, then the right to appeal exists independent of the statute; if it is not self-executing then it merely confers upon the county court the right to entertain such appeals when the legislature shall provide the means of exercising it. People v. Nyland, 41 Cal. 129.

The power of the judiciary to declare a legislative act unconstitutional should never be exercised except where the conflict between it and the constitution is palpable and incapable of reconciliation. S. & V. R. R. Co. v. City of Stockton, 41 Cal. 149.

Section 2, article IV, United States constitution, is a solemn compact between the states, to be enforced by state legislation or by judicial action, and state courts of general original jurisdiction, exercising the usual powers of common law courts, are fully competent to hear and determine all matters and to issue all necessary writs for the arrest and transfer of fugitive criminals to the authorized agents of the state from which they fled, without any special legislation. Matter of Romaine, 23 Cal. 585.

The legislature may constitute the mayor of a city ex officio justice of the peace. Uridias v. Morrill, 22 Cal. 474.

The purpose and effect of article VI of amendments to constitution is to continue the former courts

until the courts provided for by the amendments can be organized and officers elected under laws to be enacted for that purpose. In re Oliverez, 21 Cal. 415; Gillis v. Barnett, 38 Cal. 393. See also section 19 infra.

The legislature can impose no duties upon the judiciary but such as are of a judicial character, and the incorporation of colleges or towns is not stricti juris judicial, but ministerial; or rather, under our constitution, a legislative act. If the legislature can delegate such power it must be to supervisors or some other person or body possessing like functions, and not to a court. (Burgoyne v. San Francisco, 5 Cal. 9; Dickey v. Hurlburt, Id. 343.) Act of March 27, 1850, (Stats. p. 128) to provide for incorporation of towns. People v. Town of Nevada, 6 Cal. 144.

Under the power to create such other "inferior courts" Held, such courts as are here authorized must be only of inferior, limited and special jurisdiction, and the act of April 5, 1850, (Stats. p. 159) to establish a municipal court in San Francisco to be known as the Superior Court is unconstitutional in so far as it attempted to confer jurisdiction upon said court beyond the territory in which it was created. Meyer v. Kalkman, 6 Cal. 583; overruled in Hickman v. O'Neil, 10 Id. 294; and see Kenyon v. Welty, 20 Id. 640; affirmed in Vassault v. Austin, 36 Id. 696. And as to the municipal court of San Francisco established subsequent to the amendment of 1862 see Ex parte Stratman, 39 Cal. 517, where it is suggested that if the question was res integra it might be difficult to maintain that such courts were "inferior" at least within the common law definition. The Superior Court had no jurisdiction in quo warranto. People v. Gillespie, 1 Cal. 342.

The judicial power of the United States in admiralty and maritime cases is not exclusive, and the states have power to confer such jurisdiction upon their own courts. Taylor v. The Columbia, 5 Cal.

268.

Congress has made the power to naturalize persons judicial, but congress cannot confer jurisdiction

upon state courts. The provision of the constitution of the United States giving congress power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, means that the rule when established shall be exercised by the states. The legislature of this state has given such jurisdiction to the district courts only. Ex parte Frank Knowles, 5 Cal. 301.

As to writs of certiorari and appeals from state to federal courts, see Greely v. Townsend, 25 Cal. 613, overruling Johnson v. Gordon, 4 Cal. 368.

SECTION 2. The Supreme Court shall consist of a chief justice and four associate justices. The presence of three justices shall be necessary for the transaction of business, excepting such business as may be done at chambers, and the concurrence of three justices shall be necessary to pronounce a judgment [Amendment ratified Sept. 3, 1862,]

[ORIGINAL SECTION.]

SECTION 2. The Supreme Court shall consist of a chief justice and two associate justices, any two of whom shall constitute a quorum.

SECTION 3. The justices of the Supreme Court shall be elected by the qualified electors of the state at special elections to be provided by law, at which elections no officer other than judicial shall be elected, except a superintendent of public instruction. The first election for justices of the Supreme Court shall be held in the year eighteen hundred and sixty-three The justices shall hold their offices for the term of ten years from the first day of January next after their election, except those elected at the first election, who, at their first meeting shall so classify themselves by lot, that one justice shall go out of office every two years. The justice having the shortest term to serve shall be the chief justice. [Amendment ratified Sept. 3, 1862.]

[ORIGINAL SECTION.]

SECTION 3. The justices of the Supreme Court shall be elected at the general election, by the qualified electors of the state, and shall hold their office for the term of six years from the first day of January next after their election; provided that the legislature shall, at its first meeting, elect a chief justice and two associate justices of the Supreme Court, by joint vote of both houses, and so classify them that one

shall go out of office every two years. After the first election, the senior justice in commission shall be the chief justice.

SECTION 4. The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction in all cases in equity; also in all cases at law which involve the title or possession of real estate, or the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, toll, or municipal fine, or in which the demand, exclusive of interest, or the value of the property in controversy amounts to three hundred dollars; also in all cases arising in the probate courts; and also in all criminal cases amounting to felony, on questions of law alone. The court shall have power to issue writs of mandamus, certiorari, prohibition and habeas corpus, and also all writs necessary or proper to the complete exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. Each of the justices shall have power to issue writs of habeas corpus to any part of the state, upon petition on behalf of any person held in actual custody, and may make such writs returnable before himself or the Supreme Court, or before any District Court or any County Court in the state, or before any judge of said courts. [Amendment ratified Sept. 3, 1862.]

[ORIGINAL SECTION.]

SECTION 4 The Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdistion in all cases when the matter in dispute exceeds two hundred dollars, when the legality of any tax, toll, or impost, or municipal fine is in question, and in all criminal cases amounting to felony, on questions of law alone. And the said court, and each of the justices thereof, as well as all district and county judges, shall have power to issue writs of habeas corpus at the instance of any person held in actual custody. They shall also have power to issue all other writs and process necessary to the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction, and shall be conservators of the peace throughout the state.

Proceedings for condemnation of land for railroad purposes are special cases, and that the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction in such cases is no longer an open question in this state. S. & C. R. R. Co. v. Galgiani, 49 Cal. 139, and cases there cited.

District courts necessarily have jurisdiction in a large class of cases where no money consideration is involved. In Knowles v. Yates, 31 Cal. 83, it is held that the words "all cases at law" are not limited by the words immediately following, and as it had been held in Conant v. Conant (divorce) 10 Cal. 252, prior to the amendment of this section, that the amount