The Bemidji daily pioneer., 1908-07-24

of Bemidji in organizing municipal
court for Bemidji was considered
this morning by Judge Stanton in
district court, when the application
of M. G.. Slocum for an injunction
restraing the city from purchasing
supplies for the municipal court and
allowing the use of room in the
city hall as court room was brought
before the court.
F. A. Jackson appeared as council
for Mr.. Slocum while City Attorney
Gibbons represented the city and
members of the council. -
During the proceedings P. J.
Russell intervened as attorney for
H. w. Bailey, who was recently
appointed judge of the court.
Mr.. Gibbons reviewed the pro-
ceedings of the council in attempt
ing to establish the court. He
recited that the vote establishing the
court was unanimous and that Mayor
Pogue refused to sign the resolution
and in fact, vetoed the same, subse-
quent]y returning the resolution
together with his reasons for the
veto; that the council subsequently
adopted the resolution over the
mayors veto by unanimous vote.
All of this was admitted by the
counsel for the plaintiff.
In his prayer for injunction the
plaintiff stated that it would be a
great expense incurred in establish
ing the court and the court would
cause irreparable damage to the
plaintiff.
Mr.. Gibbons stated that the
charter provided that a resolution
could be passed over the mayors
veto if done by four -ffths majority.
In this instance the resolution had
been passed unanimously over the
mayors veto.
Mr.. Gibbons could see but one
provision in the charter for the
the establishing of municipal
court, that being Section 1, chapter
2 of the charter; and also: in the
charter there was provision that
justice of the peace should serve until
municipal court was established.
The charter was very silent in the
matter of the establishment of a
municipal court. Mr.. Gibbons
stated that he believed that it was
only a question of law as to the
action required on the part of the
mayor whether he could veto the
unanimous act of the counCil-would
the veto stand. Mr.. Gibbons be-
lieved that it gave altogether too
much power to one man.
Mr.. Jackson, for Mr.. Slocum, stat
ed that the city charter has no pro-
vision relative to the establishment
of the municipal court; the city
must 20 to the general law. Mr..
Jackson recited sections 124 and
125 of the Revised Laws relative to
the establishment of the court in
which the speaker held that the
approval of the mayor or the presi-
dent was absolutely necessary for the
adoption of resolution. He con-
tended that the council was attempt
ing to act contrary to the provisions
of this law.
The speaker quoted several
authorities as to the construction of
the statute, maintaining that the
intent of the statue meant that the
resolution must be signed and
approved by the mayor. He believes
that the plaintiff was entitled to the
injunction.
~ Mr.. Gibbons stated that he was
willing to leave the construction of
the statute to the court. "
Judge Stanton asked if there was
not line of authority as to the
approval or rejection of resolutions
similar to the one in question.
Mr.. Gibbons replied that he was
unable to find any.
P. J. Russell, as attorney for H.
- w. Bailey, recently appointed muni-
cipal Judge, intervened at this time
and stated that he would like to
inquire if any bond had been filed
in the action.