The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-10-05
The supreme court yesterday handed

The supreme court yesterday handed
Gown three opinions, the most impor-
4ant of which is the one denying the
petition of James T Monk for a writ
of habeas corpus for his release from
the county Jail. where he is confined
for contempt of court for failure to
turn over to the county recorder the
records of his office as mining recorder
of the Big Cottonwood mining district.
The effect of the decision is that Mr..
Monk must either produce the records
or remain in prison.
The opinion, which was written by
Chief Justice zane and concurred in by
Justices Bartch end Miner, is in sub
stance as follows:
1T appears that the petitioner. James
T. Monk, was the recorder of the Big
Cottonwood mining district, in Salt
Lake county, in this state; that a per-
emptory writ of mandanus was issued
by the district court requiring him to
deliver TO James G. Jensen, recorder
of the county, the records of his dis
trict, and upon his refusal 10 obey the
writ he was adjudged guilty Of con-
tempt and committed to prison until he
should deliver the records or be dis
charged in due course Of law. It also
appears that he was afterWard brought
before the court On a writ of habeas
corpus, and upon a hearing was re-
naanded TO prison TO be held in pur-
suance of the order of commitment
From this order refusing to hberate
him he has appealed to this court.
The authority of the court below to
make the order of imprisonment de-
l. :. o
chapter XNXVI. Laws of Utah, 1897
This section requires county
recorders TO perform the duties before
performed by district mining recorders
within so days after the law took eff
feet, to deposit the books and records
pertaining to their offices with the
county recorders.
''These two provisions the petitioner
insists. were not indicated by the title
of the act in which they were found
as required by section %, article OF
the state constitution. Appropriation
bills and bills for the codification OF
revision of laws excepted, this section
declares that no bin shall be passed
containing more than one subject
which shall be clearly expressed in
its title
THE LAW ON LAW TITLES Elk
POUNDED.
This provision limits each bin to
one subject and requires that subject
TO be clearly expressed in its title. II
requires the purpose of the bill to be
clearly stated, but does not require the
mention of the obserVances to effectu-
ate the purpose. The subject must be
expressed in the act, but an analysis
OF the subject need not be. The Law
may contain numerous sections and
--f
provisions, provided they are limited
10 requisites constituting the mode CT
way OF effecting the expressed purpose
Many details may be covered by one
subject The end to be efectuated BIZ
the law may be expressed in general
terms. The purpose so expressed con-
StituteS the subject and the method To
be provided ard the means 70 be en-
p!Cyed in accomplishing the purpose
are embraced in the subject ana need
not be specially pointed out.
The provisions OF law objected &c
by the petitioner declare that the
county recorder shall perform the du-
ties of mining recorder and shat ne
shall receive and keen the books and
records before kept and held by tbs
district recorder and expressly require
him to deliver any such books and rec
ordS IN his possession to the county
recorder. The subject of the act as
expressed in its title authorizes the
provisions objected TO-"
ELECTION CONTEST CASE CITED
The case OF Richie Us. Richards il
re the election contest, decided by the
Utah supreme court, was cited by The
petitioners counsel. and the opinion
asserts that the officers appointed uR-
der the act cited were not election Of
ncers and the provisions fer their ao-
pointment did not concern elections
and were clearly not embraced in the
subject expressed in the title.
Continuing, the opinion says: That
decision recognized the constitutional
provision limiting bills 10 one subiec;
and requiring X to be clearly expressed
IN the tide as wholesome and salu-
tGry law THAI should receive a rsasoa-
able Interpretation and be rigidly en-
forced; that legislators and the pub
lie may be informed Of tI,e purpose II
pending bills, and that suTeptittons,
incongiuors and moons. derate laws
may be prevented.
Law NOT IN CONFLICT WITH U.
s. STATUTES.
The petitioner also contends that the
provisions O. the state law. requiring
country recorders to perform the du-
ties performed before by the district
mining recorders and requiring the lat
ter 70 deposit the books and records
of their offices with the ooInty re
corders Of their respective counties,
conflicts with q iaN Cf the T'rt
States regulating the disposition of its
mineral lands. rba cl2in Is t1a5 &
ton 1924, revised statutes OF the United
States. ecAfers the authority upon the
minors Of the respective mining dis
tricts 10 make regulations governing
the Location and recording CT all pa
pers ise eessaTy 10 hold possession Of
mining claims and required 10 he re-
corded The section referred to gives
the mixers the authority to make such
regulations not in eonlI-t VITA [ q .s.,, s
Of the United States or with the laws
OF the state or territory. The as~al
government has made no provision for
Z recorder in minfng districts.
The authority 20 provide for record
ers and the recording Of all papers TO
be recorded in locating and holdiag
mining claims is left TO the states in
which such locations are made. If tle
state does not exercise the power. the
miners Of the district may. BY enact
ing the law in question, the state has
used its Dower.
The Judgment Of the court below
appealed from is affirmed"
This One Affirmed.
In the case Of the Colorado Fuel G
Iron company, appellant, Us. the West
-, TTa~Iv.o-s 100000. - -