The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-05-27
STATE DEBT LIMIT
WOULD Be PASSED
Attorney General Holds Law of
Last Legislature Is In
constitutional.
STATE UNIVERSITY WILL
NOT GET ITS $250,000
Permanent Land Fund Cannot
Be Converted Into Cash
for This Purpose.

Attorney General A. r. Barnes We'd
nesday gave a written opinion in which
he holds that that part of chapter
124 Of the session laws Of 1909, auth"
orizing partial conversion Of the uni
versity permanent land fund into cash
TO pay for q central or administration
building at the university, at cost
not TO exceed s25000o, is unconstitu-
tional. in that it would pass the state
debt limit.
1t is likely that the case viii now
be taken TO the supreme court, III q
friendly suit, for final settlement;
The attorney-general' s opinion, whlch
is directed to the state land board, and
is in regard to the execution or prom
issory note by the university to the
land board to secure the first loan OF
conversion OF SIP 500 from the univer-
sity permanent land fund to apply on
the university central building, is as
follows:
Il in receipt Of yogr favor snrtS Of May sse
note in the amount of sl2.5oo. executed
by the University OF Utah to your
board .,, ro-
visions OF chapter 124 of the Laws or
Utah, 1909. which is An act - auLhoT'2, Ilof
Ing the d Of cost not 70
Pqf aH5hSs1Rs
manent land fund othoS into o9 oasn nsnsTnr sT the
act set'ei the GmdSt University has executed the
ouested this board for this amount of
money. that Is Sl2.500, being part OF the
$3.50, 900 provided for by the above aci.
Similar Act.
During the session of the last lesis-
lature there was intTodmced LA a,oneG Te[Y
About the only difference between that
proposed act and this act was In tnat ~
was therein prGgySdead ths sna an sp
propriation was, made for $1,000 eaGh ,,h
year TO meet these notes which would
be executed by the university
1 was at that time asked. by, one OF
the legislators. TO render an opinion as
to the constitutionality OF such act. !
qla fhat sD portion aon Of the bill Which provided
tPr the 'nn University Iesi to the university for
sion of the provisions OF section 8 OF the
enabling act, but was also in direct
conflict with the provisions OF section
I further held in that opinion mat
such proposed act. which provided for
an Indebtedness to be assumed or con-
nhIigotion against the state so as To
AFFECT the debt power OF the
state Under section / of article u OF
state NAV contract debts not exceeding
in the aggregate, at any one time. the
sum of s2o6.0oo, over and above the
amount OF the territorial indebtedness
assumed by the state" and l held In
that opinion that the 25o.ooo loan would
be an obligation assumed by the state;
and therefore in conflict with section l
pf article IL above quoted.
There IS no doubt in. my mind now
but that the act, the title Of which is
above quoted, and which is found In
chapter 124 OF the Laws OF Utah. 1909,
has the same Objectionable features as
the bill which was first proposed, and
es TO which T rendered the opinion
above mentioned. and for the very .rea-
sons above mentioned. In my opinion
this act is unconstitutional, and yoCN
board has no authority to loan this
money. or any portion Of 1t, to the uni-
ye.sity,