The Bemidji pioneer. [volume] (Bemidji, Beltrami County, Minn.) 1896-1917, 1901-05-30

lied and are transferred TO the class
OF organized counties they shall be
excepted from the general laws gov
erning other counties and be subject
to a special code for the government
of their affairs on the subject of tax
alton. The validity of the special
provisions in question must be deter
mined without reference to the fact
that these counties were unorganized
prior to the passage of the statute or
ganizing them. The only real differ
ence between the counties actually or
ganized by the act and the counties in
the state already organized was that
the latter were in possession of all
the powers pertaining to such organ
izations, while the former were not
equipped with county machinery. All
of these counties, organized and I'M
organized, had been established, that
| is, their boundaries had been fixed
and they had been named. A large
number had been vested with author
| ity to manage and regulate their own
affairs without restriction. Two had
not been SO authorized, and these
were singled out as incapable of fully
exercising that authority. Such dis
elimination cannot be justified on the
ground OF population, for, when or
ganized, Beltrami county contained
more people than many Of the counties
previously organized had when given
full power over their own affairs.
When the state census was taken in
1895, two years prior to the passage
of the law in question, this county had
population Of / 1864. Out Of the 81
counties il this state organized prior
to 1897, 80 were actually organized
with less population than that5of Bel
trami county in 1895, and with q
single exception, all were set in mo-
ton without any limitation or restric-
tion whatsoever upon the powers of
the people therein residing. Going
into the matter of population little
further, we find that by the census of
1900 the population of Beltrami
county had Increased most remark
ably, from / 1854 to II ,030 in five years.
Assuming that the rate OF increase
was the same each year, as we have a
right to do, between the taking Of the
census OF 1895 and the passage OF the
act in 1897, we find that the county
actually contained q population OF
more than $500 when organized. This
indicates very clearly that in so far
as any distinction was attempted, or
could have been predicated upon
actual population, it was wholly un-
warranted by the facts. Cass, the
other county covered by the law in
question, is not in point Of popnla-
ton, so noticeable as Beltrami, but
the facts as to each are sufficient to
show that the number of inhabitants
therein was not considered. Nor
could this distinction have been prop
erly based upon the ground Of need Or
necessity, for the needs and necessities
of the people in nnorg anized counties
are just as great and imperative as
are the needs Of the residents OF other
counties already in possession of
local self government. New counties,
as we'll as old, are by law compelled
to compensate their officers, to pay.
the state it's revenue tax, it's university
tax, it's loans, interest tax, a school
tax and other taxes. A new county
must lay out and improve it's high
ways, provide county buildings, main
tain peace and order, provide courts
for the administrator of justice, and
there are many other local wants
which might be enumerated, especially
district schools which are much needed
upon the frontier. No one can sug-
gest a single reason why the financial
needs and necessities in 1897 of the
counties about to be organized were
not as great as they were in other
counties. They were probably greater,
and yet this law contained provision
which necessarily crippled local gov
eminent almost to the point of extinc-
tion.
We are of the opinion that the leg
islation on this subject did not rest,
nor was it based upon any character
istic or peculiarly of circumstances
which plainly distinguished the
counties included from those excluded.
The court below seems to have been
of this same opinion and to have sus-
tanned the law upon this point with
great reluctance.
We answer the first question as fol-
lows: That the limitation upon the
lerying and collection of taxes of Bel
trami county contained in chaper so,
laws OF 1897, was and is unconstitu-
tional and invalid. The case is re-
manded to the lower court with in
structions to proceed in accordance
with these views.