City Council v. Goldsmith

Citations

• 29 S.C.L. 428

Syllabus

<p>1. Under the ordinance of the City Council of Charleston, passed in 1835, the Commissioners of the market are “authorized, when they deem the same necessary, to vacate or discontinue the lease or hiring- of any of the stalls” of the market, and “whenever they shall see fit to declare any stall vacant,” &c.</p> <p>2. Under this ordinance an absolute discretion is given to them, limited only by the purpose for which their powers are conferred, the good of the city. The discretion thus given is free within its prescribed limits.</p> <p>3. If it should appear that that purpose was departed from, as if, for instance, upon the face of their acts it should appear that their discretion was exercised to wreak private malice, in opposition to their own views of the city’s good, their act would be void for fraud and corruption: but all presumptions must be made in favor of their good intentions, and no error of judgment upon a matter committed to their judgment without appeal, can make their act void, or give an appeal not before provided for.</p> <p>4. The errors of the Commissioners within their prescribed limits are to be corrected by appeals to their justice and good sense, and by change of the individuals who compose the body.</p> <p>5. The ordinance of 1835 being within the powers of the Council, and no corrupt purpose on the part of the Commissioners being shown, the act done by them, vacating or determining the lease of a stall in the market, ■ should have been decided below, for. the plaintiffs, as matter of law.</p>