The Kalispell bee. [volume] (Kalispell, Mont.) 1900-192?, 1901-01-15
Att'y-Gen. Donovan Renders
an Opinion on the
BONDING QUESTION.
A Majority Of Votes Cast on the Propozi-
ton All that Is Necessary to Garry.
Spirit of the Law.

Attorney General James Donovan
in an opinion prepared Saturday holds
that the issuance of bonds for county
improvements may be decided by a
majority of the votes cast either for
or against the proposition, regardless
of the total number of electors regis
tering their votes at the same cleo
ton. The opinion was written in aa-
swer to an inquiry from William ID.
Clark, chairman of the board of
county commissioners of Silver Bow
county, and fully covers the question.
In his letter to the attorney gen
eral Mr.. Clark says the question of
issuing bonds in the sum of 100000,
redeemable in ten years, payable in
twenty years, bearing four per cent
interest, for the purpose of building
a county JAIL was submitted to the
electors of Silver Bow county at the
last general election, resulting in Il
majority of 103 in favor of the prop
o'iSioli' ouC VI a IOCoi NOlt vi
243. there were only 1919 votes cast
both for and against the loan being
issued. OF which 961 were in favor Of
the bond issue, while S5S were op-
posed.
There were similar bond issues vot
ed upon by the electors of Cascade
and Flathead counties at the last
election, and the opinion prepared by
the attorney general will be of no
less interest to the taxpayers and
boards of commissioners of those
counties than in Silver Bow. Cas-
cade county proposes to build court
house, costing over 100000, besides
making other county improvements
while Flathead county has improve
ments in sight that will run we'll up
into the thousands
While the statute provides that
county boards may authorize loan if
majority of the votes cast are in fa-
vor of it, Mr.. Donovan's interpreta-
tion is that in using the words ''in
favor of the loan," means votes cast
in favor of the particular proposition
and not votes cast on any other gen
eral proposition.
Quoting from the opinions of differ
ent courts upon the proposition he
says that the purpose of the statutes
is first to give the elector the privi-
lege of expressing his Judgment on
the proposed county Indebtedness, if
he chooses to do so. In the event Ct
his neglect to vote upon the propo-
sition, manfesting no interest and
remaining silent, such silence should
not defeat the express purpose of the
state constitution in furthering puo-
lie interest. The attorney general
prepared an exhaustive opinion on the
subject, in which he says:
THE first question for considera-
tion in this matter is, does the con-
stitution authorize such a loan? An
inspection of section 5, article 49, of
the constitution, will show that the
closing paragraph reads as follows:
No county shall incur any indebted
ness or liability for any single pur-
pose to an amount exceeding $4,000
without the approval of a majority Of
the electors thereof voting at an cleo
ton provided by law.
''This is the authority by which the
question was submitted to the cleo
tors of Silver Bow county. The ques-
tion under consideration is what the
following words mean: "The APPROX
al OF majority of the electors there
of, voting at an election to be provided
by law The first consideration in
determining what the above language
means is, how shall constitutional
provisions be interpreted? It seems
to me that the language of the con.
stitution means that majority of the
electors thereof, voting at an election
to be provided by law, is the iudg
ment of the electors as expressed by
their action at the polls. To enforce
this provision of the constitution the
legislature of this state has enacted
as part of the Political Code, Arti
Gle w, entitled, Question of raisina
money to be submitted to a vote"
Section 4270 is very nearly in the
language of the constitution, and
reads as follows: "The board of coun
| CONTINUED on Page A.