Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1881-04-07
"PiOneer Press" Blindness.

The Pioneer Press can motor it may
be more truthfully said, ao,N nOt-see the
points of those who differ with it on the
bond question In its last it cites extracts
from the debate in the committee of the
whole Of the Democratic wing of the
constitutional convention. The report Of
the dictate is about twelve pages in
length, and there is not one word in all
of it relevant to the points; that emo per-
son or persons belonging to or constitut-
ing the judicial department should exer-
else powers belonging to either of the
other departments; and that the power in
question-deciding the constitutional
limits of the legislative power-if judi
cal, which think it is, must be decid
ed by the judges in their official
capacity sitting as q court, and upon a
case duly pending before them; and if
such power be eXtra-judicial or nom
judicial, then the persons who are the
judges can not properly act at all or give
any opinion And cited 10 Mimi. 70, as
an authority. Now, the sounGness of
this position was not questioned by any
one in the debate referred to. If it had
been, the Pioneer Press would be we'll an
swered in the words of the supreme court
in Taylor VS.. Taylor, 10 Mimi, on page
1875, as follows: at is also urged that the
debates in the convention that framed the
constitution show that the construction
claimed by plaintiff is the correct one. !"
eff such debates could ever properly
be resorted to as aids in Interpretation,
it seems quite obvious that such rule
could not properly be followed in this
q
constitution divided the first day of the
session, forming two organizations, and
afterwards joint committee of each re-
ported a constitution that each wing
adopted, and which is now the conStitu-
ton of the State. AS we'll might we re-
sort to the debates in committee room
as to the debates of either wing of said
convention, to show what was meant by
the language used in the constitution.
But we think such debates should not
influence a court in expounding consti-
tuition, in any case '"See Eckcn VS. Rawb,
II Sergt g. Rawl, 352; 3 How, United
States, II. l.; Sedg. on Stat. and Con.
Law, 499; ib. 241; Bank of Pa. VS.. Com
monwealth, 7 Penn, st. r., IA; South
work Bank VS.. The Commonwealth, 26
Penn, ST. R., AS"
The Pioneer Press instances as in point
the act of 1872, special laws, page 81, and
the action of the district judge appoint
ing persons under it, whose duty was tto
contract for and purchase not less than
500 or more than $50 acres of land
for the uses and purposes of public
park" etc.; also recent act, which
have not seen, for the appointment of
commissioners to purchase the st. Paul
water works"
Now, the power of eminent domain
that is, the right to take private property
for public uSe-When unrestrained by
constitutional provision, is purely legis-
tive. But the p DIVISIONS in our and
other constitutions, that it shall not be
taken without just compensation first
paid or secured, cuts it in two, and makes
half of it judicial If restraint on the
legislative power rested in the exercise
of legislative will it would amount to
nothing. In such case the prohibition
in practice would not prohibit The
rule is this: determining the ne
essity of taking for public
use is legislative; determining what
is just compensation and seeing that it is
paid or secured is judicial; and the ap-
VI " tuC
compensation is means to the end.
But now suppose that in the above cases
the acts of the legislature had required"
the judges of the supreme court to ap-
point such commissioners, and there had
been previous decisions by that court that
such acts of the legislature were uncon-
stitutional, and all the supreme judges
had declined to appoint such commits
sioners-not on the ground of the dis
qualifications Of the judge on account of
interest, relationship or other cause
would the district judges have felt them
selves at liberty to appoint them? II they
had, might not distinguished official
have characterized it as acting s'in a
broad and cheerful spirit of accomoda-
tion''
What the Pioneer Press cannot see, be-
cause it will not look at them, is:
First-That if the determination and
decislon' of such question of law as
that mentioned in the adjustment act,
may be conferred on Nom judicial com
missioners; then the legislature may if it
chooses provide for the decisions of all
legal questions by commissioners, and
thus practically abolish the judicial de-
partment as such.
Second-That the opinions of the su-
preme court as to the extent of legislative
authority, when duly expressed, are bind
ing on the subordinate judges-also On
the elitor Of the Pioneer Press.