Slike strani
PDF
ePub

impairing the obligation of contracts. Floyd v. Blanding, 54 Cal. 41.

Section 3788 of Political Code as amended in 1885, limiting and decreasing the time within which a purchaser at delinquent tax sale might enforce the execution of the tax deed is not unconstitutional. The tax sale does not create a contract entitling the purchaser to rest indefinitely upon the terms of the statute then in force respecting the time of his application for a deed." Tuttle v. Block, 104 Cal. 448.

The amendment of 1891 of section 172 of the Civil Code forbidding the husband to give away community property without the consent of the wife, cannot be construed retroactively so as to deprive the husband of his vested right to dispose of community property acquired prior to the amendment. Spreckels v. Spreckels, 116 Cal. 340.

The amendment of section 702 Code of Civil Procedure of 1895, reducing the amount to be paid on redemption of real estate under execution sale from two to one per cent, violates the obligation of contract of sale, where the sale took place prior to the amendment. Teralta Land etc. Co. v. Shaffer, 116 Cal. 523.

Thresher v. Atchison, 117 'Cal. 74. Also the amendment of 1895 of section 3442 Civil Code, did not apply to transfers made by an insolvent debtor prior to the amendment.

Cook v. Cockins, 117 Cal. 140.

Though the legislature has the power to give to statutes a retrospective operation, if they

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

are not ex post facto, and do not impair the obligation of contracts, or deprive any one of vested rights, yet it is to be presumed that no statute is intended to have any such effect, unless the contrary clearly appears, especially if to give the statute retrospective effect would work manifest injustice. Piguaz v. Burnett, 119 Cal, 160.

SECTION 17. [Art I]. Foreigners of the white race, or of African descent, eligible to become citizens of the United States under the naturalization laws thereof, while bona fide residents of this state shall have the same rights in respect to the acquisition, possession, enjoyment, transmission and inheritance of all property, other than real estate, as native born citizens; provided, that such aliens owning real estate at the time of the adoption of this amendment may remain such owners; and provided further, that the legislature may, by statute, provide for the disposition of real estate which shall hereafter be acquired by such aliens by descent or devise. [Amendment ratified at election Nov. 6, 1894.]

[Original section:] SECTION 17. Foreigners of the white race or of African descent, eligible to become citizens of the United States under the naturalization laws thereof, while bona fide residents of this state, shall have the same rights in respect to the acquisition, possession, enjoyment, transmission and inheritance of property as native born citizens.

Const. 1849, Art. I, Sec. 17. There is no provision of the constitution which prohibits the legislature from conferring the same rights of inheritance upon persons born in foreign countries and who have

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

never been residents here. Section 671, Civil Code, provides: "Any person, whether citizen or alien, may take, hold and dispose of property, real or personal, within this state;"> and section 672: “If a non-resident alien takes by succession he must appear and claim the property within five years,” etc. Section 4, article IX, of this constitution, does not limit the power of the legislature to declare that aliens may be heirs. [Lyons v. State, 67 Cal. 380; People v. Rogers, 13 Cal. 160; Estate of Billings, 64 Cal. 427; same estate, 65 Cal. 593.] State v. Smith, 70 Cal. 153.

A non-resident alien may assign property in this state inherited by him, and the assignee is entitled to appear and claim the property. Carraseo v. State, 67 Cal. 385.

SECTION 18. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, unless for the punishment of crime, shall ever be tolerated in this state.

Const. 1849, Art. I, Sec. 18. SECTION 19. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable seizures and searches, shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue but on probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons and things to be seized.

Const. 1849, Art. I, Sec. 19. The legislature has power to authorize a person to be searched for lottery tickets. Sections 1523, 1524, Penal Code. Collins v. Lean, 68 Cal. 284.

Sections 1459 and 1460 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, providing for orders in behalf of an administrator against persons alleged to have property, or knowledge of property belonging to the estate of a deceased person,

do not violate the provisions of the constitution protecting persons against unreasonable search, etc. Levy v. Superior Court, 105 Cal. 606.

SECTION 20. Treason against the state shall consist only in levying war against it, adhering to its enemies, or giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the evidence of two witnesses to the same overt act, or confession in open court.

Const. 1849, Art I, Sec. 20. The word “convicted” as used in this constitution and numerous sections of the codes means a finding that the accused is guilty, either by a verdict of a jury or by some other mode mentioned in section 689, Penal Code. Ex parte Brown, 68 Cal. 177.

SECTION 21. No special privileges or immuni. ties shall ever be granted which may not be altered, revoked or repealed by the legislature; nor shall any citizen, or class of citizens, be granted privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not be granted to all citizens.

The sufficiency of a complaint in an action to recover taxes from a railroad company must be tested by the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure relating to pleadings, and not by sections 3668-3670, Political Code, which attempt to declare what will be a sufficient complaint for such purpose. See notes under

[ocr errors]

subdivisions 3, 10, 13, 20, section 25, article IV. People v. C. P. R. R., 83 Cal. 393.

An ordinance of a board of supervisors purporting to levy license tax upon all sheep pastured in the county, but exempting therefrom those persons who list their sheep as taxable property in the county, and pay taxes on them as such, is in effect a tax upon property, although denominated a license tax on business, and is a discrimination against the property of the citizen of this state, which is not applied to others of his class, and grants an immunity to the same class of persons in the county adopting such ordinance which is not given to one falling within the provisions of the ordinance. The owner of the sheep pastured in one county, but upon which he pays taxes in another county where he resides, is discriminated against. Lassen Co. v. Cone, 72 Cal. 387.

An ordinance of the supervisors of Mono county imposing a license tax at the rate of fifty dollars per one thousand head of sheep upon the business of pasturing and herding sheep in that county, and declaring a violation of the ordinance a misdemeanor, held valid. Ex parte Mirande, 73 Cal. 365, distinguishing Lassen Co. v. Cone, supra.

An ordinance of the city of Modesto prohibiting wash houses or laundries, except in a specified portion of the city, being general in its character, confers no special immunity or privilege, and is valid. In re Hung Kie, 69 Cal. 149.

« PrejšnjaNaprej »