Truelson v. City of Duluth

• Decision Date: 21 January 1895
• Docket Number: No. 9276.,9276.
• Citation: 60 Minn. 132
• Parties: HENRY TRUELSON v. CITY OF DULUTH and Others.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

60 Minn. 132

HENRY TRUELSON v. CITY OF DULUTH and Others.¹

No. 9276.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

January 21, 1895.

Appeal by Henry Truelson from an order of the district court for St. Louis county, Lewis, J., dismissing his application for appointment of inspectors to examine the ballots cast at a special election held in the city of Duluth October 26, 1894. Reversed.

S. T. & Wm. Harrison, for appellant.

Page Morris, for respondents.

COLLINS, J.

The question here is whether the result of a special election held in the city of Duluth, at which it was voted to issue bonds in accordance with the terms of Sp. Laws 1891, c. 55, § 35, can be inquired into and contested under the provisions of Laws 1893, c. 4 (G. S. 1894, §§ 6-205). The notice of contest was served on the mayor and a member of the city council, and at the hearing of an order requiring the city to appear and take part in the selection of three persons to inspect and examine the ballots the district court dismissed the proceeding for want of jurisdiction, the precise point being that the statute of 1893 contains no provision for the contesting of an election such as the one involved. Briefly stated, the argument in support of the order of dismissal is that, as a city is not mentioned in section 190 or 191 (G. S. 1894, §§ 195, 196), and it is under section 190, if at all, that the right of contest is given, and as there is no provision for the service of a notice in case of a contest over an election of the nature of the one now in question, the district court had no power to entertain the proceeding. That the provisions of the act were intended to apply to and include city elections is made evident in section 198 (G. S. 1894, § 203), in which it is provided that in city elections the act is to be construed in connection with laws authorizing such elections; and this intent is conclusively indicated by the language of section 199 (G. S. 1894, § 204), wherein it is declared that the act shall apply to all general and special elections in the state, except township and village elections. This exception is particularly noticeable, and tends to emphasize the assertion that city elections are clearly within the terms of chapter 4. That no stress should be laid upon the fact that cities are not specially mentioned in either section 190 or 191 (G. S. 1894, §§ 195, 196) will be apparent from a construction placed upon a section of the old election law in State v. Dowlan, 33 Minn. 536, 24 N. W....