St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1896-03-22
TO KILL THISTLES
ATTORNEY GENERAL CHILDS
SHOWS COUNTY OFFICERS THE
LAW ON WEEDS.
NOT ON HIGHWAYS ALONE
ARE THE THINGS A PEST-TOWN
MONEYS MAY GO ELSE
WHERE.
STATE Is NOT RESPONSIBLE
For the Expense of removing thu
Obnoxious Weeds i'm Any Case,
He Thinks.
STATE is NOT RESPONSIBLE

The tangle in which the. people of the
country districts have found the law
relating to the Russian thistle and 9TH
er obnoxious weeds is set straight in
an opinion given yesterday by Attor-
ney General Childs to County Attorney
a. j. Volstad, at Granite Falls. The
letter is as follows:
II yours of the 10Th inst. you submit
the following questions -
Could the town pay out of it's own funds for
destroying thistleS not on the highway?
2. Should weed agent specify in his report
the tract on which thistles were destroyed on
highway and is this expense chargeable on
the land?
3. Does the state reimburse the town for
money expended in destroying thistles ON a
highway?
IT is true, as you suggest that the in
tertion of the legislature upon the sub
ject of Russian thiStles is obscured by
/ reason of the apparently contradictory
! language sometimes employed. From
careful reading of all the legislation
enacted at the last session Of the leg
| lslature upon the subject Of noXious
| weeds, l am of the opinion that we
must look to chapter 274 as the only
controlling legislation upon the sub
! Ject Of Russian thiStleS. This last sec
! ton of chapter 272 disclaims any inten-
!
! the provisions of chapter 274. mas
much as certain Of the provisions Of
chapter 272 as affecting the subject Of
7 the russian thfStleS are inconsistent
| with provisions. contained in chapter
! 274, it is proper to regard the proVis-
! ions found in the first named act mop
! elatiVe and of no effect so far as the
/ question Of the jurisdiction Of the Of
! ttcerS or the expenses incident to the
XVaa6 9
| Chapter 2l2 is restricted exclusively to
| weeds growing in highways. Chapter
| 273 does not involve the subject of Rus
sian thistles, while chapter pa is, re-
stricted exclusively thereto.
! The act provides that the board of
! county commissioners shall fix a time
! within which Russian thistles shall be
| destroyed. 1t further provides for the
| appointment of weed agent with such
! jurisdiction as shall be allotted him
| by the appointing authority. The du-
| ties of such agent are two-fold. First,
! he is to destroy all weeds growing in
the highways before the expiration of
the time appointed by the board Of
| county commissioners. Second, in case
of the omission of the owner of any
| land or lands to destroy the thistle
! within the time prescribed, it is made
| the duty of the agent to thereupon and
after the expiration of such time enter
! upon such land and destroy all such
/ thistles found standing and growing
! thereon.
In the performance of such duty he is
! authorized to employ assistants whose
| compensa ton is to be fixed by the
! board or council appointing him.
Expenses incurred for the destruction
| of thistleS in highways are to be borne
| by the respective townships and viii
lagos in which they were destroyed,
| save that where townships have not
| been organized, the expense. is to be
| borne by the county. On the other
| hand, all expenses arising from the de-
struction of weeds upon the lands Of
delinquent owners are to be audited
| by the board of supervisors and the
| amount thereof allowed is to be certi-
! fled by the board or village or city
| council as the case may be, Ito the
! board of county commissioners. The
beard of county commissioners pass
upon the bills thus certified and, = If
| approving the same, and in the alb
sence of an appeal, the county auditor
draws his warrant for the amount so
! allowed. Finally, the county auditor,
after all bills have been allowed and
paid by the county, certifies to the
state auditor the full amount thereof,
and thereupor the state reimburses the
| county for the amount thus expended
by it. The amount thus expended by
the state is to be recovered back into
the state treasury by tax upon the
respective tracts Of land which have
been benefited by the destruction of
the weed.
If the foregoing is sound exposition
of the law, and no other seems tenable,
your questions admit of easy solution.
The first is answered in the affirma-
| tive The second and third are an
| swered in the negative.
] Had q HemOrrhage.
| John Peters, an eX-soldier of the regular
army. formerly stationed at Fort Smelling, was
seized with a severe hemorrhage Of the lungs