Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1915-03-13
COURTS ARE
, !. GIVEN Power
LEGISLATURES POWER LIN.
TIED IN RECENT DECISION
OF WASHINGTON COURT
MAY APPLY1O NORTH DAKOTA
For the Courts to Determine the
Existance of An Emer-
genCy.
gency

The Tacoma (Wash.) Ledger OF
March 6 contains the following article
which Is Of great interest to North Da'
kotans in that it may be applicable to
the condition existing in this state
with regard to the initiative aSd refer.
endum:
Laying down the rule that the popu.
lar referendum has limited the powers
Of the legislative branch of govern.
ment to the extent that the Legislature
can pass no emergency Aause Except
such laws as may be necessary for the
immedia. e preservation OF the peace,
health or safety and support of the
state government and is existing in
s%titntions," and even then it is for the
courts to determine the existence of
ar emergency, the STATE supreme court
today in an 1S-page decision directs
the issuance of a writ to restrain the
state treacurer and secretary of state
from serving on the newly organized
land board for a period of 80 days af-
ter the adjournment OF the legislature.
The litigation resulted from the veto
by Governor Lister of House bill No.
sd, commonly referred to as the Sec
ond McArdle bill, reorganizing the
land board by replacing three guber.
material appOintees, two members of
the secretary OF state. After the veto
was announced the house and senate
both passed the bill over the veto Of
the Governor Lister, and upon the aid.
vice of the governor, Clark Jackson.
J. w. BrislaWn and fire warden e. w.
Ferris, the members of the board,
sought a writ to prevent the state
treasurer and secretary of state from
serving on the board their action be.
ing based on the ~alledged unconstitu.
tionality of the emergency clause at
tached to the bill. %
Five to Four Decision.
The supreme court sustains their
contention in a five to four decision.
Judge Stephen j.. Chadwick writes the
majority decision which is conquered
ia by Judges O. G. Ellis, 0. r.. Hol-
comb, L. N. Parker and John F. Main.
I Judge Wallace Mount writes a dis
senting opinion which is c%oncurred in
by Judges Herman D. Grow and Chief
Justice George E. Morris. Judge Fu.-
lerton dissents individually.
Judge Chadwick in his decision says
the central point involved III the case
is whether the legislature can pass an
act and declare an emergency so as
to release it from the restraint placed
upon it by the referendum amendment
to the state constitution. He takes up
in full and refutes the argument of
ATTORNEY Genreal Tanner that the
court will not under any circumstances
review the discretion of a legislative
body and that a legislative declaration
OF an emergency has always been re.
garded as not open to judicial inquiry.
This would, be tr:e says Judge Chad
wick, under the old emergency clause,
but the referendum amendment to the
constitution has restricted the scope
Of legislative action. and says that in
his opinion there was no necessity for
an emergency clause in the bill be.
fore the court. Int courts have a right
10 pass upon the acts of the legisla.
ture of this kind and he says that sim.
ply because the legislature in it's dis.
cretioc has seen fit to make the bill
an emergency measure does not pro.
hihit the courts from reviewing the
acts to determine whether an actual
emergency existed. TO hold otherwise