
    Higgins et al. v. Bell, Commissioner of Police and Excise.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
    
    July 2, 1889.)
    Inspection—Steam-Boilers—Special Acts.
    Laws N. Y. 1873, c. 863, providing a system of government for the city of Brooklyn, and requiring steam-boilers in that city to be inspected by its board of police
    
      ° and excise, is not, as to such requirement, repealed by the general act (Laws 1874,. c. 614) exempting from police inspection boilers which have been guarantied by insurance companies.
    Appeal from special term, Kings county.
    This is an appeal by Charles S. Higgins and John J. Morgan from an order denying a motion to continue a temporary injunction restraining defendant, James D. Bell, commissioner of police and excise of the city of Brooklyn, from inspecting plaintiff’s steam-boilers, on the ground that they are exempt from such inspection by virtue of Laws 1874, e. 614; plaintiffs being in possession of guarantied certificates, in full force, of an insurance company organized for the purpose of making guarantied steam-boiler inspections. Laws 1862, c. 168, provided for the inspection of steam-boilers in the fnetropolitan district (of which Brooklyn was a part) by the board of metropolitan police. Laws 1870, e. 136, created a separate police district of Brooklyn, and transferred to the police board thereby created the powers .formerly exercised by the metropolitan police board. Laws 1873, c. 863, provided a charter for the city of Brooklyn, and, inter alia, created a board of police and excise; and by title 11, §§ 50-52, gave to that board power to inspect steam-boilers in the city. Laws 1874, c. 614, is entitled “An act to amend an act entitled ‘An act to-confer additional powers upon the metropolitan police relating to the inspection of steam-boilers,’ passed April 9, 1862; also to amend an act entitled ‘An act in relation to the inspection of. steam-boilers, except in the metro: politan district,’ passed June 22, 1867.” This act contains no reference to the act of 1873. It provides for the inspection of steam-boilers by certain insurance companies, and that the holders of such' insurance certificates “shall be exempt from any further inspections, and from the pains and penalties of the above-named acts. ”
    Argued before Barnard, P. J., and Dykman and Pratt, JJ.
    
      Souther & Stedman, for appellants. Frank E. O'Reilly, (A. H. Dailey, of counsel,) for respondent.
   Pratt, J.

The act of 1873 was a special local act, forming a system of government for Brooklyn. By well-settled principles the general act of 1874 would not effect a repeal of the special act. Especially is this so, as the scope of the act of 1874 is limited to an amendment of the acts of 1862 and 1867, which were not in force in Brooklyn. It follows that the exemption from police inspection granted by the act of 1874 did not extend to boilers within the city of Brooklyn. They were continually subject to the provisions of the charter of 1873. The act of June 9, 1888, combining all the Brooklyn acts, expressly imposes upon the commissioner of police the duty of inspecting steam-boilers. Were it the intention of .the legislature to exempt from such inspection such boilers as were insured, we must believe they would have found means to express their purpose. The order appealed from must be affirmed, with costs.  