St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-11-01
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE.
An Open Letter.

called attention to TWO acts OF the last leglS-
lature appropriating out of the state treasury
the sum of $40, 500. The first of these acts is
entitled, an act to provide for an indeXed
digest of the Minnesota Reports; the second,
an act to provide for the furnishing Of the
Minnesota Reports to clerks of the district
courts. 1t is claimed that these acts are up-
constitutional and the appropriations not
only unnecessary but intended to benefit
private individuals and corporations.
now invite attention to chapter 81, general
statutes, p 500, title, Supreme Court Reporter
and the act approved March 4, 1851 session
acts 1ST9-S1, page 40, as unwilling matters of
still more Importance to the people of the
state. Section of the aforementioned acts
prescribes the powers and duties of the SUI
preme court reporter. Section 3 re-
quires him to print and bind the reports at
his own expense. ''He shall have and retain
the exclusive copyright thereof as his own
property" the state to purchase from him
200 copies of each edition at Sc per volume
More of this hereafter.
On the 10th day OF February, 1881, House File
No. 49,, bill to amend section of chapter
27, General Statutes, was introduced in the
house of representatives, and in proper man
ner passed both houses and was returned to
the senate from the house on March 8, 1881.
On the Oath of February of same year, House
File No. 59l, bill to provide for reporting,
publishing and selling of Minnesota reports
and read first and second times, and passed
the house March |, 1881, but seems never to
have been reported back to the house, as the
rules require. The original draft of this bill
was written in fine Italian hand,' in some
seven or eight sections the subject matter of
which corresponds with the title of the
act, and point with distinctive clearness to
the main point in view, tO-wit: the secur-
ing of a lucrative scheme forthe beneficiaries
of the scheme. The last section of the
original draft is erased by drawing black lines
across it, and an addition made, in different
handwriting and ink, of three four
sections. There are some pencil marks on
the back of the bill, indicating pretty
concluSively whence it came and who was
to profit by its passage. The bill seems
to have been engrosSed, signed by the
speakers of the two houses and approved by
the governor Oh March 4, 1884. After a
fruitless search for the first mentioned bill
H. F. No. 532, "a bill to amend section of
chapter 27,general statues addressed a let
ter of inquiry to the honorable secretary of
state, and received from him the following in
reply: yours of Oct. 20 in relation to HI. F.
532, session 1881, is at hand have examined
the original record of bills of the house and
find that II. F. No. 532 passed both houses
and was returned to the house from the
senate March g. 1881, but there the record
stops; it does not show, as it should, that said
file was turned over to the enrolling clerk.
of bills presented to him for approval and no
such bill has been presented to him for APP
proval. The bill passed soon after the capitol
was destroyed by fire and matters got very
mixed at the Market house."
Signed FRED Won BAUMBACH,
Secretary of State.
This certainly presents an anomalous state
of case. bill regularly passed by both
houses of the legislature and returned to the
house whence IL emanated, amending one Of
the most important statutes in the state,
spirited away without even whisper of in
quiry as to its loss or its contents, and an
other act, embracing. as we may suppose,
much of the same subject matter, passed on
the same day but not returned to or reported
to the house where it originated, finds its
way to the hands of the governor and is ap-
proved and becomes a law lin so far as these
acts can make it such), thereby perpetuating
an unwarranted, and as we insist.
illegal monopoly that grows and fattens
at the expense of the people
of the state. If legislation can be thus
manipulated, the will of the people, as ex-
pressed by their representatives, stifed and
tiers stalk to the front and triumphantlyt
carry out their pet schemes of plumber and
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, then the less legislation we
have the better.
The act of March T. 1881, says the supreme
court reporter shall have no pecuniary inter-
est Ill SUCH reports, DuU Uney Shall De pup
liShed under his supervision, by contract to
be entered into by the secretary of state, with
the West Publishing company, who shall
agree to publish and sell the same for the
uniform price of So. The terms of the con-
tract are set forth with full particulars,
among others, that the contractors will take
out 4 copy right upon each volume in the
name Of the secretary of this state; volume
~ to be completed and published under ex-
listing laws, the state to take 200 copies at So
per copy. Section Is is as follows: That the
reporter of the supreme court, in lieu of the
copyright heretofore held by him and as
compensation for his services as such re-
porter, shall receive an annual salary of
$1,000.
Copyrights can only be secured under the
act of congress regulating their issuance.
(See chap. 3 OF the Revised Statutes of the
United States page 965.) Any citizen of the
United States or resident therein, who shall
be the author, inventor, designer, or propri-
etor of any work, map, etc.. may enter the
same for copyright, if before publication
he deliver to the librarian of congress a
printed copy of the title of such work, to be
recorded by him, and within ten days from
publication deliver to the librarian two copies
of such work, to be kept in said library.
There is S25 fine for failure to comply with
this requil ement, and no action can be main
tanned for infringement unless he shall insert
in each copy, on title page, copyright and
the date and by whom copyrighted, etc. If
this is inserted without obtaining such copy
right there is fine of 500 imposed.
From all this it would appear that this state
has no more right or authority to issue or
claim copyrighted franchise in the judicial
decisions of its supreme court than it has to
issue papal bull, and the reporter has even
less than the state. So, all these enact
ments whereby the latter shall shave and re-
tain the exclusive copyright thereof as his
ara ShQr nd q 1
nothing more. l suppose this is the only state
in the Union where anything of a similar
kind has been attempted. The judgments
and judicial decisions of courts cannot be
copyrighted, because when entered of
record they are the property of the pub
lie, and no one has right to
appropriate them. as author or s'owner''
the act itself is obnoxious to other criticisms
that will appear in reading its provisions, and
OF which can not now speak. There are
suspicious evidences of 'handling" and lear
marks that would indicate s.crookedness'' in
abundance. These coupled with the informal,
not to say illegal, manner in which it was
hurried through the legislature in advance of
a bill passed before it, and escaped tho
mixing at the Market house after the fire,
will leave each reader to his own conclusions
as to how,when and by whom this was accom-
plished. will only mention one other objec-
ton, which goes to the very root of the mat
ter. The constitution of the state says: mo
law shall embrace more than one subject,
which shall be expressed in its title The
title of the act under consideration is an act
to provide for the reporting, publishing and
selling of the Minnesota Reports. No one
would suppose from this title that the salary
of the reporter was to be found in this bill.
The reporting, publishing and selling reports
is one thing, the fixing of the salary
of a public officer is entirely o diff
fferent subject, and neither cognate
or german to the subject embraced
in the title. This is the more significant when
it is remembered that there was then in force
a statute fixing this salary on a different
basis. This bill provides for contract with
the West Publishing company for publishing
the reports subsequent to volume p. at the
uniform price of 81, and ''vests alp copy