They expressed their conviction that "a less expensive article" could be used with the same effect, thereby saving time, money, and trouble. The platform set forth their determination to use that power which, as citizens, they possessed, to secure at the earliest possible period the passage of a law "simple in its workings, honest in its conclusions, equitable in its provisionsin fact, a law which will protect the workingmen from any and all infringements attempted by dishonest men who thrive at the expense of honest labor."2

The workingmen seem to have considered that the law passed in 1868 fulfilled these requirements in a fairly satisfactory way, for in the following year the pledge presented for the endorsement of candidates for political offices had, among other requirements, this section: "The Lien Law is all-important to the best interests of laboring men and persons furnishing materials for building, and we believe the present law a good one. Will you vote against the repeal of the Lien Law, or any amendment calculated to weaken its present force and effect?" That their fears of a repeal were not unfounded is evident from the fact that several sections of the law were omitted from the codes of 1872, but were re-enacted two years later.

The Workingmen's Party of 1877-78 included among its minor aims the demand for "a perfect mechanics' lien law." A section was inserted in the new constitution adopted in 1879 which charged the legislature with the duty of providing by law for the speedy and efficient enforcement of the liens to which mechanics, material men, artisans, and laborers of every class were declared entitled.*

While a few changes were made in the laws on this subject in 1880 and 1883, the legislature made no serious efforts to fulfill this obligation until 1885, when a number of important. amendments and additions were made. This was a year of great activity on the part of the labor organizations. The Knights of Labor were then at the height of their popularity and influence. Twenty-five assemblies had been organized in 2 Alta, June 2, 1867.

3 Ibid., August 21, 1869.

4 Constitution of California, Art. XX, Sec. 15.

California, and their influence extended to all parts of the state. The passage of an effective mechanics' lien law was one of the aims enumerated in their declaration of principles, and it is probable that their influence helped secure the substantial additions made to the laws at this time. Numerous less important changes have been made in the laws for the protection of wages since 1885, so that at the present time these laws give the completest possible guarantee that the workers of California will receive the wages which they have earned."

The foregoing brief survey will give a general idea of the history of this important branch of the labor legislation of California. We are now prepared to make a more detailed study of the provisions of these laws, showing at just what periods the sections having the greatest significance for the wage-workers were enacted. We will first consider the mechanics' lien laws, or those giving the wage-worker a claim on the property whose value has been increased by his labor, and will follow this with a summary of other laws which have sought to give further protection to wages.

LINES OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE MECHANICS' LIEN LAWS.

In examining the mechanics' lien laws from the standpoint of their value to the wage-worker, we can trace development along four different lines:

1. Extent in the application of the laws allowing mechanics' liens.

2. Provisions to make secure property or funds which can be depended on to furnish the money necessary for the payment of the wages due.

3. Simplification and lessening of the cost of the legal process by which the lien can be obtained and enforced.

4. Provisions of the laws making wages the preferred claim in the division of the proceeds of the sale of the property, or of funds available for the satisfaction of the liens.

5 These sections of the California codes have been amended in 1887, 1889, 1893, 1897, 1899, 1901, 1903, 1905, and 1907. The amendments to the codes of 1901 were declared unconstitutional because of a defect in the enacting clause of the bill. Lewis v. Dunne, 134 Cal. 291, 66 Pac. 478.

EXTENT OF APPLICATION OF LIEN LAWS.

The first law of this kind enacted in 1850 allowed a mechanics' lien only for work done on a building or wharf. The law of 1853 added "bridges, ditches, flumes, or aqueducts constructed to create hydraulic power, or for mining purposes, to the list of properties on which liens could be acquired. This amendment was soon repealed; the law of 1855 allowing such claims on a "building, wharf or other superstructure. ''s In this year a section was also added allowing a lien "when any person shall have made an express contract in writing with the owner of any lot or lots, in any incorporated city or town to grade or improve the same, or the street in front of or adjoining the same, and shall go on and complete the said grading or improving of the said lot, etc."'9 In 1857 the bridges, ditches, flumes, and aqueducts were once more subject to liens,10 and fences and machinery were added to the list in 1862.11 Two important lines of work, the construction of wagon roads and railroads, received this protection in 1864,12 and services on mining claims were included in 1868. In this year the list stood: mining claim, building, wharf, bridge, ditch, flume, tunnel, fence, machinery, wagon road, aqueduct to create hydraulic power for mining or other purposes, or any other structure or superstructure.13 It would seem that this should have been sufficiently inclusive, but it was found necessary to add "well" in 1899.1*

The section of the law allowing a lien for improvements on a lot in an incorporated city or town has also had further developments. The law of 1868 provided that "Any person who

6 Statutes of California, 1850, p. 211.

7 Ibid., 1853, p. 202-3.

8 Ibid., 1855, p. 156.

9 Ibid., 1855, Sec. 2.

10 Ibid., 1857, p. 84.

11 Ibid., 1862, p. 384.

12 Ibid., 1864, p. 465.

13 Ibid., 1868, p. 589.

This list was embodied in the Code of Civil Procedure of 1872, Sec. 1183, and has been retained ever since.

14 Statutes of California and Amendments to the Codes, 1899, p. 33. The courts have held that this applies to wells for oil and also for water. (Parke & L. Co. v. Inter Nos O. & D. Co., 147 Cal. 493.)

shall at the request of the owner15 of any lot in any incorporated city or town, grade, fill in, or otherwise improve the same or the street in front of or adjoining the same, shall have a lien on such lot for his work done and materials furnished in grading, filling in or otherwise improving the same."'16 In 1885 this was amended by the addition of "sidewalk in front of or adjoining the same," and two years later, the law permitted liens for work done in the construction of "any areas, or vaults, or cellars, or rooms, under said sidewalks. ''18

A further recognition of this principle that the land is chargeable with the improvement made upon it is found in the provision which has been a part of all the mechanics' lien laws, to the effect that the land on which the improvement is situated is also subject to the lien. The law of 185019 stipulated that it should apply to the land on which the improvement was made and the space around it, not exceeding five hundred square feet. In 185620 this was changed to apply to the land on which the improvement was situated and such additional space as was necessary for its convenient use." If the person authorizing the improvement was only a part owner, or owned less than a fee simple, then his interest was chargeable with the lien. These provisions have been retained since that time."

22

The theory behind all these lien laws is that such claims

15 The statute of 1862, p. 389, Sec. 21, reads, "When any person shall make an express contract in writing for grading lots or street, etc."

16 Statutes of California, 1867-8, p. 591, Sec. 9.

17 Statutes of California and Amendments to the Codes, 1884-5, p. 145. 18 Statutes of California and Amendments to the Codes, 1887, p. 155. The law of 1887 read, "Any person who at the request of the reputed owner of any lot, etc., so a later amendment was necessary to make the law read, "owner or reputed owner. The Supreme Court has decided that this section is unconstitutional in so far as it purports to authorize the creation of a lien upon land by virtue of a contract for improvement of the street adjacent thereto entered into with one who is only the reputed owner of the land, so as to affect the interest of the real owner therein. (Santa Cruz Rock P. Co. v. Lyons, 117 Cal. 213.)

19 Statutes of California, 1850, p. 212, Sec. 6. 20 Ibid., 1856, p. 204, Sec. 4.

21 Tibbatts v. Moore, 23 Cal. 208. Green v. Chandler, 54 Cal. 626. Lothian v. Woods, 55 Cal. 159. Cowan v. Griffith, 108 Cal. 224.

22 When the lien can be satisfied by the sale of the building apart from the land, the California laws have permitted such sale and removal from the land.

should be enforced because labor or materials actually bestowed upon the property have increased its value. The courts have refused to allow a lien where such was not the case. Thus it has been decided that a watchman who guards the property,23 a cook who prepares food for the men making the improvements,24 and the teamster who hauls the material to the building25 are not entitled to mechanics' leins to enforce the payment of their wages. An apparent exception to this rule is the lien. allowed for work in mines, as the amendment of 1903 expressly states that the lien shall be allowed for the development by substractive process, as well as for constructive work. 26

Liens granted for labor performed on some one section extend to the whole property involved. Thus a carpenter's lien is not on the part of the building that he erected, but on the whole structure; the labor of the miner gives him a claim on the entire mining property, including the works owned and used by the owners for the reduction of the ores,27 and the courts have held that the liens of laborers for work on an eighty-acre tract being developed for oil attach to the whole property.28 It has been found necessary to modify this ruling, however, in some cases of liens for labor on irrigating canals. The claim has been enforced against the section of the canal on which the labor was performed. This would seem to establish a precedent for a similar ruling in the case of railroads, though the past decisions. have held that the liens apply to the whole road.30

29

The courts will not enforce mechanics' liens against public property.31 The laws also limit the application of the lien allowed under certain conditions. Where the work is in charge

23 Williams v. Hawley, 144 Cal. 97, 99.

24 McCormick v. Los Angeles City Water Co., 40 Cal. 185.

25 Wilson v. Nugent, 125 Cal. 280, 284.

26 Statutes of California and Amendments to the Codes, 1903, p. 84-6; Jurgenson v. Diller, 114 Cal. 493; Reese v. Bald Mt. G. M. Co., 133 Cal. 289. 27 Amendments to the Codes of California, 1885, p. 143, Sec. 1183.

28 Berentz v. Belmont Oil Co., 84 Pac. 47.

29 Pac. Rolling Mill Co. v. Bear Valley Tr. Co., 120 Cal., pp. 94, 100-1. 30 Cox v. Western R. R. Co., 44 Cal. 18, 28. Bringham v. Knox, 127 Cal. 40, 43.

31 Mayrhofer v. Board of Education, 89 Cal. 112. Bates v. Santa Barbara, 90 Cal. 543.