Conlin

The legislature of this state at its session in 1891 passed the following act (Stats. 1891, p. 513): —

Thereafter the plaintiff presented his demand for the said amount to the board of supervisors, and on the 7th of December, 1891, the board refused to allow or order the same paid, whereupon the plaintiff brought this proceeding in the superior court to obtain a mandate directing the defendants to allow the claim. The defendants filed an answer to the said complaint, in which they set forth certain matters alleged to be the basis of the action of the legislature in passing the act, and pleaded that by virtue thereof the act was in contravention of certain provisions of the constitution. The plaintiff demurred to this answer, but the court overruled his demurrer, and made findings of fact upon the issues presented by the answer, but in its conclusions of law held that the validity of the act must be determined from its face, and could not be made to depend upon matters of fact not appearing thereon.

In Stevenson v. Colgan, 91 Cal. 652 ; 25 Am. St. Rep. 230 , we said that “in passing upon the constitutionality of a statute, the court must confine itself to a consideration of those…