St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-02-23
THE COURTS.
Supreme Court.
OPINION.
costumes.

State of Minnesota ex rel, Sarah B. Merriek,
relator, VS.. The District Court of Henne-
pin county, respondent.
| Syllabus-While only municipal corpora
tions' may be consttutionally authorized to
levy assessments for local impr.vem ents,
such assessments may be levied in behalf OF
a municipal corporation by its authorized
| SCENTS.
The act providing for a system of public
parks in Minneapolis, Chapter 281, Special
| Laws, 1889, is not unconstitutional because
| the board of park commissioners is Lot
municipal corporation"
The act is not unconstitutional in its pro-
| visions authorizing the board of park COM
missiopers to purchase lauds at price agreed
| upon with the owner, and which shall in
| clude the exemption of the remaining lands
| of the vendor from further assessment.
The constitutional equirement of equality
in taxation is applicable with respect To leg
islation authorizing assessments for local
Improvement and limits the power Of the
| Legislature; but the legislature may exercise
| its discretion within the prescribed limlta-
| lions, in framing enactmentSs, as to the man
ner in which assessment shall be levied, So
as TO secure equality Of apportionmeut.
| An act should not be declared invalid
merely because inequality may result from
its operation. Before courts can declare
au act unconstitutional IL should
at least be apparent that it was not framed
with regard to the constitutional requirement.
and that 1t will produce gross inequality.
The act was not unconstitutional before 1t
was left to the vote of the city 10 determine
whether its provisions should 90 into effect.
The act requiring the publication of a no.
| of 70 he ri fpr
pointment of assessors, but prescribing no
| period for such publication, application
should be made to the court TO determine by
order the period Of publication. Upon proof
of a publication for seven days, no such
order having been sought, the court ap-
| pointed assessors.
The court having implicitly approved the
publication as sufficient it is to be afterwards
deemed valid.
A requirement in the act to give notice OF
the meeting of the assessors 10 make assess
ments by publication for at least ten days in
one Of ''said daily newspapers" no daily
newspaper having been previously referred
TO, is com piled with by publication for ten
days in daily newspaper of the city, the
word ''said'' being rejected as meaningless.
1t is no valid objection that the notices
published prior 10 the making Of the assess
ment did not describe the property TO be as
sessed or the district within which assess
mcnts would be made.
A resolution Of the board Of park com mis-
sioners for the purchase Of land at meet
iug of the board when it was not competent
to take such action, was cuared by
subsequent and valid action of the board
concentrating the purchase
Upon the bearing before the district court
upon application for the confirmation Of an
assessment. proper objections being filed
US prescribed by the act, the court should
consider not merely as 10 the regularity and
validity of the assessment but should review
The determination Of The assessors, upon evil
dence TO be presented, and consider whether
the assessment is apparently 50 grossly ex-
ccssve or error eous that in the exercise OF
Judicial discretion the court should itself cor
rect il or order a reasse5sment.
The confirmation OF assessments by the
district court, contemplated by the act be-
comes final adjudication az to the validity
Of the assessments, and certiorari will be TO
review the action Of the court in respect
thereto.
The confirmation of the assessment az to
the lands Of the relator is set aside and the
tense remandcd to the district court for fur
Their proceedings. DICKINSON, j,