State ex rel. St. Paul Gaslight Co. v. McCardy

• Decision Date: 22 November 1895
• Citation: 62 Minn. 509,64 N.W. 1133
• Parties: STATE EX REL. ST. PAUL GASLIGHT CO. v. MCCARDY, COMPTROLLER.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

62 Minn. 509

64 N.W. 1133

STATE EX REL. ST. PAUL GASLIGHT CO.

v.MCCARDY, COMPTROLLER.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Nov. 22, 1895.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

1. The joint committee created by Sp. Laws 1889, c. 64, has entire charge of the city hall and courthouse, and has authority to contract for heating and lighting the same, so as to render it fit for occupancy and use for the transaction of public business.

2. This committee is not a department of either the city or county government, but a distinct and independent quasi municipal board or body. Its powers, as well as the mode of exercising them, are determined exclusively by the act creating it, and by the general rules of law, and not by the provisions of the city charter regulating the municipal affairs of the city.

3. The “Bell Charter,” subsequently enacted, did not, by implication, repeal, or in any manner modify, the act of 1889, or in any way affect the powers of the committee created by it.

4. At least in so far as executed by furnishing the light, a contract made by the committee for lighting the city hall and courthouse for three years is valid, and the city and county are liable, in their proportionate shares, for the payment of the light thus furnished.

5. Where a claim against the city is a legal and valid one, and there is sufficient money in the city treasury, to the credit of the appropriate fund, to pay it, mandamus will lie to compel the city comptroller to audit and adjust it, and report it to the city council for payment.

Appeal from district court, Ramsey county; Chas. E. Otis and Hascal R. Brill, Judges.

Mandamus by the state of Minnesota, on the relation of the St. Paul Gaslight Company, against J. J. McCardy, comptroller of the city of St. Paul. Judgment for relator, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Kueffner, Fauntleroy & Rice, for appellant.

Flandreau, Squires & Cutcheon, for respondent.

MITCHELL, J.

Mandamus to compel the comptroller of the city of St. Paul to audit, adjust, and report to the city council of the city of St. Paul the relator's claim against the city for light furnished for the courthouse and city hall pursuant to contract with the joint committee having charge of the building, as provided for in Sp. Laws 1889, c. 64. The facts are all stipulated. The questions involved relate mainly to the construction of local legislation, which is familiar to those specially interested, but of no particular interest to others. The able memorandum of the trial judges, which we might safely adopt as our opinion, is full and exhaustive. Any very extended statement or discussion of the case by us is therefore unnecessary. It is sufficient to say that, pursuant to Sp. Laws 1881, c. 376, a building was being erected, under the supervision of a special commission, for the use of the city of St. Paul and the county of Ramsey, as a city hall and courthouse, and which was to be owned by them as tenants in common. The building was nearing completion. Inasmuch as the county and city acted under different laws with reference to the letting of contracts and the transaction of business, it would have been impracticable for the two to care for the building, and keep it in proper condition for use, if acting separately. It was therefore essential to the efficient care and custody of the building that it should be intrusted to the exclusive charge of a single body. To effect this purpose, the legislature, by Sp. Laws 1889, c. 64, provided: “The said building when completed shall be in charge of a joint committee of seven to be appointed as follows: The mayor of said city of St. Paul shall be exofficio member of and the chairman of said committee. Three (3) of said committee shall be appointed annually by the president of the common council of said city from the members of said council and three (3) shall be appointed annually by the chairman of the board of county commissioners from the members of said board. Said committee shall have entire charge of said building and shall have power to appoint such janitor, custodian and other employés as they shall deem necessary for the proper care and management of said buildingand at such compensation as said committee shall determine. The members of said joint committee shall each be entitled to receive for their services a compensation of one hundred dollars ($100) per annum and no more, which shall be paid at the expiration of each and every quarter (1/4) year and together with the expense of keeping said building in repair and the necessary expense of heating and maintaining the same, shall be paid equally by said city and county; that is to say, one-half (1/2) thereof out of the treasury of said city, and one-half (1/2) out of the treasury of said county.”

In June, 1894, this joint committee entered into a written contract with the relator to furnish light for the building for the term of three years, at an agreed price per month. Subsequently, the committee, by resolution, requested the relator to commence furnishing light in accordance with its contract, which...