Cited by

Instead, we would return to the understanding of the referendum power’s scope as reflected in the records of the constitutional convention of 1910, the actions of the first legislature, Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Ass’n

Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Ass’n, 217 P. 935, 940 (1923).

217 P. 935 (1923); Davis v. Union Pacific Railway Company, 206 Kan.

* * *" , 217 P. 935, 937 (1923).

Orme v. Salt River Valley Users Ass’n, , 217 P. 935 .

A , , , 217 P. 935 (1923).

* * * ’ Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Ass’n, , 217 P. 935, 941 .

The Salt River Valley Water Users’ , 236 P. 728 ; Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Association, , 217 P. 935 .

3 Further developments during this period are indicated in the opinion of this Court in Orme v. Salt Riv *376 er Valley Water Users' Association, , 217 P. 935 (1923).

In making these assignments, cognizance was taken of the ruling of this court in the case of Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Association, , 217 P. 935 in which we held the determination by the legislature that an emergency exists is an exercise of legislative discretion not reviewable by the judiciary.

* * * ” Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Ass’n., , 217 P. 935, 941 .

Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Assn. [ , 217 Pac.

19 R. C. L. 788; City of Tucson v. Sims, supra; , 217 Pac.

In Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Assn., , 217 Pac.

t is true these two classes of laws are excepted from the referendum, it will be observed that they are not given this status merely because of their nature or the need for their earlier operation than ninety days but because, these things being true, the legislature, which is the judge of the question whether they should become immediately operative (Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Assn., , 217 Pac.

of carrying on a legitimate public enterprise in a reasonably prudent manner a surplus of the material used or distributed is acquired, or a by-product created, a municipal corporation may lawfully engage in the business of disposing, of such surplus or by-product for profit, without special legislative authority.” This is in line with the holding in Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Assn., ,, 217 Pac.

Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Assn., , 217 Pac.

Recently this court has spoken on the very question involved, saying, , 217 Pac.

Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Assn., , 217 Pac.

The authority of the association, acting with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, to construct that dam, was questioned in the case of Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users’ Association, , 217 Pac.