Hartig v. City of Seattle

Citations

• 53 Wash. 432
• 102 P. 408
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 1340

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations — Charters—Adoption — Initiative and-Referendum. Under Const, art. 11, § 10, authorizing a city of 20,000-inhabitants to frame a charter for its own government, consistent, with and subject to the laws of the state, a city may, subject to such limitation, adopt the initiative and referendum plan of government.</p> <p>Same — Validity—Statutes. The initiative and referendum plan of government adopted pursuant to Const, art 11, § 10, authorizing; a city to frame its own charter, is not inconsistent with Bal. Code, § 740, vesting the legislative power of cities in a mayor and council; since such section applies only to powers provided for in the charter..</p> <p>Same — Adoption of Charter — Implied Repeal of Statutes. Bal. Code, § 740, vesting the legislative power of cities in a mayor and council, does not prevent the adoption of a charter providing for the-initiative and referendum form of government, because it would be? impliedly repealed thereby.</p> <p>Intoxicating Liquobs — Licenses — Statutes — Implied Repeal. Bal. Code, § 2934, providing that the mayor and council of each city shall have the sole and exclusive authority to license or prohibit the sale of intoxicating liquors is impliedly repealed by Bal. Code, § 739, conferring upon cities of the first class power to frame their own charters and to regulate the sale of intoxicating liquors.</p> <p>Same — Statutes—Conflict—General and Special Laws. The city council of Seattle has exclusive power to license the sale of liquor without submitting the question to a vote of the people under the initiative and referendum amendment to the charter of the city covering “any ordinance dealing with any matter within the realm of local affairs or municipal business,” and under the concurrent amendment No. 11, especially conferring upon the city council the power to license and regulate the sale of liquor; since special concurrent laws obtain as against a conflicting general law.</p> <p>Appeal — Rev