Rathbone v. Wirth

7 Citing cases

  1. Lukens Steel Co. v. Perkins

    107 F.2d 627 (D.C. Cir. 1939)   Cited 22 times
    In Lukens Steel Company v. Perkins, 107 F.2d 627, the court observed that: "In ordinary and common usage locality is synonymous in meaning with such words as place, vicinity, neighborhood and community."

    It could almost as well be said that because Esperanto groups throughout the world have a community of interest, the whole world is a locality. Rathbone v. Wirth, 6 App. Div. 277, 290, 40 N.Y.S. 535, 542. Little Rock v. North Little Rock, 72 Ark. 195, 204, 79 S.W. 785, 788.

  2. Lindeen v. Mont. Liq. Cont. Bd.

    122 Mont. 549 (Mont. 1949)   Cited 1 times

    The theory behind this constitutional provision is the preservation to the people of the principle of local self-government, — "Home Rule," — which is fundamental in our American political institutions. In State ex rel. Gerry v. Edwards, 42 Mont. 135, 145, 146, 111 P. 734, 737, 32 L.R.A., N.S., 1078, Ann. Cas. 1912A, 1063, the court quoted with approval from Rathbone v. Wirth, 6 App. Div. 277, 40 N.Y.S. 535, wherein the Supreme Court of New York in turn quotes with approval from Black on Constitutional Law, section 131, the following: "The principle of local self-government is regarded as fundamental in American political institutions. It means that local affairs shall be decided upon and regulated by local authorities, and that the citizens of particular districts have the right to determine upon their own public concerns without being controlled by the general public or the state at large.

  3. State ex Rel. v. Moroney

    156 Okla. 200 (Okla. 1932)   Cited 1 times

    "The right of local self-government in cities and towns (i. e., the power of the citizens thereof to govern themselves, as to matters purely local in their nature, through officers of their own selection) existed in this state at the time the present Constitution was framed, and was not surrendered upon the adoption of that instrument, but is vested in the people of the respective municipalities, and the Legislature is powerless to take it away." — in Rathbone v. Wirth, 40 N.Y. S. 535, as follows: "The principle I refer to is the principle of local self-government. * * * Local self-government is the which fits people for self-government.

  4. Amos v. Mathews

    99 Fla. 1 (Fla. 1930)   Cited 139 times
    Recognizing principle that counties are not independent sovereigns because they derive their powers from the sovereign State

    Our strength as a self-governing people may be attributable to the distribution of governmental powers among the local political subdivisions of the State and the exercise of these powers by the people of the locality. Rathbone v. Worth, 40 N.Y. Supp. 535, 542, 6 App. Div. 277. Many of the early decisions regarded the principle of local self-government as fundamental in our institutions and as a matter of constitutional right, whether in terms expressly provided for or not.

  5. Thomas v. Reid

    142 Okla. 38 (Okla. 1930)   Cited 15 times

    "The right of local self-government in cities and towns (i. e., the power of the citizens thereof to govern themselves, as to matters purely local in their nature, through officers of their own selection) existed in this state at the time the present Constitution was framed, and was not surrendered upon the adoption of that instrument, but is vested in the people of the respective municipalities, and the Legislature is powerless to take it away." The court quotes with approval from Rathbone v. Wirth, 6 App. Div. 277, 40 N.Y. Supp. 535, as follows: "Under our form of government that supreme power is vested in and exercised by the majority, and for all practical purposes the majority are the people.

  6. Scott v. Village of Saratoga Springs

    92 N.E. 393 (N.Y. 1910)   Cited 15 times

    The appellant contends that under such constitutional provision all city, town and village officers whose election or appointment is not provided for by the Constitution must be either elected by the people or appointed by those upon whom the people have conferred power and authority by election. He cites as authority for this proposition the language of the court in Rathbone v. Wirth ( 6 App. Div. 277). The language of the court in that case, so far as it relates to the question now under consideration, was not necessary to the decision. It is undoubtedly the theory of the Constitution that the several counties, cities, towns and villages are of right entitled to choose whom they will have to rule over them and that this right cannot be taken from them and the electors and inhabitants disfranchised by an act of the legislature or of any or all of the departments of the state government combined.

  7. Schieffelin v. Goldsmith

    227 A.D. 246 (N.Y. App. Div. 1929)   Cited 1 times

    Article 13, section 1, entitled "Oath of Office," after setting forth the form of oath, provides: "And no other oath, declaration or test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust." The question whether these provisions of the Constitution are violated by requiring political party membership as a qualification for appointment to public office was fully considered in Rathbone v. Wirth ( 6 App. Div. 277; affd., 150 N.Y. 459). In that case a statute (Laws of 1896, chap. 427) had been enacted creating a board of four police commissioners for the city of Albany, and providing that "No person is eligible to the office of police commissioner unless at the time of his election he is a member of the political party or organization having the highest or the next highest representation in the common council."