Loan by city of its money or credit.-The ordinance adopted August 11, 1919, by the common council of the City of Syracuse purporting to amend the franchise of the plaintiff, a street surface railroad company, and empowering the city to Lurchase the supplies and to perform the work by its commissioner of public works in the reconstruction and repairs of the tracks of said company and to assess the cost thereof to it as a local assessment to be paid in ten annual installments under section 16 of the city charter, as amended in 1917, is in violation of this section of the Constitution. The purchase of new material for the repair of plaintiff's tracks is not for a "city purpose" within the meaning of the constitutional provision. Syracuse & Suburban R. R. Co. v. City of Syracuse (1920), 113 Misc. 28, 183 N. Y. Supp. 757.

Education Law, § 883, subd. C, as added by 1921, ch. 120 which permits the trustees of the College of the City of New York to fix the compensation of the faculty and employees of the college, is not obnoxious to the inhibition of section 10 of article 8 of the Constitution of the state, that no city shall be allowed to incur "any indebtedness except for city * purposes," because it requires

the use of city moneys to maintain the college. The president of said college is permitted to occupy without charge a house adjacent to the college grounds and owned by the city, the purchase of which was duly authorized in 1907 for the express and stated purpose of providing a residence for the president and since that year the building has been occupied by the successive presidents of the college. Held, that the contention of the corporation counsel, in support of his claim that the statute is unconstitutional, that if the sum of an adequate rental were added to the money compensation fixed for the president's salary, the total of his compensation would exceed the statutory maximum, was not deserving of extended consideration. An application by the college for an order of mandamus requiring the board of estimate and apportionment to revise the city budget for the year 1923 by increasing the appropriations for compensation of the faculty and employees of the college so as to comply with the salary schedule compiled by the trustees of the college and presented to the board of estimate pursuant to statute, granted. Matter of College of City of New York v. Hylan (1923), 120 Misc. 314, 199 N. Y. Supp. 634.

War contracts.-L. 1921, ch. 711, amending L. 1918, ch. 585, relative to payment by municipalities of increased cost of completing contracts because of the war does not violate this section. Holbrook, Cabot & Rollins Corp. v. City of New York (1921), 277 Fed. 840.

Village has no power to issue bonds or certificates of indebtedness to pay special policemen; election to pass on that proposition restrained.-The holding of a special village election of the village of Corinth, which was organized under the Village Law, at which was to be submitted the proposition of issuing bonds or certificates of indebtedness by said village to pay certain special policemen will be restrained in a suit by taxpayers, on the ground that the village has no power under section 128 or any other section of the Village Law to borrow money upon its credit for the purpose specified. Kathan v. Jones (1922), 201 App. Div. 580, 194 N. Y. Supp. 734.

Payment for operation of bus lines by the City of New York would be in violation of this section. Belt Line Railway Corporation v. City of New York (1922), 118 Misc. 665, 195 N. Y. Supp. 203.

Payment of pension, when does not violate this section. Matter of Wright v. Craig (1922), 202 App. Div. 684, 195 N. Y., Supp. 391, affd. 234 N. Y. 548.

Employment by a village of certified public accountants to audit its receipts of taxes at a stipulated price is for a village purpose within the meaning of this section. Gaynor v. Village of Port Chester (1920), 230 N. Y. 210, 129 N. E. 657, revg. 188 App. Div. 975, 176 N. Y. Supp. 900.

Schools. Art. VIII, § 11; Art. IX, §§ 1-4; Art. X, §§ 1, 2.

Board of estimate and apportionment of City of New York may be compelled to place request in budget, though total amount thereof would exceed amount allowed to be raised by general tax, where said board still has power to reduce discretionary items, so as to keep the total amount within the constitutional limitation. People ex rel. Cropsey v. Hylan (1921), 199 App. Div. 218, 191 N. Y. Supp. 195, affd. 232 N. Y. 601, 134 N. E. 588.

Military Law, section 245, as amended by L. 1917, ch. 435, providing for claim by municipal employee for excess of salary over compensation while in army does not violate this section. Henn v. City of Mount Vernon (1921), 198 App. Div. 152, 189 N. Y. Supp. 851.

L. 1907, ch. 594, as amd. by L. 1922, ch. 604, relating to the Bronx parkway, is valid. Matter of Bronx Parkway, Commission v. Hylan (1922), 119 Misc. 785. Section cited.-Matter of Emerson v. Buck (1921), 230 N. Y. 380, 130 N. E. 584, revg. 194 App. Div. 81, 185 N. Y. Supp. 730.

Art. VIII, § 11. State board of charities.

The visitorial power over charitable corporations of this State is, under this section of the State Constitution, in the State Board of Charities, and it has the power to require the trustees of the New York State School for the Blind, a charitable corporation, to make written reports of the visits and inspections of its own trustees and of their attendance at regular and special meetings and to furnish copies of the minutes of their regular and special meetings. There is no power in the Legislature to impair this constitutional right of the State Board of Charities, and any visitorial powers conferred upon the Commissioner of Education by section 970 of the Education Law must be exercised in subordination to the powers conferred by the Constitution upon the State Board of Charities. People v. Lewis (1922), 203 App. Div. 395, 196 N. Y. Supp. 711.

Art. IX, § 1. Common schools.

Section cited.-Matter of Guiteras (1920), 113 Misc. 196, 184 N. Y. Supp. 190; Herman v. Board of Education (1922), 234 N. Y. 196, 137 N. E. 24., affg. 200 App. Div. 854, 191 N. Y. Supp. 930.

Art. IX, § 2. Regents of the university.

Section cited.-People ex rel. Diffenbach v. Regents of University (1921), 199 App. Div. 55, 192 N. Y. Supp. 108.

Art. IX, § 4. No aid for denominational schools.

Free distribution of text books and school supplies for use of pupils in parochial schools in City of Ogdensburg restrained as in violation of this section and as not authorized by Education Law, § 868, subd. 4, and L. 1903, ch. 187. Smith v. Donahue (1922), 202 App. Div. 656, 195 N. Y. Supp. 715.

Art. X, § 1. Sheriffs, clerks of counties, district attorneys and registers; governor may remove.

Section cited.-Matter of Hamlin (1921), 196 App. Div. 714, 188 N. Y. Supp. 326. Art. X, § 2. Appointment or election of officers, not provided for by this constitution.

Appointment of commissioners pursuant to L. 1892, chap. 493, providing for the extension of a highway is not a violation of the so-called Home Rule clause of the

Art. X, §§ 3-9; Art. XII, § 2. Cities; passage of laws.

Constitution. Coyne v. Town of Greenburgh (1920), 194 App. Div. 861, 185 N. Y. Supp. 670, modfd. 233 N. Y. 503, 135 N. E. 893.

L. 1921, chap. 134, as amended by chapter 335, creating transit commission and defining its jurisdiction, powers and duties is constitutional and valid. Matter of McAneny v. Board of Estimate, etc. (1922), 232 N. Y. 377, 134 N. E. 187, affg. 198 App. Div. 205, 190 N. Y. Supp. 92.

L. 1907, ch. 594, as amd. by L. 1922, ch. 604, relating to the Bronx parkway, is valid. Matter of Bronx Parkway Commission (1922), 119 Misc. 785.

Civil Service Law, § 21-b, par. (d) construed in the light of this section. Opinion of Attorney-General (1921), 26 State Dept. Rep. 302.

Section cited.-Matter of Barthelmess v. Cukor (1921), 231 N. Y. 435, 132 N. E. 140, revg. 194 App. Div. 359, 185 N. Y. Supp. 191.

Art. X, § 3. Duration of term.

Section cited.-Heinemann v. State of New York (1921), 198 App. Div. 63, 189 N. Y. Supp. 554.

Art. X, § 5. Vacancies in offices, how filled.

See County Law § 160; Public Officers Law § 42.

Art. X, 9. Compensation of officers.

Salaries which are absolutely fixed by the Constitution cannot be diminished during the term of office, and these officers are not subject to the income tax upon their salaries while the constitution provisions remain unchanged. Officers whose salaries may be fixed by the Legislature and who had been elected prior to the enactment of chapter 627 of the Laws of 1919 are not subject to income tax during the period for which they then stood elected, but officers elected since that day are subject to the tax. Opinion of Attorney-General (1920), 23 State Dept. Rep. 703.

Art. XII, § 2. Classification of cities; general and special city laws; special city laws; how passed by legislature and acceptance by cities. All cities are classified according to the latest state enumeration, as from time to time made, as follows: The first class includes all cities having a population of one hundred and seventy-five thousand or more; the second class, all cities having a population of fifty thousand and less than one hundred and seventy-five thousand; the third class, all other cities. Laws relating to the property, affairs or government of cities, and the several departments thereof, are divided into general and special city laws; general city laws are those which relate to all the cities of one or more classes; special city laws are those which relate to a single city, or to less than all the cities of a class. Special city laws shall not be passed except in conformity with the provisions of this section. After any bill for a special city law, relating to a city, has been passed by both branches of the legislature, the house in which it originated shall immediately transmit a certified copy thereof to the mayor of such city, and within fifteen days thereafter the mayor shall return such bill to the clerk of the house from which it was sent, who if the session of the legislature at which such bill was passed has terminated, shall immediately transmit the same to the gov

ernor, with the mayor's certificate thereon, stating whether the city has or has not accepted the same. In every city of the first class, the mayor, and in every other city, the mayor and the legislative body thereof concurrently, shall act for such city as to such bill; but the legislature may provide for the concurrence of the legislative body in cities of the first class. The legislature shall provide for a public notice and opportunity for a public hearing concerning any such bill in every city to which it relates, before action thereon. Such a bill, if it relates to more than one city, shall be transmitted to the mayor of each city to which it relates, and shall not be deemed accepted unless. accepted as herein provided, by every such city. Whenever any such bill is accepted as herein provided, it shall be subject as are other bills, to the action of the governor. Whenever, during the session at which it was passed, any such bill is returned without the acceptance of the city or cities to which it relates, or within such fifteen days is not returned, it may nevertheless again be passed by both branches of the legislature, and it shall then be subject as are other bills, to the action of the governor. In every special city law which has been accepted by the city or cities to which it relates, the title shall be followed by the words "accepted by the city," or "cities," as the case may be; in every such law which is passed without such acceptance, by the words "passed without the acceptance of the city," or "cities, case may be. (Amended 1907, 1922.)

as the

Aldermanic Reapportionment Act (Laws of 1921, chap. 670, amdg. Greater New York charter) is constitutional; apportionment of aldermanic districts need not be based upon equality of population; fifteen days within which city may act on special city law begins to run on date of mailing of bill.-The Aldermanic Reapportionment Act (Laws of 1921, chap. 670, amdg. Greater New York charter) is not unconstitutional upon the ground that the apportionment formation of the aldermanic districts is not measured by the number of residents or inhabitants or is disproportionate thereto, for there is no requirement in the Constitution that the reapportionment of aldermanic districts shall be based upon the equality of population; nor is said act unconstitutional upon the ground that the Legislature repassed it before the expiration of the fifteen days allowed to the mayor of the City of New York to consider and return the same under section 2 of article 12 of the Constitution, where said act was mailed to the mayor on the thirty-first day of March, received by him on April first, and again passed by the Legislature on April sixteenth, on the theory that it had not been returned within fifteen days, for the fifteen days within which the mayor shall return the bill to the house from which it was sent as required by section 2 of article 12 of the Constitution begins to run upon the date of the mailing of the bill in Albany and not upon the date when it is received in New York City. People ex rel. Boyle v. Cruise (1921), 197 App. Div. 705, 189 N. Y. Supp. 338, affd. 231 N. Y. 639, 132 N. E. 920, reargument denied 231 N. Y. 650, 132 N. E. 925.

The time of transmission under section 2 of article 12 of the Constitution of the state is determined, not by the date of receipt, but by the date of dispatch. People ex rel. Boyle v. Cruise (1921), 231 N. Y. 639, 650, 132 N. E. 920, 925.

Re-passage by legislature of bill affecting city after disapproval by mayor; return of bill to governor instead of to assembly unimportant.-The fact that a bill, affecting the City of New York, at the time of its re-passage by the legislature had

been returned disapproved by the mayor to the governor and not to the assembly is unimportant. The bill was no longer subject to action by the mayor but had been returned in the only way he intended to return it. The place of deposit did not affect the legislature's action. People ex. rel. Boyle v. Cruise (1921), 231 N. Y. 639, 650, 132 N. E. 920, 925.

The provision of section 34 of the General City Law that the clerk of the house in which the particular bill originates shall place thereon the date of the "transmission" to the mayor of the city is controlling in the interpretation of section 2 of article XII of the Constitution, for, if by the word "transmission" is meant the receipt of the bill by the city authorities, the provision of the General City Law would be incapable of enforcement. People ex rel. Boyle v. Cruise (1921), 197 App. Div. 705, 189 N. Y. Supp. 338, affd. 231 N. Y. 639, 132 N. E. 920.

Chapter 134 of the Laws of 1921, entitled "An act to amend the Public Service Commissions Law, in relation to creating the Public Service Commission and the Transit Commission, defining the jurisdiction, powers and duties of such Commissions, and abolishing the Public Service Commission of the First District, the Public Service Commission of the Second District and the office of Transit Construction Commissioner," is a general act and not a special city bill and, therefore, it was not necessary to send the same to the mayor of the city of New York for action as provided by section 2 of article 12 of the Constitution. Matter of McAneny (1921), 198 App. Div. 205, 190 N. Y. Supp. 92, affd. 232 N. Y. 377, 134 N. E. 187.

L. 1921, ch. 711, amending L. 1918, ch. 585, relative to payment by municipalities of increased cost of completing contracts because of the war, is not a special city law. Holbrook, Cabot & Rollins Corp. v. City of New York (1921), 277 Fed. 852. Section cited.-People ex el. Koplitz v. Warden (1919), 112 Misc. 598, 184 N. Y. Supp. 254; People ex rel. Purser v. Cahill (1922), 119 Misc. 471, 196 N. Y. Supp. 368; City of New York v. City of Yonkers (1922), 200 App. Div. 427, 192 N. Y. Supp. 885.

Art. XIII, § I. Oath of office.

Failure of a policeman to file his oath to office within the time prescribed by statute causes a vacancy in the office ipso facto. Matter of Yakel (1922), 118 Misc. 641, 195 N. Y. Supp. 355.