The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1913-11-19

Continued From Page One. ..,,
ing conduct and not engaging in trade.
Mr.. Tenneson Contended that the es-
adjustment of this department was
the creation of a monopoly since it re-
CURED certain officials to bond with it
and did not allow private, competitions;
that bonding was a distinct business,
Doth in this country and foreign coun-
tries n had been in use in England
for considerable time and was recog-
nlZed by our statutes as such; that it
was primarily the duty Of officials to
secure bonds n not Of the state to
provide them; that the constitutional
ity Of the laws requiring bonds was
probably unconstitutional. He contend
ed that the act violated a large mum
Der Of the provisions of the state con-
stltution, which have to do with per-
sonal liberty and the equal rights Of
property n citizens. The state can
not engage in trade without a special
constitutional permit, as is instanced
by the terminal elevator and state
highway amendments, which are now
pending in the state. The speaker
urged that the contemplated depart
ment was not an internal Improvement
and came within the prohibition Of the
American attitude toward govern
mental interfereneG in private business
Tracy Bangs on behalf of, the plain
tiff contended that the contemplated
bond of the act was not in reality %
bond at all-that an instrument to be
a bond must have an. obligor and
abligee, neither of which was providA
ed by the act. The commissioner OF
insurance might elect to pay. a loss or
he might not and that the state could
not be coerced since there was or
might not De any fund to pay the OBJ
1ioo fiNl 7ho nat o-nFar- n~Isfr ~ 80 4
and judicial powers on the insurance
commissioner.
Mr.. Bangs further commended that
the $3.50 on a thousand levied on the
communities for the bonding of them
officials was an illegal tax. He review
ed the growth Of taxation and pointed
out that a tax can be levied only forl
burden must fall ,proportionately on
every member of the community OR
the property of every member. More,
no community can be taxed for the
benefit OF another. This act contem-
plates taxing one community for the
benefit Of another. Different counties
have different amounts to raise for the
bonds of their officials, therefore, the
burden falls unequally upon different
communities.
States Contention.
Inc SLdL6 commenced THaC the act
was not unconstitutional and denied
the allegations of the plaintiff in toto.
Inasmuch as the state constitution. does
not require the bonding of any official.
the entire matter rests with the legIs-
lature and if they wished to Destroy
surety bonding or another kind of
bonding, it could be done by legisla-
tive act. 1t "a commended that the,
legislature had the power, in the alb
sence of constitutional limitations to
make the bonding of an official a
qualification for Office. II the state
has the power to create or abolish
bonding it has the power to create a.
bonding department to take care Of
the bonds thus made a qualification
for office. BY doing this the state is
not engaging in the bonding. business
nor establishing q trade department.
Many states create funds for pension
ing public servants; this and other
states AK insurance companies to
create funds for volunteer fire: depart
ments. - 'r=s ~: .sa %t' -
The fact that fidelity division Of