The Bemidji daily pioneer. [volume] (Bemidji, Minn.) 1904-1971, 1905-04-15
CAN HO Id
But ONE ].
Legal Opinion Declares Mr..
Hazen is Neither Mayor
Nor Street Comm +.
LAW AND AUTHORITY CITED.
FOR THE OPINION.
Trustees Cannot Make Contracts
With Themselves Relating
to Public Affairs.

With a view to contributing to
the solution of the difficulty in
which Bemidji finds itself in
municipal matters the Pioneer
has secured the following legal
opinion for the law firm Of Glib
bons & Torrance:
Editor, Bemidji Pioneer.
Dear Sir:
In compliance with your re-
quest for our opinion on the fol
lowing quest ions,
|. Can A. b. Hazen, a men
Der Of the village Council of
Bemidji hold the Office of
Trustee Of the village, and at
same time hold the Office of
street commissioner of the
village?
2. Is Mr.. Hazen president
Of the village Of Bemidji?
We submit the following; and
in view Of the fact that we dis
agree with the opinions previ-
ously published in your paper,
we cite authority.
WE ANSWER BOTH CUES
TTONS IN THE NEGATIVE.
1. Mr.. Hazen, while member
Of the village council, is expressly
prohibited by statute of this
state from being in any way,
directly or indirectly interested
in any contract with the village
or the village council.
+ Sec. 1869, Gen. Statutes Of
MINI. 1894 provides:
No member of the village
council shall become a party
to or be interested, directly
or Indirectly, in any contract
made by the village council
of which he may be mem
Der, and every contract or
payment voted for or made
contrary to the provisions
hereof is void; and any Viz
lation of the provisions of this
section hereafter committed
shall be a MALF9EASANCE
IN OFFICE which shall sub
iect the officer so offending to
| REMOVAL FROM OF.
FICE.'
Sec. 6666 provides as follows:
"a public officer, who is
authorized to make any con
tract in his official capacity,
or to take part in making
any such contract, who vol
UNFAIRLY becomes interested
individually in such contract,
directly or indirectly, is
| GUILTY. OF A MIsDE.
MEANOR.
In the case Of Stone VS., Beyans,
88 MINI. 1877 the facts were that
Bevans was president of the vii
lage council Of Morris, Mimi.
An extension OF the water
works system of that village was
in progress. Bevans manifested
considerable interest in the mat
ter, went to Dubuque, Ia. to in
vestigate a water works system
there, and, in consideration Of
such assistance and in order to
secure his active services until
the completion Of the enterprise,
the council adopted a resolution
appropriating to him $50 per
month. Bevans was not present
at the meeting, and did not par
ticipate in the resolution, but,
pursuant to such resolution, or
ders to the amount of $3.50 were
issued to and accepted by him.
The plaintiff, taxpayer,
brought this action against Be
vans to compel him to refund to
the village the money so paid
him, and the supreme court af-
firmed the judgment of the dis
trict court compelling the return
of the money. The court in it's
opinion says,
eve are very clear that the
resolution was ILLEGAL,
and could confer no rights
upon a member Of the coun-
ell based upon an agreement
with that body for compensa
ton. The relation Of mem
bers of the council to the vii
-
liner calls to mind the Polk county
case of three years ago, when