State v. Clausen
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | PARKER, J. MACKINTOSH, J. |
| Citation | State v. Clausen, 110 Wash. 525, 188 P. 538 (Wash. 1920) |
| Decision Date | 30 March 1920 |
| Docket Number | 15620. |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. STATE RECLAMATION BOARD et al. v. CLAUSEN, State Auditor. |
Original proceedings in mandamus by the State of Washington, on the relation of the State Reclamation Board of the State of Washington and George J. Hurley, to compel C. W. Clausen, as State Auditor of the State of Washington, to issue a warrant against the state reclamation revolving fund. Writ ordered to issue.
L. L Thompson, Atty. Gen., and Glenn J. Fairbrook of Seattle, for plaintiffs.
Frank C. Owings, of Olympia, for defendant.
This is an original mandamus proceeding in this court, wherein the relators seek a writ of mandate to compel the state auditor to issue a warrant against the state reclamation revolving fund to the relator George J. Hurley, in payment for 160 acres of land purchased from him by the state reclamation board under the land settlement act, Laws of 1919, c. 188, p 583. The auditor has refused to issue the warrant as demanded of him, basing his refusal upon the sole ground that the land settlement act is unconstitutional.
To the end that we have clearly before us the full purpose and scope of the land settlement act, we deem it desirable at the outset to here quote the larger portion of it, as follows:
The state reclamation act, Laws of 1919, c. 158, p. 442, provides for the composition and organization of the state reclamation board mentioned in the above-quoted portion of section 3, of the land settlement act. The state reclamation act also renders it plain that the state reclamation revolving fund from which the appropriation made by the above-quoted section 8 is, and is to become, largely, if not wholly, the product of taxes levied and to be levied upon all property in the state subject to taxation, in the same manner as the state general taxes are levied. In view of the express provisions of section 9 above quoted, we need only concern ourselves in this case with the question of the constitutionality of the act in so far as it authorizes the expenditure of public funds raised by taxation in the purchase by the reclamation board of land to be subdivided, improved, and disposed of as provided by the terms of the act, since we do not understand the contention here made in support of the auditor's refusal to issue the warrant as demanded of him, to be rested upon any other grounds of unconstitutionality than that the act, in so far as it authorizes the expenditure of public funds raised by taxation, is in excess of legislative constitutional power; in that it is, in effect, an exercise of the power to tax and to expend public funds so raised, for a purpose not public, but private--that is, for a purpose not governmental in the sense that such purpose is not a legitimate function of government.
We must, of course, proceed with our inquiry having in view the elementary principle that a tax can be lawfully levied, and the public funds so raised...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Gruen v. State Tax Commission
... ... facts requisite to the validity of the enactment, even though ... no legislative finding of fact appears in the statute ... 'We ... are also in accord with the rule announced in the case of ... State ex rel. State Reclamation Board v. Clausen, ... supra, [110 Wash. 525, 188 P. 538, 14 A.L.R. 1133], ... [211 P.2d 656] State ex rel ... Collier v. Yelle, 9 Wash.2d 317, 115 P.2d 373, 380 ... 'The ... statute, it must be remembered, is an exercise of the taxing ... power by the state. It must be ... ...
-
Albritton v. City of Winona
... ... 33074 Supreme Court of Mississippi February 7, 1938 ... [178 So. 800] ... (In ... 1 ... The ... state exists to promote welfare of its citizens, that is, ... their peace, happiness, and prosperity (Const. Miss. 1890, ... section 6; Const. U.S ... 283, 141 P. 164; Veterans Welfare ... Board v. Jordan, 189 Cal. 124, 208 P. 284, 22 A.L.R ... 1515; State ex rel. v. Clausen, 110 Wash. 525, 188 ... P. 538, 14 A.L.R. 113;. 59 C. J. 206, note 8 ... The ... proposed taxation to pay the proposed industrial bonds ... ...
-
State ex rel. Wis. Dev. Auth. v. Dammann
...Wis. 563, 88 N.W. 596, 90 N.W. 1067, 58 L.R.A. 739. The supreme court of the state of Washington in State ex rel. Board of Reclamation v. Clausen, 110 Wash. 525, 188 P. 538, 14 A.L.R. 1133, sustained an act creating a state reclamation board with authority to purchase farm lands for resale ......
-
Baker v. Matheson
...in egregious cases, it is for the legislature, and not the judiciary, to determine what serves a public purpose. See State v. Clausen, 110 Wash. 525, 188 P. 538 (1920). The necessity for providing wide legislative discretion is also supported by the constitutional provision which specifical......