The Bad Lands cow boy. [volume] (Little Missouri, Dakota [i.e. N.D.]) 1884-1886, 1885-03-19


e 1t L. and Il legislatures as well as individuals
oome in the constitutional prohibition, then
none Of us could break 1t II we would, and mona
II us would break 1t In violation Of our oaths II
we could, In the case Of Mills VS.. Williams. IL
red Jos, Justice Pearson declares that while
there are some grants conferred at the mere will
of the legislature, and subject at all times to be
modified or repealed, there are others which as
sumo the nature Of contracts and cannot DO,
moleated. e-s=.S * ss 6
The legislature" says the learned Justice. lis
bus an pasS purpose par to IL
to do 1t by the instrqmentality Of second
party. These Two parties make contract. The
legislature, for and III consideration Of certain
labor and outlay Of money, confers on the party
pf the second part certain powers and capacities.
The expectation of benefit to the public Ia the
bected remuneration for the outlay on the
other It is a contract, and, therefore, cannot be
modified, changed or amended without the con-
sent Of both parties. 5L u
3 The Legislature of 1883 directed q commits
sion to select site for q capitol, and declared
that reconsideration OF large amount Of
money to DO paid and land to be given, such
site should become the permanent seat OF gov
ernment." The wisdom of that law has been
questioned, and 1t is not my duty to modify, to
Justify or defendit. It is sufficient to know that
Bismarck was chosen: that 1t accepts the propo-
sition made by authority OF the leRislature;
that 1t paid the money demanded and icontrt-
buted the land required. There is no allegation,
7 believe, that the city has not complied with
the spirit and letter Of its agreement. II the
contract were between individuals no one would
question the binding force Of the objection for q
moment Shall the rule be changed because one
defend and dignity to maintain9 Such an In
depreciation, In the words Of the judge above
quoted, wouldE d t}sj;%g i1iiii.s r.
SHOCK THE PUBLIC CONSCIENCE
There is not one law for the sovereign and
another for rhesubject,- = says Judge Allen (7I
N. Y, 549)s but when the sovereign engages In
business enterprises and contracts with tndivid-
uals, the rights and obligations of the parties
must BIO adjudged on the same principles as IL
both parties were private citizens. "a state may
repudiate It's contracts, It may refuse to per-
impair them is limited By the federal constitu-
lion. It may refuse to respond In damages and
leave q claimant without any remedy, rs 1t may
mains. No Legislative fat can destroy that
6ee Duncide vs.. The State, 80 N. Y, 360.) The
court says: 1t has been settled SO to be beyond
which denies to state power to pass laws i'm
pairing the obligation of contracts applies to all
laws passed within its limits, contracts made BY
nals- The sovereign can CONTRACT and has
many occasions to do SO. It must be governed
by the same rules Of common honesty which
U1itN AAu1tl0uHl6. IL IL tEu0 GuaC dB U Eul6 INC
legislature is sovereign and may modify Or
abolish the aot Of Its predecessors but this rule
has . plain exception and this exception seems
mode sss IN oSeFs N
reported in 9Th MCLEAN, l6l,' @aby which
legislative act can be made irrepealable except
contracts. and. commenting on this, Judge
Cooley says: Legislative acts are sometimes
IN substance contracts between the state and
them. and they are not the less under the pso.
lection OF the constitution because Of having 9 Z
.umed that form. tgee Work on Constitutional
Limitations, 1863 Tho books seem to be full Of
principle ID bis great work on the eenstttRtiop
which HN;ss2s @'.-z ri ft!s'' 81 ~ ~
- -; : SEEMS TO COVER THE MEASURE
under consideration, entirely and completely.
Says the great ;commentator,j section .37A
Story on the Constitution: 1T has been made
aquestion whether 1t 1.-THE constitutional pro-
hibition) applies to contracts and grants created
directly by law or made by some authorized
agent in pursuance Of law. 10 has been suR-
geste6 that in such cases it Is to be deemed an
act of the legislative power, and that all laws
are repealed by The same authority that enacted
them. But 1t has been decided upon solemn
agreement that contracts or grants made by =
state are not less within the reach Of the prohi-
bition than contracts and grants Of private per-
sons. Tbs legislature may mako contract with
edsStaa I, w and under when n. It T.
lection Of the qohstitattop; and it may 90
laid down as general principle that WheneYers
law Is in its own nature contract, and absolute
cannot divest those rights or annihilato or Ina
pair the title acquired. No court OF Justice In
this country. continues Judge Storey. would
lature possessed the power to violate and disre-
gard such - contracts so that such .
power. SO repugnant to the common prin;
under any grant or ought to 3 be implied
9t the psopls 1899 also sections 1889. 1882,
doubt but thst this bill plainly violates the eo9-
stitution We have sworn to support. The rHte
may be hard one In some cases and Under some
did not enact the law which makes It's applica.
t1on necessary. Our only duty In to take the
case as we find IL and act with . solemn regard
for our oath. But 1t may be asked. has the ter
rttory no power to 1919 =. .-si.S ,:.$$f
Ks CHANGE THE LOCATION OF IT'S CAPITAL? N n
Undoubtedly. There are certainly ways by
which state can resume Its sovereignty, 1t be-
Ing II ths interest rest Of PUBLIC policy that this
: asks Justice There is another phase of the
question which seems important to be consid-
cred II greatly adds to the difficulties sur-
rounding this bill The act provides that the
property shall be disposed OF, the Indebtedness
paid, and the. remaining proceeds distributed
among those who have contributed to the Gregg
ton Of the capitol building. understand that;
the land on which the capitol was built was,
decided to the territory by the Northern Pacific
Railroad company for capitol purposes only;
be devoted solely to such purposes, or, failing
to be SO used, shall revert to the granter This
being 30, the provision tor distribution is OF no
avail. for there will DO nothing to Distribute.
The building. being part of the realty, passes
/ with the ground, and the result of this law
would be to enrich this corporation which gave
the land. while the men OF small means who
were induced to subscribe to the fund. and some
of whom still owe large proportion Of their
subscription, must absolutely lose everything.
, In the same way the provision regarding the
payment Of debts contracted by the commits
assets ont Of which these claims can
be hquidated. I am sure the legislature does
not desire to place the PARTIES who have had no
lot or part in this unfortunate conflict at such
/ disadvantage. It seems to me, apart from
other considerations, that this agitation is UNI;
to plunge the territory into renewed and dis
tracing litigation, Of which the people are tired
1 and weary II rightly interpret their wishes
they are saying to us: Let us have fair laws
I wherever they are enacted: let us have an hon
est government wherever 1t is administered,
people let us have peace cannot approve the
bill lSignedl GILBERT A PIERCE, Governor.
BISMARCK, Oak, Special Telegram, March.
lO.-As everybody expected, the house sus-
tanned the governors veto Of the capital re.
moyal bill After An animated debate, tho vote
was ordered - Fl 3! - IL
The vote stood 20 tops In favor nof
pasainR over tia yetn: Tha vote was: "a
s, Ayes-Barnes, Bayard, Blakemore. Dawson,
Gregg, HelviQ, Larson, Myron, Miller Martin.
Mccall. ParshsH, Picklor, Riddell, SoutLwicE,
SMw Swan. Smith, sprasue, Van osdel, j.. P.
: ! Noes-CJartrssr Toe D.,ro,;,,,8 T,ia.,5.. r..