Lancey v. King County

Citations

• 15 Wash. 9
• 34 L.R.A. 817
• 45 P. 645
• 1896 Wash. LEXIS 126

Syllabus

<p>CONSTITUTONAL LAW — TITLE OF ACT — PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS — COUNTY AID — EMINENT DOMAIN — EXERCISE FOR BENEFIT OF UNITED STATES.</p> <p>An act of the legislature will not be declared void on the ground of violating the constitutional provision that “ no bill shall embrace more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title,” unless the violation is most clear — sound policy and legislative convenience requiring that this provision should be liberally construed.</p> <p>The act of February 12, 1895, entitled “ an act to grant and prescribe powers of counties relative to public works undertaken or proposed by the State of Washington, or the United States,” contains but one subject matter, which is fairly embraced within the scope of its title.</p> <p>An act authorizing counties to condemn land for a right-of-way for a ship canal projected by the general government, is not a violation of art. 8, §7, of the constitution, which forbids counties giving any money or property, etc., to or in aid of any individual, association, company or corporation, etc., as neither the state nor the United States can be brought within the meaning of the section.</p> <p>Such undertaking is not open to the objection that it is in violation of art. 8, §6, of the constitution, which prohibits a county from incurring debt for any other than strictly county purposes, as it is entirely within the limits of the county, and for the purpose of connecting two large local waterways with the Pacific ocean.</p> <p>The fact that an act authorizes the exercise of the state’s eminent domain for the purpose of constructing a ship canal which shall be under the control of the general government, but for the use and benefit of the public generally, will not render the act unconstitutional, when there is no express constitutional provision prohibiting it.</p>