The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-10-24
SCHOOLS TO SUFFER-
SUPREME COURT DECLARES THE
MML-AND-A-HALF SPECIAL TAX
LAW INVALID
THREE JURISTs HELD IT VAIN

the Law Was Knocked Out-Min-
neapOlis and Duluth Also In 1t.
The supreme court yesterday declared
invalid the 1899 law giving St. Paul, Min
neapolis and Duluth the right to levy an
additional tax of one and a half mills
for school purposes. thus reversing the
decision of the district court for Ramsey
county on a very knotty legal tangle.
the intricacy Of which is attested by the
fact that both courts were divided upon
the seriousness of the objections made to
the law.
OF the four justices of the supreme
court who pass upon the validity Of the
law of 1899, three declare 1t unconstitu-
tional, although not concurring in their
objections to it. Justice Buck was not
present, and Chief Justice Start dissents
entirely from the assumption that the law
is unconstitutional, holding that where
law is susceptible Of two constructions
reasonably, that should be followed which
sustains it, rather than that which would
destroy it.
The prevailing opinion is written by
Judge Canty. The syllabus is as follows:
State. ex rel. city of st. Paul, ct al, re-
spondents, VS.. VIM. R. Johnson, county
auditor.
Held, chapter 40, Laws 1899, is special
legislation regulating the affairs OF sch oil
adopt as part thereof, the provisions OF
number Of diverse and special laws re-
lating to the management OF pubic
schools in three cities of over fifty thou
sand inhabitants each, in this state, and
therefore contravenes sections 30 and a.
article 4. of the constitution, prohibiting
such special legislation, and Is void.
Order reversed. -Oanty, j.
The opinion, signed by Justice Canty,
after reciting the facts agreed to-, and the
law above referred to, continues:
If this extra mill and a half is not to
be levied IN each city in the same manner
as the other portions of the school tax
ing has been provided at all. No person,
board or legislative body has been desig-
mated to determine whether all or any
parto such mill and a half shall be
Levied. in each, or any year, and the law
Is imperative for want Of means to carry
it out. But if, in order to prevent law
from being tnoperative, 1t SHOULD be held
and collected IN the same manner as the
other portion Of the tax Is levied and col
lected, then we have arrived back at the
place from which we started and the law
is no better because certain things neces-
sary to,malle it ope1 atlve are implied than
it would be if those things were plainly
expressed.
Speaking for myself alone, will say
that I am also of the opinion that said
chapter 40 is. special legislation and re
pugnant to both Of these sections. In
Minneapolis It is necessary to, refer to
the special law. regulating the public
' AS applied e these ffs two cities, Chapter
-
each special law, thereby presarMtng and
perpetuating all the irregularities in the
two laws.
True, as applied to Duluth. chapter 40 is
an amendment to g special law applicable
to Duluth alone. Then chapter 40 IS In eff
the three different laws, two of which
Were special laws before the amendment.
and as amended all three are special laws
the WANT Of uniformity IN the result II
chapter 40 is held constitutional the
assessment in St; Paul II now 10y, mills on
the dGllaSr af f. Mnnsages S als o ana
a law which SO reads be held constitution
alp But 1t is immaterial how the law
reads, such is It's effect. True, the amend
ment is uniform that is the. same sized
such uniformity in the character of the
amendment-end the size Of the patch
is not the test OF whether the result is
in the result Is clearly, repugnant to said
section "a of the constitution, which re-
qpir;ess that laws passeedh@ys hef1egislatu.e
throughout the state. NM, A,eY.
Under these circunnst ances, the dec1ara-
ton Of section 2 of chapter 40 becomes
idle and meaningless.
Again, If independent machinery uni
form In it's operation had been provided
for levying and collecting the mill and a
half in each city, the act would still be
because Of want of uniformity in the re-
suit The act providing for the mill and
a half would still be based on special
than a series of uniform amendments.
or patches uniform in size, placed on
each of the said diverse and special acts.
thereby preserving and perpetuating all
nally existed in. the different laws that
were so amended. ..---5-
The order appealed from Is reversed,
and the case rerRanded with directions to
dismiss the proceeding -Canty, ].
Buck, j., absent.
Justice Mitchell adds this memorandum:
While I concur in the result, I am not
prepared to assent to the proposition that
the act in question is unconstitutional on
the ground that 1t is not uniform in it's
operation upon all the cities in the class
as respect to ma ximum In all taxes that
may be levied for school purposes
1t seems to me that as respects the
amount of tax authorized by the act it
cannot be said to be based on existing
special legislation In that respect the
act itself is uniform in its operation. The
inequalities in respect to the maximum
amount Of taxes which may be levied for
school purposes, in the different cities
existing special >. legislation, and are
neither created nor increased by this act
But 1 cannot get away from the con-
clusion that the act is, on another ground.
rpn110-nanf the constitutional nraViGiOy,
which prohibits the legislature from
amending, extending or modifying ex-
listing special legislation
[ am of the opinion that the necessary
effect as we'll as the manifest intent Of
the act is to adopt the diverse provisions
of the existing special legislation con-
of the class, relating to the levying, GER
tifying collecting, etc, of taxes for school
purposes, or more briefly stated, it adopts
this special legislation for the purpose Of
carrying the grant Of power into effect
And it is immaterial whether the act
does this in express terms, as In Alex
ander VS.. the City Of Duluth, or by neces-
sary implication, 1t is, urged by the re-
spondents that the authority to a city to
do an act is authority to the legislative
department Of the ely, to wit the city
that this begs the question and overlooks
the fact that in some cities of the class
the board of education is the legislative
department of the city as to the levy Of
But even if it be conceded that under this
act the tax in every city is to be voted
cial provisions of its charter, the fact
remains that as to all other and subse-
quent steps, the provision of the special
charter Of each city must be resorted to-
Otherwise the act would be nugatory and
imperative. For considerations Of public
policy or necessity, the upholding of this
act may be result deyoutly to be wished
for. But this Is no reason for disregard
ing the plain provisions of the constitu-
ton.
In my Judgment it was mistaken policy