The Sacramento Union from Sacramento, California • Page 5

GENERAL A. L. HART'S BRIEF. To be Filed in the Supreme Court in the Rideout Case. Tho Able Counsel's Argument Against the Validity of tho Capital Removal Resolution.

Following is the full text of the brief of eneral A. L. Hart, one of the counsel lor plaintill in tho case of the People, on relation ol N. li. Kideout, against the Secretary of State to restrain tbe latter from certify me to the passage by the Legislature ofthe so-called constitutional amendment making San Jose the scat of government.

J. W. Armstrong, who is of counsel for the plaintill', is also preparing a brief for iiliug with the Supremo Court: lv tiie Supreme Court ofthe State of peoplt of the State ol California, on tne relation ol N. D. Rideout, appellants, vs.

E. xi. Waite. Secretary of the Stale ol Jalifornia. of A.

Hart on behalf oi appellants. vi the lltu day ot March, 1898, an amendment to the Constitution ol tne Btate of California wu- proposed in tbe Senate ol said State, i-aid amen Iment waa entitled "Senate Conn Am- leinieut Xo. J-'JJ." and by Itti proposed to amend Section 1 XX. of the Constitution Ol said object said amendment filing to change tbe seat ol government fiom the cny ot Sacramento to toe city ol San The amendment was proposed in lorm aud uage a- foil iwa Legislature ofthe state of California, ta thirtieth session, commencing on day of A. 11., 1893, two -thirds ol all tiie members elected to eacu bouse of said Legislature voting favor th.reot, bereby pi oposea mat Section 1 ul Article XX.

(mlslechs, ol tlie Constitution oi the State ol California, be amended so as to read us follows I "a etlou l. The dty of San Jose Is hereby declared to the seat of government of this stale and shall so remain until changed by law; but no law changing tlie seat of government snail be valid or binding uincss the same be approved and ratified ova majority ol tue qualified electors ol the Btate voting therefor at a general stale election, under such regulations and provisions astbeLeglslntui, a two thirds vote of each house, may provlue, submitting the question of change to the people; provided, that the State shall i a donation of a site ol not less than ten acres and before such removal snail he had. The Governor, the Se retarj of Btate, and the Attorney-General are bcrebautboi Ised to approve said site, and upon the approval thereof and the payment oi si.OoO.- OOOlnto the btate- Treasury, the Legislature shall provide for the erection of the necessary building and the removal of the seat of go v. i.t. Two-thirds of ail the members elected to house voted in favor ot said amendment, and the same was thereafter oorreetl) eutered in the journal ol tbe Senate Itn the yeas and nays taken thereon, bul in tie- Assembly there were some verbal ditlereiices between tne amendment as pro, and adopted, uid the amendment as entered In Its journal.

The proposed amendment was not put in tin-lorm of a bill; it v.as not printed for the use ot the members; It was not read on three several day-. The measure was not declared i a case of urgency, nor did twothirds ot either house, by a ote of yeas and nays, or otherwise, dispense witb th? provls oi Section ot Article IV. of theOonitutlon. No statute Mas passed by tbe Leg- IslaUire. either by a two-thirds vote of eacli liouse, or otherwise, providing any regulations or provisions for submitting the question of said change to the peoi le, nor for sub the question of ratify Ing any law providing for the change of tin- seat of government oi this stut- iiuii said city of Sacramento lo said city ol San .1 This action was commenced for the purpose of i ving this court determine, deiinitetv and finally: the seat of government of tm- can lie changed hy such a proposed i iment of tin- Constitution.

an amendment proposed i ie- manner desci tbed is a Jaw Ithin the DlngOl se. tion 1 ol Article XX. ol the i institution, and il it were conceded thai -i a proposed amendment is a law within tb( meaning ol Section lof Article it could be submitted o. the people for ratification witnout au Acl ol the Legislature, passed by a two-thirds vote all mc iia' ed to each house, making and provisions lor tue submission of i qUC-l lou tO tue peop c. The judement ofthe loner court wasin Cavor of the ibis appeal is taken upon ilu- ludgment roil.

It ia contended by the appellants that the of government ot tins cannot be changed by an amendment of the Constitution j. oposed tn pursuance of, and in tin- manm by. Section 1, Article XX. of thi i institution; tbat, while it is competent for tiie Legislature to propose, and for tbe people to rutiiy an amendment of any provision ol iln Constitution ofthe Section 1 o' Article yet, SO long lt sa: 1 tion lof Article XX. remains ln its present I.

rm. unamended, it prescribes the onij i.y whicb the seal ol government can bi changed; that such a change can oulv be made by law, and-cannol be accomplished uv a proposed amendment under Section 1 Article XVIIL; that the law proi Idingforsuch a eguhirly Introduced by lull. and, unless a case of urgency ls regularly declared by a two-thirds vote of the hous which it ts pending, the bin must be printed for the use ot the members and read on three eral days in cacti and mnst receive pproval oi the Executive; lha! such a bill, wi.eu regularly passed Into a law, does not become valid or binding until approved and rMtiiiei by a majority of the qualified electors of the State voting theretor at a ueneral state election, under such regulations provisions as tbe Legislature, bj a twot; nils i.f each house, may provide, submlttlng the question of cbange to the people; that seat of government at Sacramento is nn accomplished ami established tact, made so by liie provisions of Section lof Article XX. ol tbe Constitution; and, while tiie provisions of the Constitution, with reference to the method of moval, may be amended, the lad of lhe existence oi the seat of government at Sacramento cannot be cnanged so long as Constitution remains as it is, except the manner provided bj said etion; thnt the proposed aim udmenl under cousideration iinvalid vi its bee, even conceding that tie ol rumtnt may be changed lv the manners thi recent session of tbe 1.. jisiu'ur thai said amend ment couples the proposed change with conditions which, un di all circumstances, would invalidate it.

for it iii'e seat of government, not vi mi any necessity or policy proj used ami ratified by i or to be finally ptcl or ratified by the people, hut upon au option whicb ultimately depends upon the conduct ofthe city of Sau Jose alone. i. Tbe flrst and main question to be eonsidlre i upon this an: 0 tbi tie-, ol government of Ul an ami v.iv,.tit ol tin onstitutlon pi iposed and mud In manner prescritx by Section 1 of ill. It must conceded, inthe i -t, that, while the people may adopt an amendment the Constitution whicb is proposed tothem in prescrih me Instrument Itself; neither the Legislature 1 ithe people, ln making anj change, can si, card the iseuis wnich auu pie. scrib.

their power, and that the validity or Invalidity of the proposed amendment consideration, depends ui-on the true conu'ie and Seetiou lof Article XX. ot tne St.ite Constitution. If the proposed be accomplished In tue manm attempted tlie recent session ot tiie Legislature, withoul any violation of oi tbe provisions of the Constitution, the vposed co Btll itional amendment, if it submitted to tbe lection authorized by law for such pui if. a el cti. it sliould r.e, ive support of a nm ontv ot the i ereoo, become a part of the Constitution, and the seal of government of this Btate, as the suit ther.

wou the manner therein provided. If. on the contrary, tiie i.ttem, government, in the manner prescrl lllil.PllJ, 's iii uguant to any 'a and tv- ton invs mid noo ol the nonoe, tie pro amendment could uoL vi ireumome ai'ntof 11 tion. As I'l'' -ci-t) os. amendment ior it- dut ion nialnK upon two provivi ctlon 1 Alt tiou 1 oi Article ti in XVIII prescribes.

In general terms, tin manner in whicb the Constitution may tx amendi That sectlo i proi Idi -i amendment or amendmi Constitution may be propose --aa-e and A-seinbly. and ll of all the ..,1 to each of the two fa shall voie iv favor thei o-e i amendment or amendments ghallbeenu ill their With th ha.vs tl and it Bhall be the duty ol tha Legislature to submit such proposed amendment or nts to the people lnsuch aimer and at such time and alter siieu publication us may be deemed ounl more amendments than one be submitted a' the they shall be so prepared distinguished, by number or otherwise. that each can be voted on separately, li tne a I il approve and ratify suc'u amend amendments, or any ot them, by a ty oi tn quaUfled electors voting such amendment or amendments shall become a part of this institution." ily. under this provision of the 1 ou-titutl vi, any section may be amended by submission ofthe question to the people ln the manlier therein provided, unless upon par i-uur subjects, special rales or otherwise provided bj some other and more specific proi isioas "making exceptions to the general rule. It may be conceded tliat, under said provision of the Constitution, it would be competent for Legislature Jo for the people to ratify, an amendment to Section 1 ot Aricie In such manner as to make it provide a diiJe ent method than that winch now be adopted of changing the seai of government Indeed, that section might be amended so as to place it witnin the pow of the Legislature alone, by a simple enactment I tt-ssed by a majority of that body, to change the-eai Of government of the State, and, under this general power ot amendment, tlie Legislature might propose, and tbe people might ratify, an amendment wblcb would utlestroy ami abrogate Section lof Artlcle but if sucli were done, Sacramento would stili, lv fuel, remain the Capita of the State.

If tlie Constitution were so amended as i lace It within the power ol tbe Legislature to change the seat of government oi tbe a simple enactment, no change could be actually until the requisite statute was passed. an amendment of Section 1 ol Article XX. would si in i iiy ies ult in altering the mode to be adopted in making the Of the seat of government, bul it not remove tbe seat of government. In oiiur v. while the law fixing tbe seat eminent and providing for Its change may lie the ehoatift cannot be accomplished, t-oloiig a-- the law remains unamended, without pursuing the provisions (rf Constitution as they now exist.

It will be seen, by a consideration ot the ons oi eJion 1 Article XX. that the cny oi Bacramento lias been made the seatol government ot thi- State by constitutional provision, ami. if Section 1 of Article 111. were not modified, in any manner, by any other special or subsequent provision, then 'ne jiower ot removal, under tne section above quoted, by the proposal of a Constitutional amendment, In the manner attempted tiie recenl session of the Leg is at tire, would be beyond question. Tbe convention, however, whicb trained the Constitution of the State, recognizing the paramount importance to tlie people, from au eoonomtcal standpoint it, of permanency the seat ol government, fotduatrfa, provided, by special provision, the manner in winch thereat of government might be disturbed or removed.

If ii had been the Intention of the train) rs oi the nstltutlon to permit the I at of government to Ik- removed hy the simple proposal and submission ol a constitutional amendment, there would have been no reason, which eai suggest itself to any mind, why any special, method should have been provided upon that subject. The power of th. people, in tiie adoption of their Constitution, to except particular subjects fromgeneral rule-, will not be denied; and when, in tii, exerciseol tl.eir sovereign power, the pie do thus except particular subjects from general there can be no reason for asserting that such subjects. In their regulation, shall not be controlled by such specific Section 1 of Article XX. of the constitution clearly excepts the question of removal ot ol government from the general rule providing for amendments of tbe Constitution.

It provides: "The city of Sacramento is hereby declared to be the seat of government of this Slate, aud shall -o remain until changed by law; but no law changing the seat ot government shall be valid or binding unless the same be approved anil ratiiied by a maiority of tin- qualified electors ot the state voting therefor at a general state election, under such gulations and provisions as the Legislature, by a two-thirds vote of eacli house, may pro ide. submitting tlie question of chsJnge to tlie 1 It will thus b- seen that the convention which framed tne Constitution anticipated tlie necessity of establishing the seat government bygoonstltuUonal provision, and, by plucing the question ol removal the caprice of a majority of the I gislatiire. The very fact that tbe Constitution fixes the scat of government is itself, irrespective of those considerations of public policy which at suggest themselves to every sufficient to show tiie importance which tiie question oi possible removal assumed in me minds of the convention that adopted, and ol the people wim ratiiied, thai instrument. Tee framers of tbe Constitution were not content, however, wben they had simply fixed and established the seattif government. If they had been, then, und.ubtedly.

tliis provision would have been tin- subject oi amendment iv tiie same manner as is provided for the amendment of tbe Constitution upon general subjects. After establishing the seat of government at Sacramenjo, the convention proceeded, by special provision, to specify and define, hi no uncertain terms, the manner in wliich removal might be had; and it provided as the first limitation upon the power of removal, that the seat of government at Sacramento "shall so remain until changed by law." It requires no argument the meaning ol this limitation, for tin- Constitution Itsell wisely -I- iiue- what Shall -'inst it vie a law within the meaning of its provisions. A concurrent a proposal, while either may be sufficient as the Initial sn-p- toward submitting un amendment upon general subji i.c people, is not a law, in any sense of lhe term. Jt is true that an amendment ol the Constitution, when it has been ratiiied hy the people, becomes a law; becomes a partof the fundamental law ot the State; but a resolution is merely a means by which an ainendmi nt may be proposed for submission to the in no respect a law within tbe meaning ot any of the provisions of tlie Constitution. Section 15 of Article IV.

of tbe Constitution rends I "No law shall be passed except by bill, nor shall any bill be put upon Its final passage until tlie same, with the amendments Hereto. shall bave been printed tor tlie use ot the members; nor shall any hill become a law unless same shall be read on three several days in each house, unless, in case of urgency, two-thirds ol the house where such bill may pending, shall by a vote of yeas and nays, dispense with the provision." Section 16 of tin- same article provides "Every lull whicb may have passed the Legislature -hall, belore it becomes a law, be pie-, nted to the Governor. If be approves lt, b. shall sign it; but If not, be shall return it, with his objections, to the house in winch it originated, which shall enter such objections upon the journal, and shall proceed to reconsider it. if, after such reconsideration, it again pas- both houses, by yeas and nays, two thirds of the members voting therefor, it shall become a law, notwithstanding the Governor's objection." A law, therefore, which may operate to change the Capital, if, after its passage, it ecetve the approval of a maiority of tne qualified electors of the Stale, ls one which requires mr its passage the time for deliberation sary In aii cases, except cases of urgency, in which bills are introduced lv tiie Legislature; and it must not only receive Ihe ot a sufficient majority ol tue Legislature, but, ac ing upon the importance of the subject of tne legislation, tin frami rs of the i Onstitutlon have required, also, thai il shall be presented to the Governor for hls approval or rejectlou.

Such a law requires the concurrent action of and executive departments of the state. It can make no difference that the particular bill, or proposed amendment, may lm passed tiie Legislature by a two-thirds vo for it must be conceded to be true that a lull, passed by the Leris.a ure. whatever may majority of votes which i. may recan liev become a law until ithas 1., eu presented to tiie Chil I Executive for his approval or rejection. 11l order ihat.

it he disapprove the he may point out the obis, and tijus give the Legislature his an ice upon the subject. Why, it may ho asked, wa- tiiis precaution against bast' legislation upon tnis subject required fundamental Ja Tbe answer Is selfevident. Tue contention of interested people for tbe establishment of the government in tbeir respective localities; the personal, private and put.lie interests involved in such a controversy; the Importance, to the State, ot the permanency of it.s scat ofg ment, and the questions of public economy t. tessarily arising in such an issue, cur in suggesting the wisdom uf requiring the deliberation before sucti a should be made. These considerations and otic rs induced tlie framers of tlie Constitution to provide thai there should be no cnauge of lament, uuless that chauge was made by law.

It may I I. however, that the amendment widen the Legislature has proor submission to tue people, when it shall hay-- received the approval and ratification required by Section lof Article come a law; but tlie difficulty arising a construction al onoe suggests Itself wben we consider tu. second clause of Section 1 ol Article which provides "but uo law changing the Mat governmi sua 11 be valid or binding unless tie- same be ni proved and ratified by a majority of the qualified electors of the state vol eral election, under such regulations prova isieus as the Legislature, by a two-thirds of eaeb bouse, may provide, submitting the change to the people." rwothings, therefore, are provided by the Constit to a nrsj Ir a taw making the change. Tie- first clause Ol provision ot -i under! 'lies tiiat the ena providing for the change sua 1 be a I law in the lull st sense of tnat term before there shall be any authority to submit the question of change tie- people. The second OM suspends tue operation the law, and denii stoll va id binding force until, in tiie man nor provided.

I lie people shall huve an opportunity to express m. ms.lv.-tiie question oi change lo be submitted. The laa tnus required provides for the change. Tiie people do not vote upon the law as they dei upon an amendment of the Constitution; they vote upon the question athere shall be a change of the seat of government. By this means the will ofthe legislative an executive departments, as express i state regularly enacted, is rat.jieu by tie p.

'pie voting i.T tlie change. Under this section of the Constitution, the SACI.A7I___.nTO DAILY SATTT.DAT, JUNE 10, 1 PAGES. manner of exercising the power ol removal is excepted from the general rule with ref renca tp amendments; and. in making this exception, a number of clearly defined differences are created between the manner of the exercise ol the right of removal and that of the right of amendment. Uuder Section lof Article XVIIL, tiie senate and assembly, by a two-thirds vote of all the members elected to each ol the two houses, may propose such amendment or amendments, and the Legislature, by law, may Bubmll the same IO the people in such manner, and at snch time, and alter such publication, as maj be deemed expedient.

Tiie form to be adopted in the proposal of such amendment or amendments is not prescribed or limited in that provision; the cdhtrary, it is lelt largely, it not wholly, in the discretion of tbe Legislature. manner of proposal may be any which the Legislature may devise, the only limitation being that lt shall be supported by twothirds ox all of the members elected to each of the two houses. Under Section 10l Article XX. of the Constitution, the power of the Legia ature is limited and circumscribed, so that tlie seat oi government "can only be changed by Jo say, the seat of government cannot be changed by a vote of toe people taken In pursuance of a mere resolution or proposal and a Li submitting tbe question to them of thiir suffrages. Under Section lof Article Legislature is authorized to submit tbe proposed amendment or amendments to the people.

In manner, at such time, an: niter such publication, as may be deemed expedient. It may, in other word-, submit the amendment or amendments to the people at a special election, to be provided lor bj law, orlt may submit the amendment or amendments at a nd Btate ejection, to be held under the existing laws passed for such purposes. Tbe Legislature, ln such a case, is unlimited in Us power be exercised In providing the manner, Hie time and the publication of Lhe election. Thera conid be no constitutional objection to a statute requiring tn.it such an election should be held within luirty days after the 01" tiie amendment i l.der Section of Articie XX. the Legislature is limited in its power to tne submission of the question of removal at a general Btate election, Such a question could not be submitted to the people at such a time, or after such publication, us might be deemed expedient by the Legislature; for.

If such were true, the provision or Section lof Article requiring such question shall be submitted amin general Btate election, would be renutirely nugatory. Ine reason which actuated and controlled the trainers ot tbe Constitution ln this respect is obvious. The ctol tins li iiii tation upon the power ofthe Legislature and of the people was to require th submission of the question of change or removal to be made at a time when popular excitement bad had an opportunity to subside, wheu the people had been permitted to fully deliberate upon the question of public policy and pi.bile econom necessarily involved in the Issue to submitted, and when tbe argeat number of electors would probably as-em ble at me While, therefore, an ordiuary amendment ot the Constitution may be submitted at such time us tbe Legislature mny determine upon, the greal linportanee attached to a possible removal of the seat oi government so impressed the Cramers ot the Constitution as that they were unwilling to leave the question, a- to tin- time of the election, to legislative discretion, and, theretore, they took such discretion irom that body by fixing, by constitutional provision, the time wheu the people should be permitted to vote upon that subject. 1' nder Bectli 1 of A rticle the enactment under which the proposed amendment may be submitted io tbe people may be by a majority of both houses of the iture. There is nothing In thai provision winch requires more thau a majority for tbe passage of the statute submitting the amendment or amendments to the people, or providing the manner, or the time ot election, or the publication which shall precede it.

Under 1 of Article however. the power of the Legislature In ths respect is particularly circumscribed. The votes ot the people such ease must he cast at a ueneral state election, and the Constitution expressly commands tbat tbe regulations aud provisions for tlie Submission oi that qu stion ai suchan election shall receive two-thirds of the vol, sot each of llie Legislature. Thus it wili be seen that two rules oi pi are hay. been prescribed by the Constitution; the one tor amendments of tlie Constitution upon subjects, the other for the accomplishment of a cbange in the seat of government; and lt is an Interesting lact, to be it vi the framework of tbe State-Constitution, that the subject under discussion is the only one upon which special provision has In made and a special mode of change provided; that ts to say, it is important to know that tne Constitution may be changed in any respect under the general ruie, with this single exception, concerning which special provision bas been made.

li was the evident purpose of the framers of tbe Constitution io make the subject ot tho removal ol the seat of government an exception to the general rule, and to subject it to specific, rather than general, provision uud regulation. While thai Instrument deals In general terms with matters of ordinary amendment, it expressly, ln plain, unmistakable language, excepts tbe subject under consideration from tlie more general provision regulating amendments, and specifically applies to ii a different method of proc Ii this be noi true. It must necessarily follow that Section loi Article XX. mnst be Ue I any operation whatever, aud it must also be true tnat, notwithstanding tiiis provision of i li. i Constitution, Sacramento is not to remain the seat of govern men I "until changed by law," and the submission of tbe question of removal to tiie people need noi be made In the manner expressly commanded by that provision.

in lOf Article XVIIL, as will be observed, applies to amendments generally, wnile Section 1 ol Article XX. is made apply to the remo.al of the seat of gun rnmenl specifically. Tiie trainers or the Constitution were content to permit amend men tsgi neral be made In tbe manner prescribe i by Section lot Article XVIIL, but the great Importance attached to the question oi tbe removal of tbe seat of government was sucli as that thej exeepte i that subject irom the operation of the general rule, and. as before stated, applied to It a special and particular rule. This was evidently done for the purpose of avoiding action upon the subject, and of placing in the way of removal such difficulties as would secure that ueliberatlon which tiie gray ity ol the subject demands.

The rule well settled, both In tlie construction of constitutional and statutory law, that general words are qualified by particular Clauses, and that a thing which is given in particular words shall not be taken away by general provision. This rule Is specially applicable to the case under consideration-, for lt cannot be assumed, in the luce of tiection 1 of Article that the trainers ol the Constitution ever intended tbat the scat of government oi this state should be made the subjecl ot removal in any manner otner than thai wblcb is prescribed In that section, Had it been the intention to permit the removal by resort to the remedy prescribed In Section 1 of Article there would have been no reason why the olher specific, and more diiticuit, remedy should have been provli tbe subsequent section. I'nder Section 1 of Article the amendment may be ratiiied by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon, and, if It receive such a ma.iority.it must become a part of tbe onstitutlon. The practical etlect of the provision of that section upon i his subject, la -such as that, if ies- than one-hall ol the qualified electors of the Should vote upon the subject, and the am indm shonld receive a majority of ttiose votes, it would necessarily receive tie constitutional ratliieation and become a part of the fundamental law. The language of Section lof Article XVIII.

is plain aud unambiguous; it provides as follows: "If the people shall approve and ratify su sh amendment or amendments, or any of them bj a majority ot the qualified el ors voting thereon, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of this Suppose, for Instance, that under tliis provision ot tbe i Jonstitulon the Legislature should provide ior the submission of an amendment at a special election to be held within thirty days after the conclusion of its then present session; that said election should be he? ami that less than one third of the qualified electore ol the State should assemble al lhe po.is and vote upon the amendment, and that the amendment al election should reo bare majority ef the persons voting thereon, would any one doubt that said majority would be sufficient to ratify tbe amendment, and would authorise its Insertion into the i Constitution? Suppose, also, tbat at a gen-3 ate ejection, at which an amendment was submitted, less than a majority of ail the i votes cast at tne election, bat a lull majority of all the electors voting upon Hie' said amendment should support the same, would any one doubt that under the language of tnis provision tbe amendment would be declared nil irted and would become a part of the Constitution The language, however, of Section 1, of Article XX. is entirely different. The vote must be taken at a general State election, and the law uiest be approved and ratified by a majority of the qualified electors of the state voting therefor. Wliile. therefore, under the one provision au amendment may be ratified at a special election, bj a maiority of the qualified electors thereon, under tne other provision, a law changing the seat ol government cannot become valid unless provi 1 and ratified a majority qualitled elector-oi the Stat.

ting therefor at a general Sate election." No less than the a majority or mil tin- electors voting at a general State elect ou coald ever Operate as a ratification of a proposal to cliange tue seat of government, une ot the ob eets in re- quiring the vote to be taken at a general elec- tion is to enable the proper canvassing cers to determine, as n- what would constitute, within tbe meaning ot the constitution, majority of all the qualified electors of the Stale," and, if less than all the electors should vote upon the proposition, a bare majority ot those voting thereon wouid not. in this Instance, be sufficient. Such a maiority, however, would be sufficient to ratify an amendment of the Constitution. This last diileiniee teiween tlie two sections of the Constitution is vital and substantial, and its existence is utterly inconsistent with the possibility of changing the seat of goveru- ment in any manner other than that proi Ided In Section 1 Article for It demonstfutes tue Intention of tue people, as evidenced by their solemn declaration, uiadi in their sovereign capacity, that tiie seat ot government shall not he changed by a vote wblcb would be sufficient tn ratify an amendment, but that it may only he cnanged by the auction of a majority of all the qualliled electors of the State. Tne only alteration attempted by the amendment proposed is oi that portion of section 1 of Article XX.

which fixes the seat ol government. The proposed amendment lot purport ln lis language, nor does it attempt in any manner, to amend any principle ol th. fundamental law; it simply attempts to alter or change the fact; that Is, p. remove the seat of government, whicb the provision under consideration forbids except it be done iv the manner specifically and partial ly pn scribed. It will not do, in the lace of this provision oi the Constitution, to say lliat, wben the aiiieiiilm, nl is made tn accordance with Section 1 of Article XVIIL.

th re will be no law fixing tlie seat of goverment at Sacramento; lor thai method ol reasoning would necessarily require an assumption of tlie main question at issue. When the Constitution ides mat theaeatof government shall not be removed, except iv a particular way, it held to mean what Its language implies. The contention of tiie respondent, if sustained, would necessarily result in making one provision of the Constitution nullity another; so tliat. while it is provided in one section tliat the removal or change can only be had iv a particular way. the same instrumentby another section, providing upon general subjects, would be made to authorize the removal in an entirely different manner, li the contention of tlie respondent is sound.

Section ol Article is utterly useless and ac-nes no pari ose whatever. The rah- oi construction, however. re pares the court to construe curv provision ot a Constitution or statute, so us to give force and eih.et. not only to every claussi but to cry word in It, go that no clause or word may become redundant, unless such construction would be obviously repugnant to the intention ofthe framers ofthe Instrument, to be collected Irom Its terms, or would lead to s.ime otber Inconvenience or absurdity. (Hyatt vs.

Allen, ol CaL JiG3.) Following this ruleol construction, bul one tesult can be attained. The general provision with reference to amendments must give way to the sp.ctic proi Ision controlling tlie power to remove tlie seat of government. It is said oi tbe Constitution of the I'nited stubs tuai it was confessedly an experiment in tlie history of nations, ami commentators have been lavish in then commendation of the provisions contained in that instrument regulating urn udmenta thereafter to (Story on the Constitution, Sec. 1523. i ii principle applicable to amendments of Constitutions which has ceive i the highest praise, is that wnich requires ahd allows ample time ior dellb ration in proposing aud and ratifying them, and which thereby prevents them trom being earn lr.

surprls Intrigue or artifice, with Uii-pui pose in view that ilu Haulers of the State Constitution, on account ot tue gravity and overshadowing Importance of the subject, witii painstaking care, place I obstacles iv tbe way hast' legislation upou this suhiect, and prohibited an immediate submission oi tue gui to the i pie after the law providing tor the change hut inssd through both bouses of tin- Legislature. Hv this provision, thus solemnly made a partof the Constitution, all of tne departments ofthe Government, from the people in their sovereign capacity to the highest officials who represent them, are bound, and there la no way by whicb this command of tiie Constitution can be evaded, nor is there nny manner in which its can be destroyed, except by au amendment providing a diflerent manner in which to accomplish tiie removal ol the-eat ot government. Ihe Jonsi Itution commands thatthe seat of government shall onlj movedbya law approved and ratified in a particular manner, and that command cannol he disregarded by the law-making power; disregard of its provisions would amount to, or justify, revolution, ii. The Legislature lias not provided any regulations or provisions for a subuu sic, of me question of changing the at of government to the people, au I hence there un- no means provide i by which said proposed change cau be submitted lor the ratification of tlie peoi le at a genera! Slate election, or at any other election. If the proposed amendment undei coi atieii were conceded to be a law within the meaning of Section 1 oi Article XX.

ol the Constitution, still 11 musi necessarily he true, li that mn iii the i oust itution means anvtbiag, thai the question could not be submitted to the people without additional legislation, passed bi a two-thirds vote of i be Legislature, and prescribing Uie necessary regulations under which the submission made. The Constitution pla.es a duty upon the Legislature in this respect; 11 commits to tbe Legislature the dutj of making such regula. tions with nee the printing ol tickets, the prevention of fraudulent voting, and those other substantial details wbich are always requisite in the con i and conduct of elections, and it requires that the law making such regulations shall be passed by a twothirds i iv. ni each house. How will the election be conducted, if this question ls to be submitted to tbe people? li cannot be controlled by Ihe general ejection laws, if they were passed, or might I.a passed, by a simple ijority.

The icspondent proposes' to act in pursuance ol Section lluooftlic Political Code, as amended in 1-ii 1, bicli is a provisioi contained in tii, general election laws, and was passe.l In pursuance of tbe uneral power ol the Legislature to euacl statutes hv a majority vote, it requires no argument to establish the proposition thut the question of change of the seat of government cannot lc submitted to tin- people under said general law. Kor tlie purpose of submission of such a question to the people, the general election laws must be utterly Ineffectual, because they wen- passed In pursuance of, and iv accordance with, provisions nm requiring a two-thirds vote of each liouse of the Legislature. A law passed by a majority of the Legislature, or in ursuance ol a provision authorizing its passage by a simple maiority could not, under tiiis provision, be ci. uai tor the determining and regulating tlie mv nero! the submission of this question to tbe people; bence, if the question ol I movai ot iln- seat oi this proposed am. ml Is tn be submitted toa rote ol ihe people, ll must be so submltt without any valid legislative regulation upon the subject.

The requirement that such submission sliould beal a general State election nnder such regulations ami provisions as the by two-thirds vote each house, may provide, did not come Into tie Constitution by accident The wisdom of sucli a provision, upou a Bubject of such grave importance, cannot escape the admiration and approval of those who give the subjecl matter of the section Its proper consideration. It is. in tiie highest degree, Important tin people of tins state tbat the abandonment of me valuable property held by at its present seat or government snould not be accomplished without the honest vote of a majority of the electors ol' the State. Every precaution should he laken lor the purpose of avoiding the Intervention of fraud, or force: and ii was an act of wisdom on the part of the framers of the t'ousjijution to the subject as being one of supreme imp by prohibiting latum uuon it without the concurrence of two-thirds ol the members ol both houses ol the Legislature. The history of the legtsla tion of this State demonstrates that one of the most Important matt, ism tbe regulation lOIIS IS tllllt O1 1 and the shape ol the election ticket' ami the manner In which lt may be cast by' an elecior.

The difficu ty oi obtaining an honest election and a fair count is shown by numerous efforts which nave been made by repn--ii stives 1 the Legislature to rem- edy iheo.il oi fraudulent elections and dishonest returns; and it is safe lo assert that there will be no denial ol tha proposition that, under the provisions of Section 1 of Article XX, such a law, making such a regulation, cannot be passed witnout receiving "the concurrence of two-thirds ofthe votes of both or the Legislature. If this be true it is ais unquestionably true, that because'ol prons.ou uuon the subject, the on ot removal ofthe seat of government cannot, by any possibility, besubmltted lo or receive the binding approval of the people, under auj regulations or provisions until the Legislature lias passed a statute, by a two-thirds vote, providing for the same. Tlie proviso contained ln this proposed amendment of the Constitution creates au anomaly which ought of itself to be sufficient to de.eal the proposed measure, even if tlie adopted were held to he the manner in widen to submit the question of removal to tUe jieople. Tue change ol the -at inmeiit is proposed to be made upon condition that tlie Stale shall receive a dona: vi a site or less than tan acres and before such removal, and the Governor, Secretary of State and the Attorney-General are authorized by tbe pn amendment to approve or reed said sue; it Is then provided that, upon the approval of suid site hy tiie thr officers named and the payment ol 81,000,000 into the State treasury, tbe JLegishituii shall provide for tne erection ol -Jc- nee ilng uud the removal ol tie- seat of government, such lion la not authorized by any of iJ tions of the Constitution. When an amendment to me Constitution is pro osed and is led to the people ior their approval, and is approved and ratified by a majority of the qualified electors vo'ing then a part of the Constitution.

The 1. glslature Is authorized by Section 10l Am expressly or impliedly, to attach condition which shall oontroi or affect the question as to whether the pro- posed amendment shall take Hud whicb shall ipend upon the dls'-retion. Judgment, or ratil cation, of an officer or body other tbau that of the qualified electors oJ theStute. If mis proposed amendment ot the Constitution were adopted, it woald aa the result ons ofs-c---f Articlo XVIIL, become part of tbe tliis, too. whether San se donated ten acres of land and a inilll to at Ilars.

or whether the Governor, the Secretary of State and the Attorney-General should ap- prove the donation site or not. Suppose, exampie. that thi- court should hold this proamendment lobe valid: tbatltshould he j. under er legislation, to the qualified electors ol vie State; that it sliould receive ratification by the support of a majority ot the qualified electors voting thereon, and that tiie Governor, Becretary of stite and iciierui. or any two ol them, being opposed to ua measure, should refuse to ap prove auy site tendered by tlie city of Sau Jose, or its lriends, as a donation in pursuance ol said proposed amendment, what, under such circumstance, would be tin- result? The amendment would become a part ot the Cunstitytlou, and San Jose would, therefore, be declared to be Unseat of government.

But the removal ot the Capital and tbe construction ol tbe Capitol building in which to hold tbe sessions or this court and of the Legislature, would dej ci upon tbe approval of the sue. thereafter to be made by three men. the Governor, the Secretary of stab and the Attorney-General. As a suit, the Capital would practically remain Bacramento, while it wool.l theoretically be in San Jose, and the ultimate decision as io when the seat of government sliould be actually removed would rest with the the Secretary of state und the Attorney-General. The approval of the site, which would finally determine the legislative policy Involved In the scheme, would thereby necessarily be delegated to three executive officers; tbat is to say, the -Legislature, in this instance, bas attempted to pass a measure which is to take ed'ect upon an uncertain condition, the performance ol which Involves legislative and political discretion, und has attempted ti delegate thai legislative and political discretion finally to three executive Ollicers.

Besides, the Urst clause of the proposed amendment declares the city oi Ban to be the seat of government. The last sentence of tin same pi oposed amendment provides that, upon the approval of the the officers named, Uie Leu- ature shall prov ide for lhe erection ol the necessary building and lor the removal ol the seatol government. The consistency oi language of tins proponed amendment is pro iably characteristic of the ration exercised Lr. tbe members of the Legislature when they were drafting and framing It as a lit sample ol literature to grace the Innrtamental law. li will be oh served that the proposed amendment flrst declares the seat of government to be at San Jose, and then provides that, after tan Jose ha- made the appropriate donation, the J.ej,'-isl iture shall Immediately i rocei to remove at of government, but the body thai proposed tbe amendment d.d not seem to d.ciii it expedient or wise to nunc the placet which tbe seat of government sliould be removed after said site was approved by the three executive officers named.

This attempt at a conditional provision for the removal of tbe seat of government ls as utterly in conflict witb section 1 ol Article XX. as It eOUId liave made, llie pi posed amendment, after providing tbat the sen: of government Is at tlie city of San lose and remain thcro until changed by law, and after providing thai no law changing the seal ol government shall be valiu or binding unless the same be i i ratified ln the manner now provided by Section of Article proceeds to state a condition, without stating the etlect of that condition, aud then to provide thai, upou certain contingi ncy, the 1., glslature shall provide tor removal of the seat of government, li il was intended by ihis proposed amendment to autboi a removal by a A.i of ihe rami tation by the 1 after the approval of the site by the Governor, tbe Secretary of State aud the Attorney -General, then, Indeed, tlu provision is in utter conflict with every principle upon this subject announced by Section 1 of A rti le XX. The correct interpretation, however, of this hastily drawn amendment probabl- Is i j- declared to be tlie seat ol government by tliat the -aid amendment, uio being ratiiied by ihe people, is not to ink- ellect until the conditions named iv bave len complied witb. The seat of government, therefore, if this amendment were adopted and held to be valid, would uot exist as tlie result of anj declaration tamed in the Constitution itself. Its Qnalestablishment at the city of San Jose would depend upon prool ofthe fact tliat tlie Governor, Secretary ol iio tiie Attorney-General bad approved asil ited to tbe State for the purposes ol Its Capitol building.

Such a scheme is utterly iv mJJiej with the pro-. Jsi ns of 'he oust? i. Tue manner proi Ided for tie- removal o. th. Capital by a law enacted lai vie.

ti i eio and ratified by a majority ol ectors ot the State, Is one which ls nd simple in Its execution, and one policy ought to be made to depend, simply and only, upon sau.tirv au, geographical questions, lhe state can allordtolu, il where it will best conserve the health auu convenience of Its people, and legislation based upon any is in utter and absolute disregard ot every principle anal bj tie present Constitution. The dillen ne, etwi en the scheme designed by the Constitution tor the removal of the seatol uuu ut nd ihat conceived and proposed at tin late session ot the Legislature isso marked as to tie easily observable, lv lieone case, pursuing the Constltut.on as il is, may pass a law and, by a I woi m.ika regulations and provisions lor the submission oi said law for ratification by the people, and il ratified by a majority ol the electors oi tin suite voting at a general ttlon Ihe at of government changed. the propo.ed amendment, the city of Sau is declared to be the seat of govi rnmeiit, provided that some unknown person su.ill make a donation of a site of not less than ten acres and of and provided, lurther. thut three executive officers the State shall approve said site, and that Heiture shall thereupon provide for the er. etion of tie in eessary building and for the removal of the seat ot government, lv the on- case, the seat of government wopld be removed as Ihc result of public policy vi- nee, sity, ih accordance with the declared wishes oi two-thirds of the Legislature and a ma.ii the electors of the State; In theother ea-e, removal would result trom a prop led amendment of lhe Constitution, tbo vote- ot a majority ot the electors voting thereon at nny ejection wliich ihe Legislature might designate as a proper one at wbich to sui.11lit question, the donation of land and money hy some unknown person, und finally the approval of a site by the Governor, Secretary of State and" Attorney- General.

We i.ml nothing iv Section 1 ot Article XX. which authorises anj such a scheme. iind nothing in thai section which antborises tiie Legislature to make tiie wishes ofthe people, properly expressed, for the removal of their seat of government, dependent, in any respect, upon the will or discretion ot tlie Secretary of or tlie Attorney-General, indeed. If a law were passed, as prescribed by Section 1 of Articl providing lor tin- removal ofthe that law were properly ratified by a majority ofthe electors of the Stal voting ut a general election, under regu and provisions properly passed by the Legislature, no provision whicb could be placed In the enactment could prevent the lmin. Hat removal ot tue ut ot government as ihe result of those acts aud the command of the Constitution.

Whenever, in pursuance of law properly passed, a proper majority of tbe lectors of tin- State shall expiess their approval and ratification of aMeglslutive effort io remove tne seat of government, thut removal must take place, notwithstanding any legislative conditions which mny be made; for the Legislature iias ni, to impose condition, upon tin- right i ny of the people to determine wbere it of government of ihe state shall he established, iie extent ol me power of the iture in this respect ls to provide Jor a cliange ol the seat of government, and then provide for tiie submission of tiie question of said chango to tlie people at general State election. Eacli citizen or the stab- is interested In the location to be selected, and each i- interested in having tbe question determined by tiie votes of the people upon questions of public necessity and publio policy, uncontrolled by nny consideration of donations, gilts, or subsidies offered by dilierent localities; and any condition i ased upon considerat loi ii- .1 s-ity and a sound public policy, would be utterly in conflict, not only with the letter. but with the spirit oi the Constitution, The' power must ie- exercised conjointly by the Legislature ami the people, and neither can in: pose any condition upon tiie exercise of the power of the other which is not authorized the provision from which the power is derived. Respectfully sumbrnltted. A.

L. Hakt, Attorney for Appellants. POLICE COURT GRIST. The JLlght Docket Was Quickly Mado Away With. Tii the Police Court yesterday mornin-; a light docket presented itself, which was speedily disposed of.

"Misa Jennie," arrested in the tenderloin district for standing in her crib door by OHicer Alter, forfeited her bail of Ah Loy aud Ah You, accused of had their cases continued until Jane liith. Frankie Xliorne, charged with battery, was discharged for want of prosecution, ami an attachment ordered issued for Hazel Merwin, the prosecuting withess, to show cause why sho should not be tined for contempt. nscar Glover, who pleaded guilty disturbing the peace, was sentenced to pay a tine of 510 or go to jail live day-. Mrs. Logan's "Home Magazine" and the "Weekly Union." Both only jl p-r year.

The Maguz of Washington, I conducted by Mrs. John A. Logan, is the an i most popular low-priced periodical ever printed. Tbe publishers of the Weekli UNION will I'lirnisli tha magazine to its subscribers for a mere nominal sum above the price of subscription to the weekly. m- Uxlv complete music store.

Ls-frast first-class stock. Coopers. WASHINGTON SCHOOL a Closing Yesterday Pupils Win, Were Promoted. Yesterday afternoon the pupils ol the primary departments ol the Washington i.Yolo County school held their closing exercises under the supervision of their teachers, Mesdames Yorko and Marklt The schoolroom was handsomely decorated lor the occasion, and was tilled with the patrons and friends of the school. A charming programme was well ron: dered by the pupils, one of.tho most pleasing featuresot which wero the drills.

Mr. I'hiele, a Trustee, was present aud addressed the children and their friends in a most pleasing manner, alter which ho distributed certilicales to the following named pupils: MCarric Johnson, John Todhunter, Heury Lee, Ben Moss, Tom Clifton, Percy Hart, hturaoe Arnold, Laura l.eddy, Jolm White, Maud Heed, Burtie Todhunter, Freddie Uauser, ilinuio White, Lillie Cox, Charley Douglas, Gracie Willie Woods, Alice Leddy, Arthur Goss, Josie Hoss, Clara Kripp, Blanche Loveless, Tom Loveless, Pearl Reed. Those promoted from Mrs. Markley's class are tho lollowing: iiello Maloue, Mabel Overton, Lena: Keyuolds, Leta Reynolds, Robbie Stra-I der, Robbio White, Agues Gaertner, Oracle Loveless, Johnson, May Hall, Alta Ball, Charley Hoss, Kddlo Uia mis, Ivan Noyes, Felix Opal Hood, John Douglas, i'aniiie Bragg, James Douglas, Kuox, Dysou Pouruoss, Gertrude Slalzle, Clif- ton. Real Estate Transfers.

The following real estate transactions bave been recorded since our last report: David i is bom to Jacob Usborn acres, more or less, on Randall Island, I known as the home place. Jacob 1 i 'sljorn and wife to David sboru Swamp l.and Survey No. and I 20.82 acres sold to Osborn November 13, Is--, subject to a for JfUi.ouu held by 11. Charles A. Huelsinati to Lieorge East hall of lot 7, and Xi, Tenth and Eleventh streets.

Stanton Myers and wife, to Charles 5, imd Twentieth and Twenty-lirst streets; $800. 1 ergusob Barns and wife to John 29 of Now Ramona 1 M. lluugeri'oi'd to Alexander 1.82 acres, more or less, on Hammond Island; J. 11. Lsurnbam and wife and 1..

L. Ecklon and wife to Mrs. Kate II and IJ, block 'Si, I'olsom. B. L.

Jones to Benjamin 11. Estabrook West hail of lot 2, and Thirteenth and i'ourteeuth streets; 81,200. J. YV. llnhmond and wife to Charles and Twentieth and Twenty-lirst streets.

W. A. Katsch to A. E. 16 in block 18, Uuk Park and South Saciamento.

It is said that the people of New Orleans maintain the must independent attitude toward the dictates of fashion of any city thi- laud. 5 BABY ONE SOLD SORE Tried Everything Without Roller. No Rest JNliflit or Cared by CuLicurn Remedies. My baby, whin tuo months old, had a breaking out with what the doctor called eczema. Her bead, arms, teet and hands were each one solid sore.

I tried everything, bui neither the doctors nor anything else did ber anygood. We could get no rest day or night with her. In my extremity I tried the Cr-1 Rexkdies but I had no faith In thetn. for I had neapr seen them tried. To my ureal surprise.

In, one week's time after beginning to use the n- I ICCKA Rexedies, soies were well, bnt 1 continued to use the Resolvent lor a little While, and now she IS as Cat a baby as you would like to see, and as sound as a dollar. I believe my baby would bave died if I had not tried Cuticura Remedies. 1 write this that every mother witii al baby like mine can feel confident that there is a medicine that will cure the worst eczema and that medic in, IstheCUTK dies' MRS. HETTIE BIRKNER, Lockhart, Texas. Cuticura Remedies Cure every humor ofthe skin and scalp ol infancy and childhood, whether loruirlug iring, itching, burning, acaly, orusted' pimply or blotchy, with loss of hair, and every Impurity of the blood, whether simple acrofulousor hereditary, when the bi sl phyi and all other remedlea tall.

Parents save your children years of mental and physical suffering. Begin now. Cures made in childboo 1 are ermanent. (Vi'ii-; ua lii mti.if-s are the greatest skin cures, purifiers and humor remedies oi modern limes, are absolutely pure and may on the younsrest infant with the most grat lying success. Sold everywhere.

Price, Cuticura, 60c SOAP, 25c; Hesoi.vknt.Sl. Prepared by the 01 rss Drug and chemical Corporation lioston. 49-Send for "How to Cure Skln Hiseas, pagi s. 50 Lllustrattons and 100 testimonials. pjVIPLES.

blackheads, chapped and oily skin cured Jay Ci ticura Mkdii atkp Soap. FREE FROM RHEUMATISM. 1 jST In one mlnnte the Cutlotira Plaster rellevea rheumatic, sciatic, hip. kidney chest, and muscular pains and weaknesses. The tirst and ouly instantaneous pain-killing plaster- INCREASE BUSINESS A Nil money BY USING "The Cashier," Tue simplest and cheapest Cash Register la the market.

11. S. Crocker Company. ARE YOU ABOUT TO MOVE? IK SO. BEND AN OKl'Kit TO Harry tT THK PIONEER BTEAM CARPET Cleanrus; I and streets, and have yourcarpets thoroughly cleaned and properf: reQth I and laid reteii! men.

It will cost you no more than to have it poorly A nice lot of Second-hand Carpet for sale. Telephone IWARD Wil! be paid for information ot the whereabouts of BRADLEY CHAXDLER, my brother. Address L. C. CHANDLER, 231J streeL CAPT.

RUHSTALLER'S Extra Gilt Edge MADE OF HOPS AND MALT ONLY, THE BEST BEER IX THE WORLD. XR IX. TIIK SUPERIOR COURT, state of California, Connty of sacramento. Inthe matter oltl estate ol UII HAEL 1., leceaaed. tlcelahere given, tbat FRIDAY, the l'lth day of June, l-J'3, at 10 clock a.

m. of said day, at the courtroom ol at the Courthouse, tbe City oi eot California, haa Deen appointed I place fbr proving the In lame, deceased, aud lor the application ofTbomaa Grimshaw lor tiie issuance to htm 01 ietters testamentary thereon. 1... It. HAMILTON, Clera.

F. J. Hijj.ntz, Deputy Clerk. J. Tubus.

Alto: uey tor Petitioner. 1 LEADING WHOLESALE DRUGGISTS OF CHICAGO AND ALL CITIES FROM PORTLAND me TO PORTLAND OREGON SAY ATH-LO-PHO-ROS FAR SURPASSES ALL OTHER REMEDIES AS A CURE FOR RHEUMATISM AND NEURALGIA COLDEN EAGLS HOTEL, Corner Seventh and Streets. STRICTLY KIK.ST-CLASS. FREE -BUB to and (Tom the cars. W.

O. BOWERS, Proprietor. WESTERN HOTEL, -TUHO LEAULM) HOUSE OF SACRA, 1 mento, Cul. Meals, 25 W'M. LANB, Proprietor.

Free 'bus to and from hoteL CIAI'ITAL HOTEL, CORNER SEVENTH and streets. Strictly lirst-class. Free "bus to am! from dl BLESSING lE, rip', ra. STATE HOUSE' Corner Tenth and Sacramento. BOARD AJND ROOM, 26 TO $2 I'EH day.

Meals, cents. J9-Acccomtnodiitl 1 I HST-CLASS. Frea 'Bus to and from hotel. W. J.

ULDER. Manacer. CITY HOTKL. milE CITY HOTEL HAS BEEH RENO- J. vated and throughout, and la now uul-oi lhe must desirable Housed lv Saoramento.

Win be ranted or teased to a uourable tenuut. Inquire at the hotel. THE PLEASANTON, ryi f. HOWARD HTREET, NEAR THIRD, I Snn Francisco, a First class 1.. Hotel; 200 looms, co suite and single; gus and running waP In i adi room: best beds in tho world.

I'i-i- lay, 50 ceuts and up; per week jl 60 and up. EMPIRE HOUSE, 636 Commercial street, San l-'i a I 860 150 neal ami well-kept rooms; cleanc i beds, per day 25 c-iits ii'id up; per week, and np, Kir I opi ii! nl MWS JACOB HOE A Props. INTERNATIONAL HOTEL. BOARIi A.NH BOOM, S3. $5 50 AND $ij 50 per week Meals, 26 F.

BAY Kits in iRFER, Proprietor. SACRA MEXTO OYSTER MARKET AND ICECREAM PARLOR STT It PURE ICK CREAM, ICE CREAM SODA and all kinds of SUMMER DRINK thelaclie-. OYSTERS from the shell Ineverjr ityle. Best cup ol CofteeandToa in tin-city. MRS.

1. T. WILSON. Pr THE SADDLE ROCIC Restaurant and Oyster' House, HOUSE IN EVERY RB spect. Ladles'dining-room separate.

Open day and CARRAOHER, Proprietoi I eond street between ai.i Reataurant de France, WISSEMANN PROPRIE. tors, 427 street, near Metropolltaa Theater. Family orders, banquets and wedding Dartles a specialty. well the curative OfBAl irnrn all 1 ut the SPRINGS a telephone Strin Dancing learned of the nearest tick? For rates, write to Mini: rat. I Office, No.

22 Fonrth St B. F. or to N. tinps at liuiic. iv- SaU ot Drug and Saliant..