Low v. Mayor & Common Council of Marysville

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1855Published

Before: Murray

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the City of Marysville lacked the authority to subscribe to stock in a private navigation company because such speculative enterprises fall outside the scope of legitimate municipal purposes, and further, that authorizing such powers via special act violates the state constitution.

Issues

Whether the City of Marysville's charter authorized the subscription of stock in a private steam navigation company as a 'public improvement.'
Whether the legislative act authorizing such a subscription is unconstitutional under the provision prohibiting the creation of corporations by special act except for municipal purposes.

Disposition. remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The words “ public improvements,” when applied to a municipal government, must be taken in a limited sense, as applying to those improvements which are the proper subject of police and municipal regulation”

“the object of their creation to be governmental, and not commercial.”

“it would be equally unconstitutional to confer special power on a corporation already created, In other words, it would be doing, by two acts, that which the Legislature could not do by one”

Synopsis

The amendments to the Charter of the City of Marysville provide that the Common Council shall not take any stock “ in any public improvement, or effect a loan for any purpose, without first obtaining the consent of the people, at an election held for the purpose.” Held, that this could not be extended to improvements other than municipal in their character, and the Legislature did not intend to invest the City with authority to embark in speculative enterprises of improvement.

Under this provision, the City has no power to subscribe stock in the Citizens’ Steam Navigation Company.

The words public improvements, when applied to a municipal government, must betaken in a limited sense, as applying to those improvements which are the proper subjects of police and municipal regulation—such as gas. water, almshouses, hospitals, etc.—and can not be extended to subjects foreign to the object of the incorporation, and beyond its territorial limits.

The powers of municipal corporations are limited to the express grant of their charters ; and the object of their creation is governmental, and not commercial.

The thirty-first section of the fourth article of the Constitution, provides that Corporations may be formed under general laws ; but shall not be created by special act, except for municipal purposes.” Held, that the term municipal is limited to governmental, and can not be extended to commercial purposes.

If the term public improvements, in the amended Charter, could be construed to extend to commercial speculations, then it would be in violation of said section of the Constitution : as it would be granting powers to a corporation by a special act for other than municipal purposes.

Murray, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Heydenfeldt, J., concurred.

The second section of an Act amendatory of An Act incorporating [215]the City of Marysville, and Acts supplementary to said Act, provides as follows:

“ If the Common Council desire to take stock in any public improvement, or loan the credit of the city to any improvement, or effect a loan for any purpose, for a sum exceeding five thousand dollars, they shall submit a proposition for taking such stock, or effecting such loan, stating the amount of loan or stock, to the electors of the City of Marysville, at a special election to be held for that purpose, upon the Common Council giving twenty days’ published notice of the same ; and if two-thirds of the electors vote in favor of such proposition or propositions, the Common Council shall have power to effect such loan or take such stock—but not otherwise,—and pledge the faith of the city for such loan or stock.”

The question now presented for our determination, is as to the authority of the City of Marysville, under the provisions of this section, to subscribe stock in the “ Citizens’ Steam Navigation Company.”

The objections raised are, first, that the Act does not purport to give to the Common Council of the city the right to embark in such an enterprise or speculation, but only to engage in such public improve, ments as come strictly within the proper exercise of municipal regulation ; and, second, if the Act under consideration was intended to authorize such an exercise of power, it is unconstitutional.

Upon the first point, it is clear to my mind that the section can not be extended to improvements other than municipal in their character, and that the Legislature did not intend to invest the City of Marysville with authority to embark in speculative enterprises of improvement, because of some fancied benefit which might inure to the city.

The words “ public improvements,” when applied to a municipal government, must be taken in a limited sense, as applying to those improvements which are the proper subject of police and municipal regulation-—-such as gas, water, alms-houses, hospitals, etc.—and can not be extended to subjects foreign to the object of the incorporation, and beyond its territorial limits. Without referring to the many privileges exercised by the free cities of Europe, some of which exercised almost all the powers of sovereignty, by virtue of royal patent or their own usurpation, we understand the powers of municipal corporations to

Low v. Mayor & Common Council of Marysville

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief