The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1895-08-02
ARE THEY ILLEGAL?
A Question Raised in the Matter of
the Electric Light Bonds.
The Opinion of One of our Leading
Lawyers on the Subject.

In regard to the issue of the cleo
trio light bonds, the election was held
pursuant to resolution of the common
council of May IS, 1895 which resolu-
tion the records show was approved
May IS, 1895.
Under the provision of special laws
of 1891, Mankato charter p. 400, Sec. 4,
it is provided that all ordinances and
resolutions shall be signed by the
mayor, ETC., and published in the
official paper of the city at least one
week before the same shall be in
force.
This resolution was published in the
official paper, FREE PRESS, one issue
May "a, 1895.
The resolution is correctly published
except that at the close thereof ap-
pears the following:
Approved May, 1895.
EDGAR WEAVER,
Attest, CALVIN SMITH, Mayor.
Recorder.
1t will be observed that nowhere
does it appear when said resolution
was passed or approved.
1t is quite a question whether a
publication which fails to indicate
the date of the passage of the resolu-
tion or date of its approval, is valid,
and if this should be held not suffi-
cient publication then the election
would be void under it. l cannot find
that this resolution of May Is was
ever published in the official paper eX-
cept May "a, 1895, as above stated.
In said resolution passed by the
common council May Is, 1895, is the
following clause: "Said notices shall
contain a full amount of the said
bonds to be voted upon and the pur-
poses for which they are issued, to-
gether with the rate of interest and
the date of their naaturity."
/ cannot find in any council record
that any date was ever fixed by reso-
luton or otherwise as to when these
bonds should be made payable and yet
the original resolution of May Is, 1895,
expressly provides that the notice of
election should show this and with
out some action of the common coun-
Gil fixing this date no notice Of the
date of payment could be legally in
serted in any notice.
In Tiedman on municipal corpora
tions Sec. 1S9-it is held, speaking of
elections-"But a notice which fails
to state the amount of rate of inter
est and the TIME and place of payment
is insufficient.
The author cites
"Bowen VS.. Mayor 10 Ga. 700.
Chicago r. Co. VS.. Pinckney, "A
Ill. 277.
Woodward VS.. Reynolds Comm. J
10 Att. Rep. 511."
This failure to specify when said
bonds should be payable is not cured
by resolution of June l, 1895, which
authorizes the election in favor of
$4,000 for water bonds.
This resolution was published in the
official paper, FREE PRESS, June and
only recites in regard to the electric
light bonds after reciting the election
for water bonds:
'And it is hereby resolved that an
election be called and had for the
same purpose at the same time and
in the same manner as provided by re-
solution of this council calling an
election for the purpose of voting on
bonds for electric lights by resolution
dated and approved May IS, 1885,"
The law does not seem to require
that any printed notice of elections
should be posted up but at our recent
election there were posted up as a
notice a printed copy of the resolu-
tions of June l, 1895, and a typewrit-
ten copy of the resolutions of May IS,
1895, and June l, 1895, attached there
w DuU UtlC w 40 ~
it was difficult to decipher what was
actually posted up. Either an original
defect or action of the elements. l
have requested of the city recorder
an inspection of the original notice
that he posted up, but he has none in
his possession although he states he
posted them himself. How he can
prove this posting and it's contents is
a question.
The council records show that of
date of May 20, 1895, ION motion of
Alderman Zimmerman the following
persons were appointed judges of cleo
tion for the special election to be held
July 9, 1885,"
No ayes and nays were called but
from a decision of our supreme court
on a recent case-39 Northwestern
Report Hesitate VS.. Minneapolis &
ST. L. R'y Co., am inclined to think
that this indefinite mode of doing
business might be held sufficient but
in case litigation is thought advisable