Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF INVESTORS' PROTECTIVE ACT.

This act, initiated by the electors of this state, will completely safeguard the interests of investors in securities, without virtually prohibiting corporate or co-operative enterprises.

This state must have its resources developed, either by encouraging corporate or co-operative enterprises financed by our general public, as "small investors," or by letting them fall into the hands of great individual capitalists, or "close corporations" formed abroad, which will absorb the profits due our own people.

This act has been prepared by experts of long experience in fiduciary capacities with responsible and successful concerns, who know and appreciate the value of that public confidence which rests on honesty in financial affairs.

The definition of "investment companies," as adopted by our legislature, includes all corporate or co-operative concerns and partnerships, whatever their line of business, and no matter how far from "investment" enterprises in the ordinary sense. Every concern for profit which is incorporated, or which raises money in any way except on its promissory notes to banks, is an "investment company" and comes under these stringent rules.

Is it not desirable, therefore, that these rules shall be fixed and bear evenly on all, and that their administration shall be conducted according to established, orderly procedures, rather than that they be subject to the caprices and prejudices of a single individual, who may alter or amend his requirements at will, or make flesh of one and fowl of another, without effective check and with no appeal adequate to protect the personal and property rights of even innocent parties?

This act includes everything controlled by the most comprehensive "blue sky" law, but it avoids the vicious methods of administration which make many such acts more dangerous and harmful to the public than beneficial.

It involves no unnecessary expense or delay to legitimate business, and the healthful publicity it provides will enable the public to judge correctly of the condition of any corporation, and will enable it to act intelligently in transactions therewith.

This act is based on the accepted legal and moral principle that men and their enterprises are to be considered honest and lawful until the contrary appears. It does not presume, as do most such acts, that they are all to be considered dishonest until they have proved their honesty to the satisfaction of a commissioner who can, arbitrarily, find them guilty and impose fine or imprisonment by a star chamber decision, without even notice of the accusation. It requires, among many other safeguards, that every "investment company" must, semiannually, file with the auditor of investments, and publish, a sworn statement of the kind and value of its assets and the character and amount of its obligations; that all advertising matter be submitted to the auditor before circulation, and that audits of books and affairs be made at the auditor's pleasure. It also provides that any "investment company" found to be in an insolvent or unsafe condition, shall be wound up under supervision of the attorney general.

W. C. WALLACE.

ARGUMENT

AGAINST INVESTORS' PROTECTIVE ACT.

This is a substitute for and an attempt to defeat the adoption of the referendum measure known as the "Investment Companies Act" set out on pages 38 to 41 of this pamphlet.

For the sake of brevity and clarity the "Investment Companies Act" will hereinafter be referred to as the "referendum act," and the "Investors' Protective Act of California" as the "initiative act." Both are "blue sky" laws, so called, but it only becomes necessary to examine the points of difference between the two to decide in favor of the referendum act.

First-One difference is that in the referendum act the officer to execute the act is called the 'commissioner of corporations," while in the initiative act such officer is designated "auditor of investments," a difference of course immaterial.

Second-By section 4 of the referendum act the commissioner of corporations is authorized to call for all matters which may be called for by the auditor of investments in the initiative act, but also to call for any such other information as may be deemed by him to be necessary to a full examination and understanding of the corporation under investigation; the auditor of investments is confined in his investigation to the strict letter of the statute, thus depriving him of the power of making such other investigation as might be indirectly necessary.

Third-By section 5 of the referendum act it is made the duty of the commissioner of corporations, after examining the matters required by the act to be presented to him, if he finds that the proposed plan of business is not uair, unjust, or inequitable, to issue a certificate to said corporation reciting that it has complied with the provisions of the act and that said corporation is authorized to sell its securities on such conditions as the commissioner may in said certificate prescribe; or if said commissioner finds that the proposed plan of business of the corporation is unfair, unjust or inequitable he may refuse to issue such certificate, whereupon said corporation shall not be permitted to transact business until amending its plan and receiving such certificate. By said act an appeal may be taken to the superior court from the decision of the commissioner.

In

This permit thus issued by the commissioner must be exhibited to all would be purchasers of the securities of said corporation and becomes its warrant to transact business, and furnishes an authoritative and valuable document for its protection and advantage, as well as for the protection of investors. But by section 5 of the initiative act no such permit or certificate is to be furnished by the auditor of investments. stead, he is required to examine the statements and information filed in his office, which, as stated, constitute only the matters and things fixed by the letter of the statute, giving him no discretion or power to call for anything else. The auditor, after making such examination, if he finds that said corporation be violating the provisions of its charter or of the laws, may direct a discontinuance of such violation or unsafe practice, but has no power whatever to restrain it in its activities, except to refer the matter to the attorney general and require him to bring suit against such corporation, which suit is to be brought in the county in which such corporation is transacting its business, thus compelling the attorney general to bring suit in a county where the corporation may be, and substituting the slow, laborious and expensive process of the courts for the expeditious methods provided by the referendum act in such cases; under the referendum act such corporation and the commissioner may readily readjust said methods of business so as to permit the corporation to proceed. This curtailment of power of the commissioner is one of the important differences. Fourth-As by said section no certificate to transact business is issued, the investing public would have no opportunity of knowing authoritatively whether a corporation offering its securities was legally authorized to do so.

Fifth-By section 6 of the referendum act an investment broker, upon making certain showing to the commissioner, is permitted to receive a certificate authorizing him to deal in stocks of other corporations, a very important provision for the investment broker who deals in marketable stocks; by the initiative act no such permit or license is provided for or can be issued. Sixth-Another very important difference is in section 8 of the referendum act, which provides for general supervision and control over all investment companies and brokers by the commissioner; and provides further, possibly the most important of all his powers, the power of visitation and examination whereby he, like the superintendent of banks, the insurance commissioner, the railroad commission and the commissioner of building and loan associations, will have the power to visit and inspect such corpora

tions a power most salutary and necessary, bu which has been entirely omitted from the initi ative act, doubtless for the reason that its ad vocates desired to escape this regulation.

By sections 18 and 22 of the initiative act it adoption, even though the referendum act wer also adopted, would work a repeal of the refer endum act and leave only the initiative act in force. The authors of the initiative act wer zealous to work this result, for the reason tha they apparently desired to draw the teeth of the referendum act and to substitute in its place another so harmless as to be of no real pro tection, effect or benefit to the investing public Vote "Yes" on the "Investment Companies Act." Vote "No" on the "Investors' Protective Act of California." LEE C. GATES, State Senator Thirty-fourth District.

SUSPENSION OF PROHIBITION AMENDMENT. Initiative amendment adding section 26a to article I of constitution. Provides that if proposed amendment adding sections 26 and 27 to article I of constitution relating to manufacture, sale, gift, use and transportation of intoxicating liquors be adopted, the force and effect of section 26 shall be suspended until February 15, 1915, and that, as to the manufacture and transportation for delivery at points outside of state only, it shall be suspended until January 1, 1916, at which time section 26 shall have full force and effect.

The electors of the State of California present to the secretary of state this petition, and request that a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the State of California, by adding to article I thereof, section 26a, suspending the force and effect of proposed section 26 of article I, if enacted at the general election held November 3, 1914, as hereinafter set forth, be submitted to the people of the State of California for their approval or rejection, at the next ensuing general election, or as provided by law. The proposed amendment is as follows:

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

Article I of the Constitution of the State of California is hereby amended by adding thereto a new section, to be numbered section 26a, in the following words:

Section 26a. Should an amendment to the Constitution of the State of California by adding to article I two new sections to be numbered respectively section 26 and section 27, as proposed by initiative petition filed with and certified to the secretary of state, and relating to intoxicating liquors, be enacted at the general election held on Nov. 3, 1914, then the force and effect of said section 26 shall be suspended until Feb. 15, 1915, at which time it shall have full force and effect except that, as to the manufacture and transportation of intoxicating liquors for delivery at points outside of the State of California only, the force and effect thereof shall be suspended until Jan. 1, 1916, at which time such manufacture and transportation also shall wholly cease and on and after said date said section 26 shall in all respects have full force and effect.

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF SUSPENSION OF PROHIBITION AMENDMENT.

This amendment seeks to correct an oversight in the drafting of the prohibition amendment, which failed to fix the time when it shall go into effect. The law of the state fixes the time at five days after the declaration of the vote by the secretary of state unless the time is specified in the law. It has been the rule where prohibitory amendments have been proposed to grant those engaged in the liquor traffic a reasonable length of time to get out of the business. The amendments of Washington, Oregon, and Colorado fix the date at January 1, 1916. The present local

option law allows ninety days to close out the business.

This amendment was initiated by the same persons who initiated the prohibitory amendment. It has been endorsed by almost all temperance organizations. It hardly needs an argument, as it is reasonable, wise and fair. The liquor traffic has been recognized as a business by our state laws, and if a majority of voters now prohibit the traffic those engaged in it ought to have time to readjust their financial affairs to conform to the law. This provision gives opportunity for laborers employed in the business to secure employment in other lines, or in the business reconstructed for the purpose of making a legitimate use of wine grapes. It also provides time for municipalities whose budgets have been based upon license fees to rearrange their budgets.

The concession is not made because of any legal rights, but in the interest of fair dealing and to make the loss inherent in a change of state policy as light as possible. It ought to command the support of every voter, whether in favor of prohibition or against it, as it is non-effective unless the prohibitory amendment carries.

The mere statement of the case is all the argument that is needed for this amendment. There is no prohibition in it. F. M. LARKIN. ARGUMENT AGAINST SUSPENSION OF PRO. HIBITION AMENDMENT.

The second proposed amendment, extending the time when prohibition is to take effect, simply serves to befog the original issue, which original issue is prohibition with its attendant evil effects on the people at large, among such evils being. that it tends to make hypocrites, falsifiers, lawbreakers, cowards, and also destroys self-respect.

Additional thereto, it destroys personal property and greatly lessens the value of real property; all without recompense therefor. It is condemnatory in character, and the rule is that there can be no condemnation without just compensation, which compensation prohibition denies. Such denial seems to verge on fanaticism.

The issue involved is simply one of prohibition with its attendant evils of confiscation and injury to our prosperity, on the one side, and maintenance of honesty, temperance, self-respect, liberty of thought and action and prosperity on the other. If confiscation is right, why delay it? Let the intelligent voter read and ponder. C. F. A. LAST.

ONE DAY OF REST IN SEVEN.

Initiative act prohibiting, except in cases of urgent emergency, the working for wages, or requir ing or employing any person to work, more than six days or forty-eight hours a week, the keeping open or operating certain places of business or selling property on Sunday; declares Sunday provisions of act inapplicable to works of necessity, or to member of religious society which observes another day as day of worship and who on such day keeps his place of business closed and does not work for gain; declares violation of act misdemeanor and prescribes penalties.

The electors of the State of California present to the secretary of state this petition, and request that the proposed law, hereinafter set forth, be submitted to the people of the State of California for their approval or rejection at the next ensuing general election, as provided by the Constitution of the State of California.

An act to provide for one day in seven as a day of rest.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

Section 1. Definition and construction. In this act, unless the context otherwise requires : (a) The word "day" means twenty-four consecutive hours, the word "Sunday" means the period of time which begins at 12 o'clock p. m. on Saturday night and ends at 12 o'clock p. m. on the following night, and other words and terms used have the same meaning as defined in the codes of California.

(b) A contract to perform a lawful act, though made on Sunday, is valid, but a contract rendered void by unlawful action on Sunday can not be made valid by subsequent action.

Section 2. It is unlawful for any person, firm, association or corporation in this state, or for any officer or employee of the State of California, or of any political subdivision thereof, to violate any of the following provisions:

(1) To hire, employ or require any employee, apprentice, servant or other person or persons to work at or engage in any trade, business, profession or occupation for more than six days in any calendar week of seven days.

(2) To work at or to engage in any said trade, business, profession or occupation for wages for more than six days in any calendar week of seven days.

(3) To keep open on Sunday for the purpose of transacting any business or labor, any store, office, shop, building, or place of business where goods, wares, merchandise or property is sold or offered for sale; or to sell or offer for sale any goods, wares, merchandise or property on said day.

(4) To keep open or operate on Sunday for profit any mill, mine, factory, bake-house, barber shop, work-shop, studio, or any such or similar place of business or occupation which is managed by or employs either skilled or unskilled labor, or both; provided, however, that the above provisions of this section do not apply to unavoidable work in caring for live animals, or to cases of urgent emergency. Immediate danger to life, property, public safety, or public health only shall be considered cases of urgent emergency within the meaning of this act. And, provided, that the above sub-sections numbered (1) and (2) do not apply to any person whose total hours of labor during seven consecutive days do not exceed forty-eight hours; and, provided further, that the above sub-sections numbered (3) and (4) do not apply to works of daily necessity. It is hereby declared that said works of necessity within the meaning of this act include the following, but not so as to restrict the ordinary meaning of the expression "works of necessity":

(a) Work essential to the relief of sickness and suffering, including the sale of drugs, medi

cines, or surgical appliances by retail for strictly medicinal purposes;

(b) Furnishing lodging or meals at hotels, boarding houses, restaurants, lunch stands, cafes, and work incidental thereto;

(c) Ice cream parlors;

(d) Parks, bath houses, libraries, museums, or art galleries;

(e) Sports, theaters and amusements;
(f) Setting sponges in bakeries;

(g) The sale and delivery of daily newspapers and magazines, or the necessary work in the preparation of the Sunday or Monday morning edition of a daily newspaper;

(h) The sale and delivery of milk, or cream, and unavoidable work in making cheese or butter, and in any manufacturing plant or industry, or industrial process of such a continuous nature that it cannot be stopped without serious injury to said plant, industry or its product or property used in such process;

(i) Unavoidable work essential to the protection of mines, property or perishable products in imminent danger of destruction or serious injury, and to utilizing water power necessary to prevent serious injury or loss in hydraulic mining or other industries where the water supply is not continuous throughout the year;

(j). Any work which is necessary to the continuous supply of electric current, light, heat, air, water, gas or motive power; to operating vessels, vehicles, livery stables, garages, railroads or any other transportation lines in this state; to telegraph and telephone service; and to any such public utility which the public welfare requires should be kept in daily operation;

(k) Any work which the railroad commission of this state, having due regard to the object of this act, to provide one day of rest in seven, deems necessary to permit in connection with the traffic or conduct of any railway or of any other public utility within the jurisdiction of said railroad commission, including the permitting of two days of rest to fall at any time within a period of fourteen consecutive days; provided, however, that said employee, apprentice, servant, or other person engaged in works of necessity as above provided for in sub-sections lettered (a) to (k) inclusive, shall not be hired, employed or required to work more than six days in seven, except as provided for in this act, but the day of rest may fall upon parts of two calendar days. And provided, further, that the above sub-sections numbered (3) and (4) do not apply to any person who is a member of a religious society which observes some other day than Sunday as its day of worship, and who actually keeps his place of business or occupation closed and does not work for gain or wages upon said day of worship.

Section 3. Any person, firm, association or corporation, or any officer or employee of the State of California, or of any political subdivision thereof, that violates any provision of this act, is guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, said offender shall be fined not less than ten dollars nor more than two hundred dollars, or be imprisoned in the county jail not to exceed thirty days, and, upon each subsequent conviction, both said fine and imprisonment shall be imposed; except, however,

in case of corporations, the imprisonment, when imposed, shall be imposed upon all officers or agents thereof in this state committing such offense or causing the same to be committed.

Section 4. The commissioner of the bureau of labor statistics and his deputies, are hereby authorized, empowered and directed to enforce the provisions of this act. And it is also hereby declared to be the special duty of each magistrate, district attorney and peace officer in this state to inform against and diligently prosecute any and all persons guilty of the violation of any provision of this act, either upon credible information as to any such violation, or upon reasonable cause to believe that there has been any such violation.

Section 5. Nothing in this act shall be construed to repeal or limit an act entitled "An act limiting the hours of labor of females," etc., approved March 22, 1911; or to limit the powers of municipal or county governments, not in conflict herewith.

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF ONE DAY OF REST IN SEVEN.

It is against the law of nature that man should work all the time, yet many men are compelled to do so against their will. Continuous labor makes of man a beast of burden, a slave to toil. Six-day laborers do more and better work and live longer, happier lives than seven-day toilers. One day of rest per week increases the efficiency of labor and the wage therefor. A mine owner has said, "We can afford to pay 25 per cent higher wages for a six-day than a seven-day laborer." Unfortunately all employers have not discovered that fact. One day's rest in seven works to the advantage of employers. Fatigue is one of the chief causes of accidents on transportation lines and in the industries. "Safety first" is now the slogan. Employers' liabilities will be diminished and the traveling public protected.

This bill provides for one day's rest in seven for all employees engaged in the continuous industries and for both employer and employee in all lines of business which can stop on one specified day. It applies to state, city and private employees. It is neither a religious measure nor a "blue law." No one would contend for a moment that religious or "blue laws" are enforced in any state on the Pacific slope or elsewhere in the United States to-day, and yet every state in the union, except California, and every civilized nation on the globe, sets aside Sunday as a common rest day, and none has been so bold as to claim that in so doing religious or blue laws are being forced upon the people.

This proposed law is probably the most liberal of any to be found on the statute books. It will not interfere with sports and amusements. They are left to local control. It will not interfere with any church or religion. It allows the Jew or Seventh Day Adventist to rest on Saturday and work the other six days of the week. It will not interfere with such industries as transportation lines, telegraph or telephone systems, electric light, gas and water plants; making of cheese and butter, caring for perishable fruits and other products; irrigation and work in industrial plants which require daily operation; daily newspapers and ice cream parlors; hotels, restaurants and boarding houses; sale of drugs and caring for the sick; sale and delivery of milk and cream. But while such businesses and industries may be kept in constant operation, each employee is to have one day off in seven, except in case of emergencies. The law will not limit the number of hours on the work days.

It is not an infringement upon but a grant of personal liberty. Men do not want the liberty to be compelled to work all the time; they do want the liberty to rest one day in seven. The right of rest for each requires a law of rest for all.

The bill gives one day's rest to employers in mercantile and other industries which can stop one day in the week. Why should they not have it? Proprietors need rest more than their clerks in this strenuous age of close competition. The saloon keeper as well as the grocer is entitied to this holiday. It can be secured only by means of a law which closes all places of the same line of business on the same day.

Every voter who believes in a weekly home day for wage earners and brain-tired business men will cast a ballot for the initiative act for one day of rest in seven.

WILLIAM KEHOE,

State Senator First District. ARGUMENT AGAINST ONE DAY OF REST IN SEVEN.

This proposed law discriminates in favor of those sects that observe Sunday as a day of rest and religious worship, by selecting and establishing it, by law, as the day of rest, and enforcing it upon the people under severe penalties of fines and imprisonment; while those who would obs rve another day are merely permitted to do so, under prescribed conditions, limitations, and restrictions.

This is a violation of the Constitution of the State of California, which declares that "the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be guaranteed in this state." (Art. I, Sec. 4, Constitution of California.) "The enforced observance of a day, held sacred by one of the sects, is a discrimination in favor of that sect and a violation of the freedom of the others." (Vol. 9, page 502, California Reports.)

This proposed law is an unwarranted interference with individual rights and personal liberty. "A man's constitutional liberty means more than his personal freedom. It means, with many other rights, his right freely to labor, and to own the fruit of his toil. *** It is a curious law for the protection of labor which punishes the laborer for working. Such protection to labor, carried a little further, would send him from the jail to the poor house." (Vol. 112, page 468, California Reports.)

The right of one person or class to choose their time of labor and rest establishes the right of every person, and of any class, to a like choice. This proposed law denies equal rights. It grants the right of choice to those who choose to labor, or employ labor, eight hours in one day, fortyeight hours in one week; but denies this right of choice to those who wish to labor or employ labor forty-eight hours and a few minutes in one week. It not only denies the right of choice, but imposes grievous penalties of fines and imprisonment upon those who shall attempt to exercise this natural liberty. Such a law would be a vicious menace to society. It would declare good citizens to be criminals because they sold something on the first day of the week, or because they had labored, or employed labor, for hire, a few minutes over forty-eight hours in one week. Their reasons not being accepted by the zealous prosecutors of the law, they would be in the power of the blackmailer or the jailer most of the time.

This proposed law places all citizens on a level with the wards and convicts of the state, deprived of the liberty to choose their own time for work and rest.

The state has no more right to say when free citizens shall work, or rest, than it has to fix, by law, a time for them to eat and sleep. For the state to deny its free citizens the personal right to determine the use of their own time is to treat them as slaves. W. MAYHEW HEALEY.

CITY AND COUNTY CONSOLIDATION, AND ANNEXATION

WITH CONSENT OF ANNEXED TERRITORY.

(Proposed by San Francisco and Los Angeles.)

Initiative amendment to section 8 of article XI of constitution. Present section unchanged except to authorize chartered cities to establish municipal courts and control appointments, qualifications and tenure of municipal officers and employees; authorizes cities exceeding 175.000 population to consolidate under charter and to annex any contiguous territory, but only upon consent of such territory and of county from which such territory is taken; prescribes procedure for consolidation and annexation.

The electors of the State of California present to the secretary of state this initiative petition asking that the Constitution of the State of California be amended as hereinafter set forth, and the following amendment to said constitution be submitted to the electors of the State of California, for their approval or rejection, at the general election to be held in the month of November, 1914.

That section eight and one-half of article eleven of the Constitution of the State of California, relating to the powers conferred on cities, and cities and counties, by the adoption of charters, or amendments thereof, be amended so as to provide for the extension of such powers, the consolidation of city and county governments, the annexation of territory thereto, and the assumption of bonded indebtedness by territory annexed to or consolidated with an incorporated city or city and county, and to read as follows:

PROPOSED LAW.

Section 8. It shall be competent, in all charters framed under the authority given by section eight of this article to provide, in addition to those provisions allowable by this constitution and by the laws of the state, as follows:

1. For the constitution, regulation, government, and jurisdiction of police courts, and for the manner in which, the times at which, and the terms for which the judges of such courts shall be elected or appointed, and for the qualifications and compensation of said judges and of their clerks and attaches; and for the establishment, constitution, regulation, government and jurisdiction of municipal courts with such civil and criminal jurisdiction as by law may be conferred upon inferior courts; and for the manner in which, the times at which, and the terms for which the judges of such courts shall be elected or appointed, and for the qualifications and compensation of said judges and of their clerks and attaches; provided such municipal courts shall never be deprived of the jurisdiction given inferior courts created by general law.

In any city or any city and county, when such municipal court has been established, there shall be no other court inferior to the superior court; and pending actions, trials, and all pending business of inferior courts within the territory of such city or city and county, upon the establishment of any such municipal court, shall be and become pending in such municipal court, and all records of such inferior courts shall thereupon be and become the records of such municipal court.

2. For the manner in which, the times at which, and the terms for which the members of boards of education shall be elected or appointed. for their qualifications, compensation and removal, and for the number which shall constitute any one of such boards.

3. For the manner in which, the times at which, and the terms for which the members of the boards of police commissioners shall be elected or appointed; and for the constitution. regulation, compensation, and government of such boards and of the municipal police force.

4. For the manner in which and the times at which any municipal election shall be held and the result thereof determined; for the manner in which, the times at which, and the terms for which the members of all boards of election shall be elected or appointed, and for the constitution, regulation, compensation and government of such boards, and of their clerks and attaches, and for all expenses incident to the holding of any election.

It shall be competent in any charter framed in accordance with the provisions of this section, or section eight of this article, for any city or consolidated city and county, and plenary authority is hereby granted, subject only to the restrictions of this article, to provide therein or by amendment thereto, the manner in which, the method by which, the times at which, and the terms for which the several county and municipal officers and employes whose compensation is paid by such city or city and county, excepting judges of the superior court, shall be elected or appointed, and for their recall and removal, and for their compensation, and for the number of deputies, clerks and other employes that each shall have, and for the compensation, method of appointment, qualifications, tenure of office and removal of such deputies, clerks and other employes. All provisions of any charter of any such city or consolidated city and county, heretofore adopted, and amendments thereto, which are in accordance herewith, are hereby confirmed and declared valid.

5. It shall be competent in any charter or amendment thereof, which shall hereafter be framed under the authority given by section eight of this article, by any city having a population in excess of 175,000 ascertained as pre. scribed by said section eight, to provide for the separation of said city from the county of which It has theretofore been a part and the formation of said city into a consolidated city and county to be governed by such charter, and to have the combined powers of a city and county, as pro. vided in this constitution for consolidated city and county government, and further to prescribe in said charter the date for the beginning of the official existence of said consolidated city and county.

It shall also be competent for any such city, not having already consolidated as a city and county to hereafter frame, in the manner prescribed in section eight of this article, a charter providing for a city and county government, in which charter there shall be prescribed territorial boundaries which may include contiguous territory not included in such city, which territory, however, must be included in the county within which such city is located.

If no additional territory is proposed to be added, then, upon the consent to the separation of any such city from the county in which it is located. beina given hy a maiority of the qualified electors voting thereon in such county and upon the ratification of such charter by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon in

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »