The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-01-21
ALSO LENGTHY MEMORANDUM
HOLDS THAT 1T CONTRAVENEs THE
CONSTITUTION AND SHOULD
NOT BE SUSTAINED.
ACT IS FAULTY IN MANY WAYS.
ConstitutiOnaiIy Bad, Faulty I'm CIns-
sificatiOn of Population and Is
Special Legislation.

law Of 1895, designed to place the coun-
ty officers on a salary basis and abol-
ish the fee system. Judge Lewis hand
ed down the opinion yesterday.
The question was raised in the suit
of David Simard. a taxpayer, insti-
tuted against County Auditor Sullivan
and County Surveyor Gates A. john
son Jr. to restrain the county auditor
from issuing a warrant for the pay
ment of the county surveyors salary
for December, on the ground that the
resolution of the county board fixing
the salary was invalid. The county
officers sued, demurred to the COM
plant, which put in issue the const1tu-
tionality of the law of 1895 by virtue
of which the county board adopted the
resolution. Judge Lewis overruled the
demurrer. The memorandum accom-
panying tie order of the court is as
follows.
The demurrer interposed by the defendants
to the complaint raises the question or the
validity of chapter 301 of the Laws or 1888,
being IAN act authorizing and directing the
county commissioners of certain counties TO
reduce the compensation and number OF OIL
GERS and regulating the same"
CoNsTITUTIoNALITY BAD.
Does this act conflict with the constitution
of this state? II So it is invalid.
The constitution provides No law shali
embrace more than one subject, Wnfch snaIl
he EXPRESSED in it's title" The title in sub
stance reads IAN act authorizing the county
commissioners to reduce the compensation anc
number of officers and employees, and reSuia-
ting the same" The purpose OF this act,
as expressed in its title, is to reduce and reg
,Iofa ho commentator and number or COllCy
officers and clerks, and the body OF the act
fairly sustains this subject but 1t also con-
tains an additional and separate subject not
within the title. 1t authorizes Zee oflcerS 10
be changed to salaried officers. Under chap
ter 1863 Special Laws 1887, the clerk or the
district court in Ramsey county, for the faith
full discharge of his duties. shall receive ices
as therein provided; in short. his cf1ce is a
fee Office as distinguished from a salary office.
The first section of chapter 3N OF the act OF
1895 requires the county commissioners to nX
the monthly salary compensation OF the
clerk of district court; and. If the commits
sioners pursuant to this act, fix the monthly
salary of the clerk of this court do they not.
in fact, change fee Office to salary Office
And is not this power to change a fee Office
to a salary Office a distinct and second sub
iect embraced IN the body of the act and
not found in the title of the act? And who
will urge that the power to reduce and reg
ulate salaries and compensation also includes
the power to change the character of an office
from a fee office, with all its details of sched-
ules, charges and fees, to q salary office. And
IL this contention be true, the act embraces
two subjects, but one of which is embraced
in the title, and in this particular Is repug-
nant to the constitution.
II the act does not authorize the county
commissioners to change the character of the
office of the clerk of the district court, In
of 1885, and in that case this general law OF
office, the act does authorize the county COM
mssioners to Fix by resolution the monthly
salary or compensation of the clerk of the
district court" and gives the commissioners
power to reduce the compensation Of the clerk
of the district court and other employees, and
to regulate the same, which means the COM
mssioners can cut down and regulate the
compensation of this fee officer. whose fees
In this county are fixed by special laws, and
If the commissioners do exercise their power
under this act and pass resolutions to reduce,
regulate or dispense with the fees which the
special law entities the clerk of this court to
collect, the commissioners either amend, ex-
tend or modify the provisions Of the special
laws by virtue of this so-called general law
of 1895. and in that case this general low OF
1895, chapter 301. is invalid under article T.
section 80 Of the constitution, which forbids
the legislature to amend, extend or modify
any special or local law. and they cannot
delegate power which they do not have.
LIMITS OF POPULATION.
Section l of the salary act brings within
its provisions all counties in the state hav-
ing a population not less than 100, 900 and not
over 1S5. 900. Section II provides when coun-
ties, now having a population less, acquire
a population Of 100000 they shall come within
the provisions of this act, and counties shall
pass beyond Its provisions whenever the pop
ulation exceeds $4,000 or falls below 100 900.
The population Of Ramsey county in 1895 was
147, 537, and an examination of the census
returns for that year discovers no other coun-
ty within the limits of this act No attempt
has been made to extend this so-called clas-
sifcation If the population Of Ramsey coun-
ty increased and exceeds the limit of 1885, 900
there IS no class beyond until the 200 900 line
is reached: and If the county loses popula-
ton, and thus falls below this class no pro-
visions exist for such contingency, and the
special laws fixing the former compensa-
ton are repealed by this act, and the off,
Gals are left without salary or compensa-
ton. except as provided by some meager
general legislation now in force designed to
apply to rural districts.
FAULTY CLASSIFICATION.
This act attempts to classify counties upon
basis of population, and population. when
made reasonable basis has long been held
O proper element in the classification of cities.
The basis here adopted may be sustained.
yet 1t is open to serious objection. II this
act fails to classify upon a proper basis,
though general in form, it becomes special
in substance and fact and violates the con-
stitution. 1t is fundamental rule that clas-
sihcation fer the purpose of legislation, must
be based upon substantial distinctions which
make one class really different from another.
1t must be based upon some natural reason
suggested by some difference in the circum-
stances and situation of the subjects within
the class as distinguished from those with
out the class, which circumstances and sit
uation suggest the necessity for different leg
fslation with respect to them. In this re-
spect this act appears to arbitrarily estab-
lish class without any pretense of classi-
1catton founded upon substantial character
istic difference. 1t is difficult to under
stand what popularity or situation or cir
cumstance places a county with a population
of 100, 600 in the same class with another hay-
ing $4,000 rather than with one with a pop
ulation of SO 600, especially in the absence OF
any attempt to create more than one class
What reason. distinction necessity required
the lowest limit to be fixed at LOG, 900 and the
highest at $4,000? These limits mark the
lines of no other classes. And what is there
to suggest that the privileges Of this class
would not be as appropriate and avaling to
counties of $4,000 population? Is not this
classification purely arbitrary without rea-
son. based upon neither circumstances nor
situation suggesting its necessity, and II
sustained will 1t not lead to endless conf,I-
sion from which both courts and Legislature
must soon retreat3
SPECIAL LEGISLATION
This is not special legislation, because It's
provisions do not operate uniformly upon
the different members or counties in the
same class. 1t delegates to the county COM
compensation of each county officer; pro-
vided no such officer shall receive greater
compensation than $4,000 per annum. This.
in fact, leaves a great latitude for variation
in the respective salaries of the same Off
Gals in the different counties. under the act.
To Illustrate: II Winona county comes
within the class. the county auditor. under
the resolution of the county commissioners
might continue to draw his present salary OF
$1,000 year, while In Ramsey county the
commissioners might fix the same officers
salary at $4,000 and in the county of st.
Louis, the same officer might draw $1,000 per
year: 1t would be competent for the COM