Pollock v.

Taylor, 31 Cal. 338, explained.] Cummings, 38 Cal. 683. The District Court has jurisdiction in action to recover one-half of partition fence, although the money demand is less than three hundred dollars. Holman v. Taylor, 31 Cal. 338.

Since the amendment in 1862, district courts have no jurisdiction to try issues framed in probate courts. Will of Bowen, 34 Cal. 682.

Where an action was commenced in good faith in the District Court for a sum greater than two hundred dollars, exclusive of interest, that court has jurisdiction though it is necessary to enter a judgment for a sum less than two hundred dollars. Jackson v. Whartenby, 5 Cal. 95. The jurisdiction of district courts where more than two hundred dollars is involved is original and exclusive; jurisdiction of causes involving five hundred dollars cannot be conferred upon justices' courts. Zander v. Coe, Id. 230.

The district courts are not given appellate jurisdiction and an act attempting to confer such jurisdiction is void. People v. Peralta, 3 Cal. 379; Caulfield v. Hudson, Id. 389.

SECTION 7. There shall be in each of the organized counties of the state a county court, for each of which a county judge shall be elected by the qualified electors of the county at the special judicial elections to be held as provided for the election of justices of the Supreme Court by section three of this article. The county judges shall hold their offices for the term of four years from the first day of January next after their election. Said

courts shall also have power to issue naturalization papers. In the city and county of San Francisco the legislature may separate the office of probate judge from that of county judge, and may provide for the election of a probate judge, who shall hold his office for the term of four years. [Amendment ratified September 3, 1862.]

[ORIGINAL SECTION.]

SECTION 7. The legislature shall provide for the election, by the people, of a clerk of the Supreme Court, and county clerks, district attorneys, sheriffs, coroners and other necessary officers; and shall fix by law their duties and compensation. County clerks shall be ex officio clerks of the district courts in and for their respective counties.

Under the original section the term of office of district attorney was not fixed, but it is required only that the election of such officers shall be provided for. People v. Brown, 16 Cal. 442. County judge is one of the constitutional officers, and the term is limited to four years, but the legislature may determine the time of election and fix the commencement of the term. Where the act organizing a county fixes the term of county judge at two years, it is in that particular void. Westbrook v. Rosborough, 14 Cal. 181. Also: That a county judge elected upon the formation of San Mateo county held office four years. The legislature cannot limit the term. People v. Templeton, 12 Cal. 394.

SECTION 8. The county court shall have original jurisdiction of actions of forcible entry and detainer, of proceedings in insolvency, of actions to prevent or abate a nuisance, and of all such special cases and proceedings as are not otherwise provided

for; and also such criminal jurisdiction as the legislature may prescribe; they shall also have appelate jurisdiction in all cases arizing in courts held by justices of the peace and recorders, and in such inferior courts as may be established in pursuance of section one of this article,in their respective counties. The county judges shall also hold, in their several counties, probate courts, and perform such duties as probate judges as may be prescribed by law. The county courts and their judges shall also have power to issue writs of habeas corpus, on petition by or on behalf of any person in actual custody in their respective counties. [Amendment ratified September 3, 1862.]

[ORIGINAL SECTION.]

SECTION 8. There shall be elected in each of the organized counties of this state one county judge, who shall hold his office for four years. He shall hold the county court and perform the duties of surrogate or probate judge. The county judge, with two justices of the peace, to be designated according to law, shall hold courts of sessions, with such criminal jurisdiction as the legislature shall prescribe, and he shall perform such other duties as shall be required by law.

The Probate Court has exclusive jurisdiction of the accounts of executors and administrators, and of the final distribution of estates of deceased persons, while it may be conceded that the district courts have jurisdiction of actions against executors to declare a trust in respect to real estate in many instances, and actions arising out of certain controversies having their origin in the administration of estates. Haverstick v. Truedell, 51 Cal. 431; Auguisola v. Arnaz, Id. 437; in Matter of Will of Bowen, 34 Cal. 682; Gur

ney v. Maloney, 38 Cal. 85; Bush v. Lindsey, 44 Cal. 121.

Proceedings for condemnation of water to supply cities are special cases. Spencer Creek Water Co. v. Vallejo, 48 Cal. 70, and the County Court has jurisdiction unless the legislature confers jurisdiction upon some other court. Such jurisdiction cannot be given to county judge, nor to any court not mentioned in Art. VI, Id. See also, S. & C. R. R. Co. v. Galgiani, 49 Cal. 139. Writs of mandate are not "special cases" and power to issue such writs cannot be conferred upon county courts. People v. Kern Co., 45 Cal. 679.

The constitution has not conferred upon probate courts jurisdiction of all matters relating to estates of deceased persons. The district courts have jurisdiction of actions against the administrator of an administrator for settlement of accounts of the estate of which his intestate was administrator. This jurisdiction grows out of the equity powers of the district courts. Bush v. Lindsey, 44 Cal.

121.

The statutes conferring jurisdiction upon the County Court in cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer are constitutional. Stoppelkamp v. Mangeot, 42 Cal. 321. Queare, whether the provision of the forcible detainer act of 1863, by which the landlord is authorized to change terms of lease by notice to the tenant is constitutional. Id. [See Secs. 827

and 1945, C. C., and Corson v. Berson, 86 Cal. 439.1

The proceeding provided for by statutes of 1868 and 1870, modifying grades of streets in San Francisco is a "special" one, and not an action at law involving validity of an assessment, and jurisdiction to render final judgment may be vested in County Court. Appeal of Houghton, 42 Cal. 35. The constitution has not undertaken to secure the benefit of appeal to any person against the legislative control. Id.

The Probate Court has not jurisdiction to direct an executor on receipt of money loaned, to re-convey real estate, conveyed to his testator by deed absolute on its face, but intended as security for repayment of the money loaned. Anderson v. Fisk, 41 Cal. 308.

Proceedings under the act of January 24, 1860 [Stats. p. 5], for settling claims to lots in town sites on public lands before the county judge do not constitute an action at law or in equity, but such proceedings are special cases, and said act is constitutional. Ricks r. Reed, 19 Cal. 551. Affirmed in Ryan v. Tomlinson, 31 Cal. 15. "Special cases" and proceedings mentioned in this section does not include any of those cases for which courts of general common law and equity jurisdiction have always supplied the remedy, but must be confined to such new cases as are the creation of statutes, and the proceedings under which are unknown. to the general framework of courts of common law and equity. Actions to prevent or abate