Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1915-04-17
judge #hDl granted such motion was
not the Ljndge who tried the case, and

judge who granted such motion was
not the Ljndge who tried the case, and
had no opportunity to e and hear
the witnesses. 4 Iis.
6. A judgment entered pursuant to
findings OF fact, conclusions, Of law
and an order for Judgment which were
not filed until after the expiration OF
the term Of office of the judge who
made them, is not for such reason,
void, but at the most is merely irreg-
ular, and car be challenged only by
a direct attack.
Z. The question whether Sec. 1903
r. G. 1905 (Sec.' 221S C.. L. 1919,
which imposes a liability upon certain
public officers for the performance OF
contracts entered into on behalf Of a
municipality which incur Indebtedness
in excess Of the debt limit, contra
venes Sec. 81 OF the N. D. Constitu.
ton, is urged but not decided, for the
reason that a decision Of such point
is unnecessary on this appeal.
8. Section 1903 R. C. 1905 (Sec. 221S
C. l.. 1919 construed and held to i'm
pose "a penalty or forfeiture within
the meaning of Sec. 67SS R. c. 1905
(Sec. 1876 G. 4. 1879 limiting the
time to three years for the commence
ment of an action upon a statute for a
penalty or forfeiture.
Appeal from the District Court, Ro,
lette County; G. w. Buttz, j.
From. an order granting a new trial,
plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed. Opinion of the Court by
Fisk, C. j.
aoH. E.. Plymat Of Rolla, North Dako-
ia, and Mercer, Swan 4 Stinchfield Of
Minneapolis, Minnesota, Attorneys for
Plaintiff and Appellant.
VIM. Bateson Of Rolla; North Da-
kota, and Middaugh, Cuthbert, Smythe
& Hunt of Devils Lake, North Da-
kota, Attorneys for Defendant and
Respondent.
FROM RENVILLE COUNTY.
John OLaughlin, Plaintiff land Re.
spondent, s.
Peter Carlson, County Auditor Of Rem
vile County, North Dakota, Defend
ant and Appellant.
Syllabus: CD An appeal from a
judgment in a mandamus proceeding
commanding a county auditor to re-
ceive and file a nominating petition
and print the respondents name upon
the official ballot, will not be dismiss.
ed merely because the election has
been held, where the judgment of the
trial court was based solely Upon the
ground that the statute, under which
the then incumbent held such office,
was unconstitutional.
(2) Under the provisions of Section
172 Of the Constitution, the legislature
is empowered to fix the term of Of.
fee of county commissioners.
as 60 A legislative enactment is pre-,
sumed to be constitutional and will he
upheld, sunless it Is mfanjfestly violat
i've Of the organic law.
ca In constituting a constitutional
provision, or statute. inYolving ques-
tions political or duasi-political in
their character, courts will always
give great consideration to construc
tons placed thereon by the politica!!
departments of the government.
(5) In the absence of a constitu.
tional prohibition, the legislature may
change the term of an Office ever at.
ter the election or appointment of
the incumbent thereof.
(6) Chapter 1923 Of the 1913 SEES
sion Laws (Sec. 1854, Compiled Lawsl
providing a method to determine the
order of succession Of county commits
sicners, is not violative of the con
stitution of this state.
From a JUDGMENT of the District
Court of Renville County, Leighton, ],
Defendant appeals.
Reversed. Opinion of the Court by
Christianson, J..
n. J, Linde, Attorney General; John