This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1910 Excerpt: ... ing of the constitution. But as such levee districts, or reclamation districts, are distinctly not private corporations, they are corporations in a class by themselves, and the general powers of the legislature for their creation, organization and control are in no wise limited by the constitution of the state.' (See, also, Reclamation Dist. No. 551 v. County of Sacramento, 134 Cal. 478, 66 Pac. 668, and People ex rel. Chapman v. Sacramento Drainage District, 155 Cal. 373, 103 Pac. 207.) In the last-mentioned case it is said: "The act does no violence to article I, section 11, nor to article IV, section 25, nor to article XI, section 6, of the constitution of the state. That the district here organized, if it be considered a corporation at all, is not a corporation organized for municipal purposes within the contemplation of article XI, section 6, of the constitution, must be taken as well settled. (People v. Reclamation District 551, 117 Cal. 114, 48 Pac. 1016; People v. Levee District No. 6, 131 Cal. 30, 63 Pac. 676; Reclamation District v. County of Sacramento, 134 CaL 477, 66 Pac. 668.) It is unnecessary to repeat the reasons set forth in the decisions in those cases by which the conclusion there reached was expressed, to the effect that such districts are, in strictness, not corporations at all, but rather governmental agencies to carry out a specific purpose--the agency ceasing with the accomplishment of the purpose. But, additionally, it may be said that the likeness of these agencies to corporations is superficial, and that the similitude--for it is no more than this--ceases if consideration be paid to the fact that the state could accomplish this very work without organizing a district as such at all, and without giving the land owners within the d...