Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-05-04
Synopsis of Chief Justice Stay
toms Dissenting Opinion.
The Questions on Which the Decision
Hinged Discussed at Length.
His Reasons Set Forth.
The Motion for Rs-heariug is Overruled and
the Titles of Twenty Million Acres
of Land are Sealed.
Special to the Gazette.


hearing in the famous Val Verde Calves
ton, Harrisburg and San Antonio Rail-
road Company VS.. tine State WINS over
ruled in the supreme court on Friday,
the I'd inst, and Stayton, c. J., dis
sented in lengthy opinion of which the
following is a synopsis:
The magnitude of the interests involved
and the broad divergence of opinion held
by the members of the court, furnish my
reason for stating my construction OF
those points of the constitution on which
the decision must rest. For construlnG
constitution or any of the laws, the
object is the true intent OF
the lawmaker which must be
ascertained from the language IN which
the law is written, and in considering
this 1t is always important to keep in
view the object the lawmaker intended
to accomplish through its enactment.
The people of our state have again and
again declared the Importance of educa-
ton to their welfare, and their language
used in the laws looking to that end
ought not to be slightly weighed. The
fathers of the republic, before Texas be-
came separate nationality, DECLARED
the want of a.
PUBLIC SYSTEM OF EDUCATION
one OF the evils of Mexican rule, and tine
same men in the constitution then made
declared that it shall be the duty Of
permit to provide by law a general sYs-
tenn of education. When it surrendered
its nationality and entered the Union 1t
in
and in the constitution of 1945
used the language used in the first
section of the article in our
present constitution on which the decis-
ion of this case hinges. In 1854 the sys-
TEN of granting aid through alternate
sections of land began, and when the
people met again in constitutional con-
yention they repeated the declarations of
earlier constitutions on this subject. The
period of reconstruction came and che
constitution of 1869 was adopted declsr-
ing (section six) what funds, land and
other property should constitute public
school funds. Legislation from January
10, 1889, till the adoption of
the present constitution, mani
tested the same deep interest in the
cause of public free educa-
ton; and remembering this per-
sistent and unfaltering purpose, not
shown for any other objects, must be
read the lanRuage found in the present
constitution on the Interpretation of sec
ton regarding the right of parties.
WeHook at the language used, remem-
bering that the intent to be ascertalned.
is thai of the people .
WHO RATIFIED THE CONSTITUTION.
The sole inquiry is what lands did the
language used appropriate and make
part of the perpetual or permanent
school fund? Did section two make an.
of revenue named in it (?
A fund is said to be
appropriated when 1T is reserved or des-
tined by law for particular named pur-
nose or use. The declaration that the
specified funds together shall constitute
a perpetual school fund of itself leaves
no doubt upon the question, and, as if to
place it beyond controversy, there
follows the declaration that no law
shall ever be enacted appropriating any
part of the permanent or available school
fund to any other purpose whatever.
No more of words could have been used
to declare an appropriation than are
used in sections AZ and 5, Art. z, of
the constitution From the moment
the constitution became a law, April IA,
1876, the appropriation took effect and
was binding on the people and every de-
partment of the government.
We now come to the question on sec
tons "a and OF article T., self executing.
In some respects the appropriation made
by the constitution depended on q con-
tingence in that it acted on the val of
the legislature, but it does not follow
from this that it is
NOT sRLF-ExECUTING.
The instance before US is one in which
the people execute their own power
in so far as it was deemed expedient to
firmly and broadly lay the foundation
and furnish the means to erect, through
details to be provided by the legisla-
ture, structure to last for ages. Such
provisions. in "a constitution are self-ex-
scuting necessarily, in so far as
they determine and fix the fund
with which the public schools are to be
maintained, for they deprive every de-
partment of the government of all power
to diminish or divert it. The sections OK
the constitution bearing on the question
here presented are not advisory in
character, Dut they declare a right,
give its enclosure the subject matter to
which it attaches and assert it TO be per-
petual; and where TINS state of facts is
found to exist the law which brings IL into
existence is necessarily self-sxecuting. I
1t is proper. however, to look to every
provision OF the constitution having even
a remote bearing to assist Us in our
SEARCH FOR TRUTH.
The language of section 8 makes, as
all coneede, al absolute appropriation Of
land for the university in the one case;
in the other case the lands are declared
to be set apart. The appropriation for
the university, even with the declaration
that the land appropriated should be des-
ignated, was less certain than was the
appropriation 81 one-half of the public
domain of the state and the language of
section is cannot maintain the
proposition that the one provision
was self-executing and the other not.
That the people through section 2,
article Of the constitution, made some
appropriation absolutely to the public
free school fund, neither party de-
MES, and the vltal question