Ex parte Hill
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Walker
A рetition was addressed to the judge of the city court of Selma, asking that he would interpose to prevent the remоval of the seat of justice of Dallas county, and its reсords, from Cahaba to Selma. This petition was refused by the judgе to whom it was addressed; *122and now a petition is addressed to this court, for the relief declined by the judge of the city court of Selma.
We waive the question of the jurisdiction of this cоurt, in the attitude in which the subject is presented, without intending to admit it, and overrule the application on its merits. The petitiоn is based upon the ground of the alleged tinconstitutionality оf the law authorizing the permanent location of the court-house of the county; and the unconstitutionality of the law is assailed for the two reasons, that it was passed without any consultation with the people of the county, and in thе absence of an opportunity on the part of. thе people to petition the legislature; and that, in thе preliminary election for the seat of justice, only twо places, Cahaba and Selma, were by the law permitted to be in nomination.
The validity of a statute can never depend upon the antecedent consultation оf the people by the legislature, nor upon the affording to them an opportunity to express their sentiments through рetitions. The removal of the court-house of a cоunty, and its permanent location, is indisputably a permissible exercise of legislative authority. This authority it may exercise without consulting the people of the county, through the ballot, or otherwise; and if it chooses to select two рlaces, and leave the choice between them to popular vote, it is the manifestation of a defеrence to public opinion, which is not demanded by the constitution.
If the question of the power of the legislature, to make the removal of the court-house to Selma dеpendent upon the condition of its approval by a popular vote, were res integra, there would be room for much argument; but that question is settled, and is not now open for debate.—Stein v. Mayor &c. of Mobile, 24 Ala. 591-619.
Therе are many laws for the establishment of the seats of justice of the different counties, in which the act, instead of fixing the lоcation, has prescribed a mode for its accomplishment by commissioners, or by popular vote, or by the selection of two or more places, and a popular election between them; and such laws have nеver been deemed unconstitutional. The acquiescence in the validity of such *123laws, by the people, the bar, and the bench of the State, running back to the organization оf the State government, would be entitled to great considеration, and settle the question if it were doubtful.
Petition overruled.
Mr. Justice Byrd not sitting in the case.