St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-05-19
No Money Available for the
Expenses Of Antitrust
Delegates.
A Joint Resolution Of the Leg
islatupe Is Held to Be
imperative.
Attorney General Childs Rem
ders an Important 0pin-
ion on the Point.
The Necessary Funds May Be
Raised by Subscription
in the State.

A vexatious inadvertancy has SEEM
ingly baked the intention Of the legis-
lature in its attempt to dismount the
coal combine and to uprOot trusts, mo-
nopolies and the like, that have for their
specific object the maintenance OF
eXtortionate prices on articles OF gen.
eral necessity. 1t is held that the APP
preparation made by the legislature to
defray the actual expenses of the
Minnesota delegation to the antitrust
congress of the nation, was irregularly
made, and consequently null and void.
All this is explained i'll the accompany
Ing correspondence between the attor-
ney general and the state auditor.
VIII this condition Of things thwart
the movement entirely? This IS ques-
ton that is now exciting no little
amount Of comment among both the
ardent supporters of the project and the
members of the coal combine. Will the
enthusiasm of the members of the dele
CATION that has been designated to rep
resent MinneSota'S interest at the con-
ference be so dampened that the whole
movement will prove a fiasco?
Some of the most Jealous opponents
of the crusade hold that it will not.
They s,outly maintain that the spirit of
patriotism that was so deeply stirred by
The expose made by the legislative in
yestigation committee during the seS-
sion of the legislature is TOO lasting,
and that the members of the legislature
are too Thoroughly in earnest to permit
the whole thing to drop at this impor-
tant juncture, simply because it VIII
cost them something to carry out the
plan to the end. Again, there is feel
ing manifest that it will not be a very
difficult matter to raise the needed
money by popular subscription. 1t is
claimed that lasting disgrace will be
visited upon Minnesota if the inquiry is
Allowed to Fizzle
at this time. The step taken, 1t Is as
serted. has been too pronounced to per-
nit any ordinary obstacle to interrupt
searching investigation. Minnesota is
in the van in the movement. The other
states, with a common impulse, SEEM
ingly, are falling into line, and the con-
vention in Chicago will be a memorable
affair. Whether Minnesota De repre-
sented there Or not, it is more than Ger
tain that the conference will be actually
held. But 1t should be fortified by
the data and information that are in the
hands of the Minnesota delegation. All
this would prove Of the utmost impor-
lance. Months were spent in unearth.
ing the coal combine by the legislative
committee, and despite the most Strenu-
Gus opposition facts were developed that
prove the existence and conduct of the
hA tn
all over this ground again, should the
Minnesota delegation attend with the
testimony taken.
The correspondence alluded to above
between State Auditor Bierman nand
Attorney General Childs follows:
MIR. Biermann's letter.
Hon. II. w. Childs, Attorney General-Sir:
There has been presented TO me voucher
for the payment of expenses of coal com
bine conference which is to be held in Chi
cago some time next month. In looking up
the appropriation for the payment OF these
expenses, | find that it was made by reso-
luton.
Section II of article of the constitution of
this state provides that no money shall be
appropriated except by bill. and section 9 of
article 3 provides that no money shall ever
be paid out of the treasury OF this state ex-
cept i'll pursuance of an appropriation by
law. Section IL of article provides now all
laws of this state shall commence. which is
as follows: BE it enacted by the legislature
Of the state of Minnesota
Although | do not see how more than one
construction can be put upon these plain and
concise provisions of the constitution, your
Endorsement OF 1t would. no doubt, give the
opinion of this office more weight and force
and be more satisfactory to parties interest
ed or concerned in the resolution. Very re-
specially, A. BIERMANN,
State Auditor
The attorney generals reply:
Hon. Adolph Biermann, State Auditor
Sir In your communication of the 18th inst.
you inquire in substance, in view OF certain
provisions of the constitution Of this state,
whether you would be justified i'll drawing
your warrant for the payment of the ex
penses of the coal conference To be held i'll
Chicago during the present month. sucn ex-
pendlture purpOrtlng to be authorized by a
joint resolution of the senate and house of
representatives.
The provisions of the constitution peril
nent to the inquiry are as follows: No
money shall be paid out of the treasury of
this state except i'll pursuance of an appro
priation by la W" (Section OF article 81
No money shall be appropriated except
by bill" (Article 4, section 12.)
1.-The style of all laws of this state shall be-
BE it enacted by the legislature of the state
of Minnesota. article 4, section 49,
The words bill and law as used in the
constitution are unquestlonably synonymous
1t is clear then that the constitution prohib-
its in express terms the disbursement of
moneys from the state treasury except in the
manner ABOVE indicated. Is a Joint resolu-
ton law within the meaning of the consti
tuition? a law, it is seen, is required
to have certain style, or, as it is
said i'll parliamentary language. an en-
acting clause. The omission of the
style thus prescribed by the constitution is
fatal to the validity of the measure. The
resolution i'll question is wanting in this con-
stitutional requisite: but even if this defect
could be overlooked, which is wholly out of
the question, joint resolution is not within
the meaning of the constitution. law. To
hold otherwise would be to overthrow one
of the most valuable safeguards of the public
treasury,
In ali the constitutions adopted by the re-
spective states or the Union, great precau.
tioI has been displayed in guarding the pub
lie treasury against extravaganza, unjust and
hastily considered demands Next to the
rights of the citizens, the public treasury
has always been an object of solicitude on
the part of trainers OF a constitution. Ii
any measure deserves elaboration, it
is the one which provides for the ex-
pendlture of public revenue. If joint res
olutlon IS law i'll this respect, it is so i'll all
others. If it is effective for the appropria-
tion of money, it is equally available for the
enactment of penal statutes and the imposi-
ton OF taxes. Indeed, if the legislature may
do so by joint resolution, why may it not
Dy Sucn resolution. TO use the language of
an Indiana court repeal tn whole body of
laws now in force" (May vs. Rice, 81 Ind.
552.)
AS you have frankly suggested in your let
ter OF inquiry, the meaning of the constitu-
ton is too plum for construction, but author
tiles are not wanting in support of our views
(May VS.. Rice, supra); Reynolds vs.. Blue, AZ
Alabama ~; Brown VS.. Fialshner, Oregon
1871; Barty VS.. Wall, ~ Rhode Island IS
Neither the fact that the amount expressed
| il the resolution is small, nor that the object
sought thereby 10 be accomplished is praise
worthy eau affect the question. 1t is enough
to know that the constitution plainly forbids
you to draw your warrant for any part of the
sum named Even if you were to disregard
the constitutional prohibition. the state treas
urer would not only be justified in refusing
but i'll duty bound to refuse to pay any war
rant thus drawn for such purpose. Very
respectfully, Il W. CHILDs
Attorney General.
Boys Straw Hats.
Straw Hats for Boys at our Boys De-
partment. THE BosToN, on Third st.
kOr sale