El Paso daily herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1881-1901, 1897-12-10

speeding that subject matter that it is
! held to repeal aod supercede all pre-
vious laws respecting any part of the
same subject matter.
| Railway VS.. Ford, 80 Texas. p. 81,
| holding that a more liberal rule of
construction should he allowed against
| the repeating of one statute by another
| by implication, when both are passed
| by the same legislature, than would
prevail if the last act were passed at q
subsequent session.
ThOurenin v. Rodriguez, "a Texas p.
1853, holding that if a q statute gives q
new remedy.not repugnant to or incon
sistent with. the old one the latter is
not taken away, and parties have
their election between the two. Repeats
by implication are not favored.
Now, as we have argued, under the
act Of April 3,lS79, nothing but a double
question could be presented, and it is
the only statute under which the ques-
tion of tn e transferring of the power
to control aud manage the public free
schools to q board of trustees could be
voted upon by the people. The simple,
sole question as to whether or not q
city should become an independent
school district could only be submitted
under the provisions of Art. 1871 of the
revision of 1879. The act of April 3.
1872 does, not constitute in itself q
complete system. Its very caption
show that it was never designed for sny-
thing more than mere amendment to
the law as it then existed an amend
ment, as we have already shown, by
which this matter of the creation of
board of truste ca could be voted upon
1t contains no provisions whatever
respecting the most essential matters
of "a " linn and rafors in hot
ever to the matters COW
erfd by Arts. 1888 to
1898, inclusive, of the Revised Statutes
of 1879, acd we claim that there is no
rule laid down by our supreme court,
or by any other court, by which we
should be forced to the conclusion that
Art. 1871, with the other articles of
the revision of 1879 following it in
Chap. 3, of Tit. IS, which are depend
ent upon it, and have no meaning with
out it, were repeated by implication by
the enactme Mt of this very partial law
of April 3, 1879.
The whole trouble about this matter
grows out of several ra'chings of a
very old garment with new cloth and
as the legis' allure of 1895 has repeated
the old AFT 1871 of the Revised Statut ties
Of 1879 in the very words in which it
originally passed, we are compelled to
=
work.
AS the law now stands cities having
specia! charters, organized as independ-
ent school districts upon a vote of tax
payers must have their school affairs
controlled by the city council. Cities
organized uLder the act of April 3,
1879, (Which CORE spends with Art.
1905 of 1895, ct seq.,) must have their
schools controlled by a board of trust
he citu nO1nnil fh n,,o1iRod
electors may determine at an election
held as the law prescribes. Cities
organized under the gecersl law which
are indeDendent school districts, and
which may become, or have become,
such upon vote of tax payers under
the provisions of Art. 4OO4 of the
revision Of 1895 or the old Art. 1881
are auth orized by law through their
councils 10 appoint boards of trustees.
Independent school district through
vote, it derives it's authority to do so
from the legislature But the legis-
lature could, as matter of course,
declare that city shall be an
independent school district, and in the
granting of special charter would by
such a declaration entirely obviate the
necessity of an election. The legisla-
ture has declared in the special charter
of the city Of Ell Paso that the city is
an Independent school district. The
statement that the city council of the
city of Ell PasO shall have authority to
levy taxes not exceeding one half of
one per cent for the support of it's pub
tic fre e schools" involves every declar.
alton that the legislature could have
made about the matter of FL Paso's |
being an Independent school district
nJrJHr SCcSvnN