The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-12-27
TaE STATE CAPITOL.
c,,reme Court Opens the Way
For Its Construction.
,,s WARRANTS MAY BE ISSUED.
sweeping Decision That Removes
,-v DifricilIfy New Bids Likely
10 BE Called For

"a
@l.lr4 sustained the position taken III
u -ssse~ oolnfon ~ Assistant Attorney
IT, Hz5eht in the case Of the state
- NeCraw - al. comprising the
y reuitsl commission. This removes
:. lsst barrier - the board awarding the
soatFsef.
.-r5rasg2n. and fits members are merely
s-lIssterisl officers. charged with the duty
:, seslafug the capitol building. subject
= - t.n1itafio and restrictions imposed
,,u the principal limitation being that
tfslalng must he built from the fund
s-svss from the sale OF the lands granted
= eengress for that purpose. and. second.
- e,st not 20 exceed 100000. that the
srse-sai object q the Law was to secure
sstshie building from such fund with
:. hardening the general treasury OF the
80 and all other provisions are minor
- s,h3rdinats 10 this main object. The
.-~rsaaa court holds that IN 50 far as the
s,riss Of the state auditor and treasurer
: rsfaroac4 70 the subject are provided for
- he act creating the commission they
= speeial 70 that subject. and hence the
rsnsrsl provisions Of law applicable 10
,ssir respective Offices do not obtain. The
ss,ri takes up each objection made against
- uroposed plan Of the commission, and
.ustalns the commission on every propo-
stoa
ne eapI;ol commission, on learning Of
- s.vorzb bic decision, Immediately issued
seai for a meeting for next Monday. when
,nex sisis will doubtless be called for.
rollowlng Is the full text of the decision:
state u Washington. on the relation OF
The attorney general. appellant. vs. John
n Me(iraw governor; John T.. Fross,
cate auditor: Edmund Rice. Joseph 3
Alen. and Charles +. MuEday a. MEM
hsrs Of the state capitol commission: John
Frost as auditor ~ the state OF Wash
larton. and o. a Bowen. as treasurer Of
fse state OF Washington. respondents. No.
agI. Filed December -, 1895.
The question 10 be determined In this
sase 4 the legality OF a resolution OF the
state capitol commission, which resolution
as follows.
whereas. IL appears 10 the state capitol
commission that said commission can dis
nose Of warrants on the state capitol build
INK fund for the full amount Of the un-
expended Appropriation For said state cap
f;sl at par In cash II issued on the letting
q the contract for the supcrstructure OF
tie capitol building. for which bids are or
wlll be invited end that by SO doing the
completion o. said capitol building wholly
and solely from said state capitol building
fund and without resort 10 any other fund
8, the state Is insured. and the contract
sgca for said letting can be reduced sew
cal thousand dollars and said sum saved
b the state. and without so doing said
eontract cannot be let: therefore be IL
Resolved. That on the letting OF the
contract the commission. with the consent
a. the contractor. Issue 70 the auditor It's
certificate or certificates directing the au-
Eior 20 issue warrants on the state cap-
81 building fund, payable TO the order Of
H.a a.
Factor and 10 be delivered as so Endorsed
b the auditor in exchange for cash at rot
Rss than par. said certificate or certificates
and warrants 20 be for a sum or sums not
exceeding the amount OF the appropriation
stu 'unexpended: said moneys realized by
the commission from said warrants 20 he
bid by the state treasurer solely 10 be
6sharsed upon certificates issued by the
board upon and with vouchers duly pre-
sentei. passed upon, examined. audited
AMI allowed n the method provided In ser
ton a. 0f chapter I5S. Laws of 1883, certi-
fyag that services have been rendered
and material furnished. and that the per
son therein named is entitled 10 De paid
the amount therein named. said certiu-
Gates % be audited and allowed by the
state auditor"
Upoa behalf o. the rclator Il Is contend
Cd that the plan proposed by said resolu-
NNA iiifHlft~ tiff lblA nWtffk % NlUatfAf ttffA
That no authority exists in the commits
soa or Ia the auditor Of the state for that
purpose. that the acts contemplated by
sal resolution are not within the powers
conferred hy law upon sad capitol COM
hsss.on and the several officers OF the
safe made respondents herein: that u
Ro9a De a breach Of the official duty OF
'ae Kate auditor 10 issue warrants con-
tsmpated by said resolution go advance 81
80 81 a. n"aaHa
Hg Of material by the contractor. CDa
tat Il would ~ a breach Of duty for the
safe treasurer 60 pay out the funds re-
saved from The sale 81 said proposed war
fAuts upon the certificates proposed by sad
resolution. that the proposed plan con-
TEMPLATES the violation Of the constitutional
eoFsion foTAddinz the disbursement of
eoaey from any fund after the lapse OF
tsa years from Nav / following the date
y ihe Appropriation chief of these OBJ
NoIons au5 The Our most strongly relied
sNn oy counsel Is the first above mem
toned, VIZ. that the Borrowing OF money
IS = * the essence of The proposed plan
The act Of congress approved Fehru-
sy =, I>>2. commonly known as the eu-
sa4as act IN substance granted 10 the
safe tS@so acres of the unaPpropriat"d
Fa"lc lands therein "for rho purpose ~
s'e0u1g huHtioes at che capitol Of said
saie ;Sr legislative. judicial ard executive
Fairosts' Section Z. OF Tho act 81 the
sssaiure OF this state. approved March
ING provides. "rhat for tAe purpose
erecting AMI completing "a state capitol
tsilng for thr state Of Washington ON
= ate now owned AMI occupied by ihe
s-'e a. WaShiuEte". for THE purpose a.
esq OF OLYMPIA. A. said state. there
af'''y created IL BOARD 20 zee known as
si-ie c1pifu. commission ." Sec