The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-02-16

tHe IiegdtIty oi tHe hCt'
In argument court yesterday the
greater part of the morning session
was consumed i'm listening to argu-
ments in the case in which the legality
of the Scranton Board of School Con-
troll is questioned. The arguments
aganst the legality of the board was
made by Attorney |. II. Burns. The
arguments in favor of the existing
board was made by ex-Judge H. A.
Knapp. Mr.. Burns argument in part
was as follows:
The foundation of our common
school system is the Act of May s, 1854
p. L.. 617. Every township. borough
and city shall be a school district, each
district to have a board of six direc-
tors.
The city Of Scranton when incor-
porated consisted of four school dis
triCts and these were continued by the
act of incorporation. This portion OF
the act was. however, repeated by Act
Of May 9, 1889 =. L., 152, which left
the school district of the city under
the general law (supra) constituting 1t
a single district. 1t follows therefore
that the Scranton school district is
directors under the Act of 1854. unless
this act has been changed by some
subsequent legislation.
1T is claimed that this was so done
by the municipal Act of 1874 (P. L., 23O)
1t is under this act that respondents
claim their offices and the legality of
their tenure depends upon the validity
of that legislation.
a a school
districts or school affairs is invalid for
three reasons:
"First-The subject of schools is not
mentioned i'm the title
"Second-The act contains two sub
jects-cities and school districts.
"Third-The portion relating to school
affairs is local legislation forbidden by
the constitution.
A FORMER DECISION.
"That the act is unconstitutional was
really decided in Scranton school dis
tricts appeal, 113 Pa, 176. but as that
case only involved directly a supple
ment to that act, the provisions of the
act itself have stood without direct
question down to the present time.
But in Chalpants appeal, 49, Pa, 246,
the doctrine that school districts may
be legislated for in a particular class
of cities is plucked up by the roots,
and in the language of the court, 1T is
beyond the power of the Legislature to
enact, and absolutely void
Ex-Judge Knapp, in his answer,
said:
The respondent sets up that in 1877
the city by ordinance had accepted
the provisions of the act of 1874 relat-
ing to the government of cities of the
third class. Thereupon the four school
districts within the limits of the city
were merged into one. Since 1877 down
to the present time the city of Scran-
ton and the Scranton school district
have been governed under the act of
1874 Under this act schools have been
opened, directors elected contracts for
erection of buildings entered into and
carried out and bonds issued. The
validity of the organization of the
Scranton school district depends on
this act; without it there is no such
thing, and we return to the four dis
triCt plan.
RECOGNIZED THE BOARD.
'The commonwealth, in whose name
this writ of quo warranto is issued, has
u Instantly ISCOSHlZeu tne NaHulty or
this school board by paying state
funds over to it, The Supreme court
has on number of occasions recog-
nized and approved of the board. In
the case of Evans reported in 1Oa Pa,
State reports, page 394, which was a
question involving a vacancy on the
board, Chief Justice Paxson wrote:
The city of Scranton is a city of twen-
r1S nd oh,
titled to one controller An examina-
ton of the opinion of the Supreme
court shows that the provisions of the
act of 1874 were sustained by the high
est court in the commonwealth. In
the case of Simpson VS.. the Scranton
school district, in which the fees of
the treasurer were involved the act
was again sustained.
I'm the appeal of this school district
with reference to the act of 1875 a sup
plement to the act of 1874 no mention
was made by the court that the act
was not valid Furthermore it was de-
clared constitutional in the case of the
school district Of Reading VS.. Savage.
This shows that the judicial branch
OF the government has recognized the
school district of Scranton as properly
maintained and governed under the
act Of 1874.
EACH CITY A DISTRICT.
$50 far as the legislature is con-
cerned it passed the act providing that
each city should be district and each
ward should have one controller. Sim
| liar acts were passed in 1889 and in
| 1891, showing three acts of the legis-
lature in direct harmony with the act
of 1874. 1t is claimed by the relators
| that it Is unconstitutional because il
| legislates for school districts Of cities
| of the third class, which violates that
| provision of the constitution which
| provides that only one subject shall
be contained in an act. 1t might as
well be said that every act should
apply to every city as to every dis
| ification of cities and can be depended
upon to sustain the classification of
| of school districts
"Chalpant's appeal of Pittsburg, re-
lied upon by the relator is not par
allel case, In that case the act passed
for the government of cities Of the
third class was questioned. Nothing
had been done under the act. A test
case was made and the Supreme court
declared the act unc Institutional
Had this suit been brought twenty
1