in the title of the act, nor as special legislation. Kings County v. Johnson, 104 Cal. 199.

An action for foreclosure of mortgage must be commenced in county where the land or some part thereof is situated and if commenced in some other county a judgment in such action would be void. Rogers v. Cady, 104 Cal. 292.

The constitution does not command that the action must be tried, but that it must be commenced in the county where the land, or some part thereof is situated. Duffy v. Duffy, 104 Cal. 604.

The jurisdiction of the state courts in cases of homicide, extends to all places in the state, except as provided in section 8, article I, Constitution United States "all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, docks, yards, and other needful buildings." People v. Collins, 105 Cal. 508.

The place of trial is not an element going to the jurisdiction of the court, but is a matter of legislative regulation. The constitution only requires that actions must be commenced in the county where the property is situated. [Sec. 392 C. C. P.] Security Loan etc. Co. v. Kauffman, 108 Cal. 222.

The section is alluded to in Petaluma S. Bank v. Superior Court, 111 Cal. 498 in connection with the joining of a receiver appointed by the court as a defendant in a supposed case of foreclosure.

Neither the Superior Court nor the Supreme Court on appeal, has jurisdiction to try the question of indebtedness upon a mere money demand, where the sum involved does not exceed three hundred dollars. A cross-complaint for a less sum is therefore not permissible. Griswold v. Pieratt, 110 Cal. 261. See also Henigan v. Irvin, 110 Cal. 38

The service of a proposed statement on motion for new trial is not void because served on Sunday or a legal holiday, although it might be served on the next day, nor is such service "judicial business" within the meaning of the constitution. Reclamation Dist. v. Hamilton, 112 Cal. 605.

This section is referred to in People ex rel Lynch v. Budd, 114 Cal. 168.

Superior Courts are in effect always open for the transaction of business: The intervals when no business is being transacted being regarded as "recesses," and by "sessions" is meant the time during which the court is in fact engaged. Secs. 1112-1118 C. C. P.

Falltrick v. Sullivan, 119 Cal. 615.

The amount sued for determines the jurisdiction of the court. The prayer of the complaint does not determine the question of jurisdiction independent of the facts alleged. Lehnhardt v. Jennings, 119 Cal. 198.

[An amendment to be known as section 5 1-2 of this article was voted on at the general election, November 8, 1898.]

SECTION 6. There shall be in each of the organized counties, or cities and counties of the state, a Superior Court, for each of which at least one judge shall be elected by the qualified electors of the county, or city and county, at the general state election, provided, that until otherwise ordered by the legislature, only one judge shall be elected for the counties of Yuba and Sutter, and that in the city and county of San Francisco there shall be elected twelve judges of the Superior Court, any one or or more of whom may hold court. There may be as many sessions of said court, at the same time, as there are judges thereof. The said judges shall choose from their own number a presiding judge, who may be removed at their pleasure. He shall distribute the business of the court among the judges thereof, and prescribe the order of business. The judgments, orders and proceedings of any session of the Superior Court, held by any one or more of the judges of said court, respectively, shall be equally effectual as if all the judges of said respective courts presided at such session. In each of the counties of Sacramento, San Joaquin, Los Angeles, Sonoma, Santa Clara and Alameda there shall be elected two such judges. The term of office of judges of the Superior Courts shall be six years from and after the first Monday of January next succeeding their election; provided, that the twelve judges of the Superior Court, elected in the city and county of San Francisco at the first election held under this constitution, shall at their first meeting, so classify themselves, by lot, that four of them shall go out of office at the end of two years, and four of them shall go out of office at the end of four years, and four of them shall go out of office at the end of six years, and an entry of such classification shall be made in the minutes of the court, signed by them, and a duplicate thereof filed in the office of the secretary of state. The first election of judges of the Superior Courts shall take place at the first general election held after the adoption and ratification of this constitution. If a vacancy

occur in the office of judge of a Superior Court, the governor shall appoint a person to hold the office until the election and qualification of a judge to fill the vacancy, which election shall take place at the next succeeding general election, and the judge so elected shall hold office for the remainder of the unexpired term.

The term of Superior Court judges being six years, their term of office commences under article 20, section 20, on first Monday after first day of January next following their election. Merced Bank . Rosenthal, 99 Cal. 39.

When a new judgeship is created by the legislature under section 9, article VI, the first judge appointed to said office will hold until the next election by the people, and qualification of the person elected; and the first person so elected will hold office for six years, commencing on the first Monday after the first day of January next after his election. A person appointed by the governor to fill a vacancy in such office, holds under his appointment only until the next general election, and the person then elected will hold office until the expiration of the term in which the vacancy had occurred. People r. Waterman, 86 Cal. 27.

Section 14 of the act of March 11, 1893 [Stats. p. 168], creating the county of Madera, so far as it attempts to provide that the judge. of the Superior Court elected under that act shall hold his office until after the first Monday in January, 1897, is in conflict with this section of the constitution. People v. Markham, 104 Cal. 234.

The division of the Superior Court into departments is an imaginary one. The constitution provides that there may be as many sessions of the court as there are judges. The judges hold but one and the same court, and the jurisdiction they exercise in any cause is that of the court and not of the individual. The judges of the Superior Court in San Francisco may properly adopt rules for the guidance of the presiding judge in the matter of distributing the business of the court, so long as such rules do not violate any provision of law, but a violation of such rules cannot affect the jurisdiction of the court. White v. Superior Court, 110 Cal. 62.

As to certiorari in contempt case for newspaper publication, McClatchy v. Superior

Court, 119 Cal. 414.

SECTION 7. In any county, or city and county, other that the city and county of San Francisco, in which there shall be more than one judge of the Superior Court, the judges of such court may hold as many sessions of said court at the same time as there are judges thereof, and shall apportion the business among themselves as equally as may be.

See notes under section 6, supra.

SECTION 8. A judge of any Superior Court may hold a Superior Court in any county, at the request of a judge of the Superior Court thereof, and upon the request of the governor it shall be his duty so to do. But a cause in a Superior Court may be tried by a judge pro tempore, who must be a member of the bar, agreed upon in writing by the parties litigant or their attorneys of record, approved by the court, and sworn to try the cause.