In the United States the English system of municipal administration became the type for the government of the early towns and cities. III nearly every instance a special organization was provided for the cities and was outlined in a charter granted by the colonial legislature or by the Crown. Generally the governing body of the municipality consisted of the mayor. recorder, aldermen. and councilmen. At first the corpora tion seldom acted as the agent of the State, but was an organ for the satisfaction of purely local needs. such as the management of local property and finance. It had no power of government ex cept the right to issue local police ordinances. Gradually. however, the municipal corporation came to be an organ for the administration of matters of State concern, as well as of purely local matters. Thus the regulation of matters relating to public education, the public health, poor relief, elections, local justice, etc.. is quite generally intrusted to the municipalities. As now understood, therefore, a municipal corpora tion in the United States is a body politic and corporate created by the State for the purpose of State administration as well as of local admin istration. and vested with certain privileges. such as the right to hold property, to sue and be sued, etc. The transformation of the municipal ity from an organ of local government to an organ for the administration of central matters created the necessity for legislative control. which has had the result of depriving the cities to it very large extent of the management of their local affairs. The corporation is not the body of the people, nor is it the officers eolleetively considered, but rather that artificial body or legal entity created by the act of incorporation and limited thereby. A distinction must be made between a municipal corporation proper and what are known as quasi corporations not created upon petition of the people of the district, but rather as territorial or political divisions of the State. such as counties. townships. and school created for the convenience of State ad ministration. The laws regulating the incor poration of English towns and cities have little application to munivipal corporations in this country. here none are founded on common law or royal charter, and but few are based upon prescription. It may be said that they exist only by legislative enactment, and possess no powers not created by statute. A few municipal corporations arc created by charter singly, but general laws of incorporation have been passed in many States, and at the present time the con stitutions of than twenty States forbid the Legislature to incorporate cities and. as a rule, villages by special act. In twelve of these the prohibition extends also to amendments or changes of charters. When the incorporation is or special the charter sets out that the inlmbilants are constituted a body politic• with such a name and style; that by that name they may 11:1Vo perpetual succession, and May use a common seal. sue and be sned. etc. The terri torial boundaries are defined and provision made as to the form of government usually by a council made up 14 aldermen and couneilmem or by trustees—as to division into wards. qualitiea lions of voters, powers of city council to collect debts and impose taxes. etc. General law's of municipal incorporation usually start by abolish ing all special charters existing and eStablishing general regulations for the incorporation, govern ment, :Hid regulation of municipal corporations throughout the State. Frequently such laws classify the towns to be incorporated as regards their importance into cities of first or second grade, towns, and villages. To become operative, the charter granted by the Legislature must he accepted by the body of citizens to be incor porated.
When established the municipal corporation is, in the absence of constitutional provisions to the contrary, 1 com 1 + p.e.e.y subject to the power of the Legislature; thus it has been held that the latter may repeal charter provisions, allowing the li censing of liquor dealers, and even such as relate to police regulations. In other words, a muni cipal charter is not a contract, and may always lie altered or revoked, with the important excep tion that the rights of existing creditors must not be disregarded. The Legislature has general control over public property: thus it may authorize a railroad to occupy streets of a city without its consent and without payment therefor. But the courts are beginning to hold that the municipalities may also own private property which is not directly devoted to governmental purposes, and which is no more subject to control of the Legislature than the property of private individuals. Such are wharves, cemeteries, ferries, libraries, parks, hos pitals, etc. The Legislature cannot deprive the municipality of property of this kind, or direct that it shall be applied to other purposes. as, for example, that land used for a city reservoir shall be converted into a public park. The power of the municipality to alienate its public property without legislative authorization has gent-rally been denied by the courts, although the right to dispose of private property as it sees fit has been readily conceded. It is also a general rule that the public property of a municipal corporation is not subject.to execution in satisfaction of a judg ment. No exact form of words is necessary to
give force to the charter, and the corporation may even be created by implication, as where powers and privileges are conferred upon the in habitants of a locality which cannot be enjoyed or exercised without acting in a corporate capa city.
The powers which may be exercised by a mu nicipality are such as are expressly granted in the charter, such as may be fairly implied there from, and such as are essential to the declared objects and purposes of the corporation—not sim ply convenient, but indispensable. Any fair or reasonable doubt concerning the existence of a power claimed is resolved by the courts against the corporation. That is to say, the rule of strict construction applies. In some of the re cent decisions, however, there is evidence of a tendency to depart somewhat from this rule in the direction of conceding to municipal corpora tions wider powers, especially as regards the management of public utilities. Thus it has been held that a municipality which has the right to establish an electric light plant for lighting the streets may without an express grant from the Legislature distribute lights to private families. Where the city is given discretionary power upon any subject it is not for the courts to say whether such discretion has, been wisely used or not, unless fraud is shown or the discretion is being manifestly abated to the oppression of the citizen. Thus, if it have power to open new streets or grade old ones when necessary for the welfare of the city, the question of nece-csity is one for the determination of its own authorities. But when a municipal corporation is empowered to take certain action for others, and it is bene ficial for them to have it done, the law requires that it should he done, although the language is merely permissive in form. Among the principal powers usually conferred upon municipal cor porations may lie mentioned the right to acquire and hold such property as may be nece*sary to the proper exercise of other powers granted, the right of taxation and of eminent domain, the ap pointment or election of officers, the maintenance of local courts, the enactment of ordinances, and the maintenance of actions in the courts. Many special powers are given, such as relate to the incurring of loans, special assessments, licenses, police regulations. wharves, ferries, entertain ment of guests, etc. It. is a general rule of con struction that the legislative power conferred upon numieipal corporations cannot be delegated to other authorities, nor can they divest them selves of it in any manner whatever. The power to act for the general welfare of the city is usu ally granted, in addition to other powers ex pressly enumerated. Under this grant it is generally held that municipal corporations may pass such ordinances not inconsistent with other protisions of the charter or the laws of the State as may be expedient in maintaining the peace, good order, safety, and welfare of the community. Thus they may enact ordinances to provide for a proper observance of the Sabbath, for the closing of saloons at. night, for restrain ing domestic animals from running at large on the streets, for the suppression of vagrancy, for the prevention of cruelty to animals. etc. But the 'general welfare' grant does not authorize the municipality to levy taxes of any kind. As a result of their contractual powers, however, municipalities may incur provided they are to be paid out of the ordinary income of the city for the current year. The better opinion seems to be that in the absence of a specific grant municipalities may borrow money where it is necessary to the successful existence of the cor poration, or where its non-exercise would render inoperative and incomplete privileges granted. Where the Legislature imposes a duty on muni cipal corporations which necessarily involves large expenditures the power to borrow may he deduced. It he_s been held that where the city had express power to establish meat markets. a fire department, or a liquor dispensary, the power to borrow could be implied as a necessary means for carrying out. these undertakings. It may be laid down as a rule, that muni cipal corporations have no general borrowing power or power to issue negotiable paper in evi dence of debts without legislative authorization. The constitutions of many States contain pro visions limiting the of indebtedness which munieipal corporations may incur. The prohibition is usually construed to apply to in debtedness of all forms. It is, however, held by some courts that for meeting the ordi nary expenses of the munieipality and in antici pation of receipts do not create an indebtedneM within the meaning of the limitation. A muni .ipality cannot escape liability for its obligation arising ,s arlicto by pleading that its indebted ness has reached the constitutimial limit. Those who contract with a municipality whereby its indebtedness is increased do so at their own risk. lf, therefore. an individual lends money to a city which has no legal power to borrow he cannot lecover it by pleading ignorance of the powers of the city. But where municipal bonds contain recitals that the city is acting within its con stitutional power. and has complied with all the requirements of the law, it will be estopped from disputing the truth of such representations as against a bona tide purchaser of the bonds.