Warren sheaf. [volume] (Warren, Marshall County, Minn.) 1880-current, 1919-12-24
ERROR DISCOVERED
in SLEIGH LAW
Representative Berve says Legislature
Did Not Intend to Prohibit
Use of Old Sleighs.

H. 0. Berve, representative of Mar
shall county, in letter to the Sheaf
calls attention to an apparent error in
the wide sleigh law which was passed
at the last legislative session. Mr..
Berve's letter is as follows:
"My attention has been called to an
article dealing with the so-called sleigh
law, appearing in the Sheaf and one
or two other papers,, short time ago.
Upon comparison with the law as it
appears in the volume of session laws
for 1919 find that you have it printed
accurately as it appears therein.
Nevertheless there is mistake some
! where. 1t is not identical with the law
as it was passed by the Legislature.
Upon inquiry Of the Secretary e State
I find that the law is printed correctly
In the volume of session laws as COM
pared with the enrolled copy on file in
his Office. This law is known as
Chapter 1S9 of the regular session Of
1919, being Senate File 81.
'This law regulates the use, manu-
facture and sale Of s1eighs, and among
other things it prohibits the use Of the
so-called narrow guage sleigh after
Jan. 1, 1921. As the law was passed
by the House and Senate it permitted
farmers to- continue to use their old
narrow guage sleighs after said date
of Jan. 1, 1921, so that they would not
have to rebuild their old sleighs in
order to comply with the law.,l In other.
words, the use, manufacture and sale
of new narrow guage sleighs was for
hidden after said date of Jan. /, 1921,
but the old narrow guage sleighs could
continue to be used.
II find however that as the law now
appears the use Of both the new and
old narrow guage sleighs is forbidden
after the date mentioned. The words
purchased at first hand which were
in the last sentence of Section of the
bin when it passed the House have for
some strange, unaccOuntable reason
been left out. This makes the law read
so as to prohibit the use Of both the
new and old narrow sleighs. One Of
the amendments made by the House
has also not been included in the law
at all, although judging from the Jour
nails of the Senate it was concurred in
} by that body.
/, IAN effort was made when the bill
was up for consideration in the House
{; to, amend by striking out the words
i t'purchasedg at first hand" but this
amendment was lost by vote of 81
tots 50 that the words should certainly
:still be In the law. The proceedings
with reference to this bill SO far as the
House is concerned may be found on
pages 1903 and 1904. Of the House
Journal, and on page 1857 Of the Senate
Journal.
II simply wish to call attention to
these facts, as it was not the intention
of the Legislature to prohibit the use
of the old sleighs. AS to just how or
why this error has crept into the Law
I am unable to say. There is some
thing wrong about it somewhere, but
presumably it is only mistake on the
part Of some clerk in making up the
I final draft Of the bill as passed by the
/ two Houses. At any rate the law as II
now stands is not in the form in which
it was passed and authorized by the
Legislature, which can be seen from thu
Journals.
I'm view Of the fact that the law as
it now appears has not been passed BY
the Legislature, as indicated BY tht
Journals, I am unable to see how tn
part prohibiting the use Of the oil
.sleighs can be enforced. That is {
question for the courts however.
PERSONALLY can see no reason VIII,
3 the use Of the old narrow guage Sleigh
1 should not be permitted after said date
SO as not to force people to go to tn