The Saint Paul globe., 1897-07-02
CEIVES ITS QUIETUS IN THE SU-
PREME COURT.
EVERY POINT THEY RAISED
WITHOUT LEGAL FOUNDA-
TION
EVEN GOVERNMENT LAND GRANT.
General Terms of the Act Do Not
Limit 1t to Any Particular
Building.

The Kandiyohi injunction case
against the state capitol commission
received it's quietus at the hands of the
supreme court yesterday. Swan J.
Fleckten loses every point in his con-
tention, and the validity of the acts
Of 1893-95, under which the new capitol
is being built, is established. The de-
dision of Judge Willston sustaining
the demurrer of the capitol commission
to the complaint is affirmed.
The plaintiffs claimed that there was
a constitutional inhibition against US
ing a surplus now in the treasury or
funds raised by taxation while the
capitol was in process of construction,
for its erection; that the capitol could
enly be. built upon money raised by
bonds issued for that purpose. 1t was
set up in the complaint that the build
ing of the capitol was an eXtraordi-
nary expense, ard that the Legislature
had violated sections 2, 5, 6, Z ami
s, and especially section of article .,
which provides that the debt limit of
extraordinary expenditures shall not
exceed $3.50 900. Section provides that
all such debts must be contracted upon
state bonds issued in sums of not less
than $500 each and payable in ten
years from the date of issue. Section
Z simply provides that except in case
of war to repel invasion or suppress
insurrectiOn the state shall levy 10
debts except as provided in sections 5
and 6 mentioned above. Section s,
that the money arising from such
loans shall be applied to the object
specified in the act authorizing the
loan and no other. Section 9 provides
that no money shall be paid out Of
the state treasury except in pursuance
Of an appropriation by law.
The supreme court holds that the re-
strictions upon the legislature are in
tended to compel that body to provide
sufficient revenue to meet the eXpen-
ditures Of the state, to prevent the aC-
emulation of debts, and to insure
prompt payment of those created
There is nothing to limit the amount
of taxes that may be levied; nothing
to limit the amount of funds that
may be accumulated in the state treas
ury, or the amount of extraordinary
expenses and disbursements that may
be paid out of this surplus fund, pro-
vided no Indebtedness is incurred
which cannot be repaid from current
funds. While the constitution pro-
vides that the revenue shall be as
great as the expenditures, there is no
provision that they shall not be great
er. Money may be raised by taxation
to build new capitol. .at-E %,
1t is held that there is nothing in
the position of the plaintiffs that, be-
cause the legislature is elected for only
two years, it can make no standing
appropriations for a longer period: /:
neither is there anything in the con-
tention that, because the legislature
places a limited amount of funds at
the disposal of a certain board for a
given purpose, that 1t violates the
constitution. The Legislature is not
obliged to remain in session for ten
years in order to build the new cap
itOl. Moreover st. Paul is the per-
manent seat Of government for the
state, and there is nothing in the
position taken by the plaintiff that the
money was appropriated for the pur-
pose Of erecting a permanent state
building at temporary seat of gov
ernment
Fleckten also claimed that the lands
granted the state by congress for the
purpose Of erecting public buildings
should be sold and the proceeds of the
sale exhausted before a tax was
levied for the erection Of a state cap
1tol. The supreme court holds also
that the contention has no good foun-
dation. Section of the act authoriz-
ing the people of Minnesota to adort
constitution and organize a state
government granted them ten acres of
land, for the erection of public build
ings, and not especially for the erec-
ton of state capitol, but other build
ings as well. Finally, 1t is held that
the act embraces only one subject, and
is not unconstitutional, by reason of
embracing more than one subject.
These points are brought out in the
opinion handed down by Justice Canty
Following is the syllabus in this and
two other cases:
Swan ]. Fleckten ct al, appellants Tvs. H. w.
Lamberton ct al, constituting the Board of
State Capitol Commissioners, respondents.
Sylabus-1 Held, sections 2, 5, 6, and 8
of article 8 of the constitution do not pro-
hibit the legislature from appropriating the
surplus revenues in the state treasury or
part of the revenues collected each year for
the erection of state capitol, so long as suf-
ficient public funds applicable thereto are left
to defray the current, ordinary expenses Of
the state government, ana IL GOES not appear
that chapter g. Laws of 1898, contravenes
these assertions of the constitution.
2. Held, the legislature may, for the pur-
pose of erecting a state capitol, make appro-
priations covering period of time beyond the
two years for which it is elected.
g. Held, the legislature may create board
of public officers for the purpose of purchasing
a site for and experimenting the erection of
a state capitol thereon. and expending the
moneys appropriated for that purpose
4. Held, St. Paul is the permanent seat of