The herald-advance. (Milbank, S.D.) 1890-1922, 1906-05-18
- In Qno About the State -
CAPITOL BOARD FULLY UPHELD.
Supreme Court Dismisseo Action
Against Commission.

Supreme Court Dismisseo Action
Against Commission.
The supreme court in an opinion by
Justice Haney disposed of the case
brought by the Sioux Falls CONNER
cial club to stop further action on the
erection Of a state capitol. The court
takes up and passes upon every con.
tention raised by the Sioux Falls peo-
pie, sustaining the commission in
every particular.
On the contention under section 26,
article 3 of the constitution. that the
commission is an unconstitutional
body, because the legislature granted
the power to erect the building, to
special commission, the court holds
that the section in question applies to
municipal affairs alone, and finds that
by the examination of the original
draft of, and record of discussion at
the time the constitution was adopted,
that provision was taken from the
Pennsylvania statutes, where it was in
troduced to prevent the legislature
from further attempting to appoint
commissions to take upon themselves
municipal functions, and holds that the
word municipal must apply in it's gen.
eral sense to towns and villages.
On the contention that the legisla-
ture has attempted to delegate its pow
esr to commission, the court holds
that the making Of building is not
the making of law. The law was
made when the legislature authorized
the defendants as capitol commits
sion to procure a completed building.
The legislature cannot act upon every
detail arising In the course OF the erec-
tion OF public buildings. That power
must be delegated to some person or
body The contention that two sub
jects are embodied in the law provid-
ing for the erection Of the building is
not tenable. The sale of lands for
funds for the work are naturally and
reasonbly connected with the same
subject
On the contention that the legisla-
ture did not provide the method Of dis
posal OF the lands as required by the
enabling act, it is held that the only
limitation is in the use Of the funds Sc
cured from the sale OF the lands donat-
ed for the erection of public buildings
at the state capitol. The legislature
could dispose of the lands in any way
;rh ~
funds were applied as directed in the
enabling act: that the lands are being
disposed Of in a manner provided by
the legislature when it authorized the
disposal of such lands by the public
lands board.
On the claim that the commission in.
tends to proceed before the funds are
In the treasury, as provided by the law,
1t is held that nothing was shown that
such an attempt was being made; that
the commission in advertising for bids
asked for them in such manner that
they could let parts of the building at
a time, and there is nothing to show
the commission intends to let contracts
in excess Of the funds on hand.
The contention that chapter IS, Laws
of 1908, which provides for the getting
out Of stone at the penitentiary quar-
ries, fixes the quality of stone which Is
to be used in the building, Is held to
be under the further provision of the
same law that such stone is to be used
in case it is found suitable for the
work. The court holds that the only
body which can decide as to the suita-
bility OF the stone for the work is the
commission. No one else has the pow
er to make this decision.
The last contention, that the COM
mission is attempting to delegate its
powers to the architect, is held 20 be
only provision which is a portion OF
every such contract, and without a
standing.
The court dismissed the proceeding
brought against the commission, and
holds that 1t is entitled to recov sr tax
able costs OF the suit.