Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-01-06
new STATE SALARY LAW CONSTITUTIONAL
Upheld by Supreme Court in An Opinion Written by Justice
Baskn and Concured in by Justice Barch and Acting JUS
tce Morse-Governor Will Get $4,000 Year Hereafter In
stead of S2OOO-Pay OF Other Officers Also Increased

I an appropriation OF the sums neces-
sary to pay the annual salaries fixed
by the said act Of March IA, for the
years 1901 and 1902, was made.
Neither the validity nor the constitu-
tionality Of the act increasing the sal
aries Is questioned II is conceded that
the act properly applies to and fixes
the salaries of future incumbents Of the
offices mentioned but the parties dis
agree as to whether 1t can, under the
provisions of section co. article I, be
legitimately applied so as to fix the
salaries OF the incumbents whose cleo
ton occurred and whose terms began
before the act was passed. No other
question Is involved
1t Is clear from the language Of the
act and from the fact that during the
same term at which II was enacted the
legislature appropriated money 10 meet
the Increased salary of the officers
mentioned who had before the passage
Of said act. been elected, and were then
serving the term for which they had
been chosen, that the legislature in
tended the act 10 apply TO and increase
the salary Of the officers then serv-
ing their terms This appropriation Is,
by implication, a legislative construc-
ton OF the act and the section Of the
Constitution under consideration, This
being so, under the well settled rules
OF construction. the court must con-
strue the act in accordance with the
legislative intent. unless Il Is clear be-
yond reasonable doubt that the section
OF the Constitution quoted limits the
go a. 10 h..
salaries OF the officers elected and In
stalled after it's enactment.
In the case Of ogden vs Saunders, n
Wheat 2i3. 219 Mr. Justice Washing
ton. in his opinion said
81 shall now conclude this opinion,
by repeating the Acknowledgement
which candor compelled me TO make
In It's commencement that the question
which ] have been examining Is in
volved IN difficulty and doubt But II
| could rest my opinion In favor OF the
constitutiouality Of the law on which
this question arises, on no other ground
than this doubt so felt and ucRnOwl-
edged. that alone would. in my estima-
ton be a satisfactory vindication Of it.
II Is but q decent respect due to the
wisdom. the integrity. and the patriot
ism OF the legislative body. by which
any lawfs passed, TO presume in favor
Of It's validity, until rs violation Of the
constitution Is proved beyond an rea-
sOnable doubt. This has always been
the language OF this court. when that
subject has called Tor lbs decision"
In Grenada County Supervisors vs.
Brogden. ~ [. S. 1858, II is said In the
opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Har-
Ian that 1T certainly cannot be said
that a different construction Is re-
CURED by the obvious import of the
words OF the statue But II there were
room for two constructions. both equal
" obvious and reasonable. the court
must. in Difference 20 the legislature OF
the state. assume that II did not over
look the provisions OF the constitution,
and designed the act OF 1871 to take ef-
feet. Our duty. therefore, Is 20 adopt
that construction which. without doing
violence to the fair meaning Of the