Slike strani
PDF
ePub

Galgiani, 49 Cal. 139, and Hyatt v. Allen, 54 Cal. 353, to the effect that prior and recent judicial interpretation of provisions inserted in a constitution will be presumed to have been considered by the people in adopting such provisions, the importance of inserting in this volume the old constitution with its annotations is very manifest. Again, the codes were not abolished by the new constitution, and it is said in Wickersham v. Brittan, 93 Cal. 34, 40, that the effect of section 1, article XXII,“was, by a single comprehensive provision to preserve the statutory procedure that was then existing with reference to the courts which were by that instrument abolished, and to authorize that procedure in all rights of action that were to be determined under the new constitution."

Radical changes were effected by the constitution of 1879 in regard to the judicial and legislative departments and in the matters of municipal corporations and taxation, and these changes have resulted in such a volume of decisions by the Supreme Court of this state, the whole being so interwoven with the general policy of the state, that it is believed that to cite decisions from other states upon similar constitutional provisions would be largely a work of superorogation at the present time. That there is occasion for the present effort to bring together in this form the decisions of the Supreme Court of this state is manifest by the encouragement that I have received in various ways since its intended publication has become known.

W.F. H. Los ANGELES CAL., October 15, 1894.

CONSTITUTION

OF THE

STATE OF

OF CALIFORNIA

Adopted in Convention, at Sacramento, March 3rd, A, D., 1879; Ratified by a vote of the People,

Wednesday, May 7th, 1879.

PREAMBLE AND DECLARATION OF RIGHTS.

PREAMBLE.

We the people of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this Constitutiou.

Const. 1849.

Each provision of the constitution is to be given its proper effect. If in one section a power is specially conferred, or a duty specially enjoined, which, in general terms, is prohibited by other sections, the power or duty specially conferred or enjoined constitutes an exception to the general rule; the direction to employ the power or discharge the duty in the particular instance, is as mandatory as the general prohibition. S. F. & N. P. R. R. Co. v. State Board, 60 Cal. 32,

The general rules of construction are the same whether applied to constitutions or statutes, and it is a familiar rule of construction not to treat any word as redundant if that can be avoided without marring the obvious sense of the entire clause. Hyatt v. Allen, 54 Cal. 353.

ARTICLE I.

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS. SECTION 1. All men are by nature free and independent, and have certain iualienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing avd protecting property; and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

Const. 1849, Art. I, Sec. 1.

Unusual and burdensome restrictions imposed by ordinance of supervisors of San Mateo county upon the business of maintaining an asylum for treatment of insane and others, render the ordinance unconstitutional. Ex parte Whitwell, 98 Cal. 73.

A city ordinance prohibiting the sale of liquor in any saloon, dance house, etc., where females are employed to solicit or wait upon customers is a valid exercise of police power and not an unconstitutional discrimination. Ex parte Hayes, 98 Cal. 555.

So, an ordinance requiring a license of thirty dollars for ordinary saloons or bars, and a license of one hundred and fifty dollars where females are employed is held constitutional. E.x parte Felehlin, 96 Cal. 360.

Under section 1617 Political Code, there is no authority for excluding children of African descent from public schools attended by white children, nor for establishing separate schools for Africans or Indians. The case of Ward v. Flood, 48 Cal. 37, is distinguished for the reason that at that time the statutes of the state provided for such separate schools. Suggested further that there is nothing in the constitution of this state nor in the 13th and 14th amendments to the constitution of the United States inhibiting legislation providing for such separate schools. Wysinger v. Crookshank, 82 Cal. 588.

Any person is at liberty to pursue any lawful calling, and to do so in his own way, not encroaching upon the rights of others; and it is not competent to forbid any person or class of persons, whether citizens or alien residents, from engaging in such business, or to subject others to penalties for employing

to

them. An ordinance of the city of Los Angeles mak. ing it a misdemeanor for any contractor to employ any person to work more than eight hours a day, or to employ Chinese labor on work contracted for by the city, is a direct interference with the rights of individuals, and unconstitutional so far as it attempts

create a criminal offense, it not appearing that the work to be performed was unlawful or against public policy, or that the employment was such as might be unfit for infants, females, or the like, or forbidden on that ground. Ex parte Kuback, 85 Cal. 274.

An ordinance of the city and county of San Francisco prohibited the carrying on of any laundry within certain named limits without first obtaining a certificate from the health officer that the premises are sufficiently drained and that the business can be carried on without danger to the sanitary condition of the neighborhood, and a certificate from the fire wardens that the heating appliances are in safe condition, and that no persons owning or employed in said wash houses shall wash or iron clothes between the hours of ten o'clock P. M. and six o'clock A, M., nor on Sunday. Held, the ordinance was not unconstitutional. Ex parte Moynier, 65 Cal. 33.

An ordinance of supervisors establishing a license of $25 per month upon business of retailing spirituous liquors is not in restraint of trade nor oppressive. Ex parte Benninger, 64 Cal. 291.

The Sunday law contained in sections 300, 301 of Penal Code as those sections existed in 1881, is not unconstitutional. Ex parte Koser, 60 Cal. 177.

See cases collected under Sec. 3, Art. XIX and Secs. 17, 18, Art. XX.

SECTION 2. All political power is inherent in the people. 117 123 Government is instituted for the protection, security, and ben

118 408 efit of the people, and they have the right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require it.

Const. 1849, Art. I, Sec. 2.

For the purposes of government, the protection, security and benefit of the people, municipal

« PrejšnjaNaprej »