The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-02-20

ell to Levy for the st. Paul Schools
Next October, and Then 1t VIII
Be Smooth Sailing-Opinion by
Justice Lewis.
In an opinion yesterday handed down
by Justice Lewis, the supreme court re-
versed its decision recently rendered in
the case of the State vs.. County Auditor
Johnson, coming up from st. Paul. The
G o b e of Friday contained this gen
eral information. The last opinion
is one Of unusual interest to
school teachers in the Twin Cities. The
school law of 1899 authorized an addi-
tfonal levy Of one and one-half mills tax
for school purposes In cities of over sc, DOC
inhabitants. An opinion adverse to this
law was handed down by the court. 1t
now holds, Justice Collins dissenting, that
the law of 1899 Is constitutional
The decision Is in the case of State Of
Minnesota ex REL Board of Education of
Minneapolis. relator and respondent;
Clement ]. Minor, auditor Of Hennepin
county. appellant. The decision of the
Hennepin county district court In favor of
the schools is affirmed, and the syllabus
states
Held, chapter II, Laws 1899, providing
for an extra levy of ~ mills on the
dollar in school districts having $1,000 in
cial legislation within the provisions of
| sections 80 and 81. article Of the consti-
tuition.
| 2. AS to the amount Of tax authorized
! the act is not based upon special legisla-
ton, and Is therefore uniform In its APP
4 plication.
of the tax does not depend upon the pro-
| visions of special legislation, the gen.
| eral statutory provisions being ample for
that purpose.
8. The act recognizes and adopts school
| districts as organized under special laws.
but such recognition does not render the
act repugnant to the prohibition against
| amending, extending Or modifying Spe-
| cial laws. Judgment affirmed.
Lewis, J,
! The former opinion of a divided court,
| Justice Lewis states, could not be con-
| sidered as final in so important a matter
| as this, and he represents the views Of
| four Of the five justices Of the supreme
| court. On this point Justice Collins agrees
| with the majority in his dissenting opin-
| lon. In the opinion written by Justice
! Lewis he says that, with all due respect
| for the learned justices who had, In the
| former case, rendered their opinion, that
| the court will proceed to re-examine the
1
| the court declines to give any attention.
for the reason that in providing that this
| act shall be an Independent and separate
| grant Of power, an attempt was made
| by the legislature to declare the act
! general law. Independently Of such dec
| laraticn the law must stand or fall. 1t Is
| held TO be not well taken that the con-
! tention that the act Is special because
| 1t Is not uniform and cannot be enforced
x.yith ha OIL OF cnncfq1 1oCjcfa t{Or
| as a basis.
/ It Is also held that in the former decis-
| ion there was error In not considering
| the sections OF the constitutional amend
| ment together instead Of separately. I'm
due weight was given to the words. "but
shall not amend or modify same" refer
| ring to special acts. If these words were
| taken apart and literally construed. then
| the legislature cannot touch a special
law except to repeal it. But If section "a
| with reference to the passage Of general
| laws to- cover prohibited subjects be con-
| strued with it, it follows that such gem
eral laws must deal with such special
! subjects, taking into account the condi-
| lions existing at the time the amend
ments were adopted.
| In the previous case there was an alleg-
ed lack of uniformity arising from the
! different manner in which taxes are lev
fed and collected in st. Paul, Duluth and
Minneapolis. In referring to this argu-
| ment of non-confornlity Justice Lewis
| says:
General Statutes 1884, section 1857 makes
general provision for the levy and GER
| tification Of the levy to the county au-
| ditor, and the law relating to the school
| board in Minneapolis, which levies the
| tax under the charter, might be repealed,
and the system. would still be complete.
II the constitutional amendments are to
| be construed as contended for, then
| school districts operating under special
laws will be beyond the aid Of the legis-
| Iature If chapter II, Laws Of 1899, Is
unconstitutional. then a general enact
| ment made applicable to all the school
| districts OF the state would for the same
reason be invalid.
| Justice Collins while agreeing with
majority of the court that the former
opinion should not be held as final stands
squareiy upon the grounds that chapter
! n, Laws of 1885, is an attempted evasion
of constitutional amendments concerning
special legislation. The adoption of those
| amendments prohibiting special legisla-
tion radical though they were, he con-
| siders them an expression of the voice
| of the people, and that though 1t was
| disregarded by the legislature the voice
I should be obeyed by the courts. Hos
tility of the people to special Legislation
was clearly, IT unfortunately. inuicateu
| In the amendments. If the doors are now
thrown open all efforts to get together
and place the cities, towns and districts
under a uniform system may as well De
abandoned Results, he holds, will. neces-
| sariIy. be further legislation agitation
4 nv taxpayers and more radical const1tu-
tional provisions. 1t is held by Justice
Collins that section 1857, Statutes OF 1891
If It covers anything, merely prescripes
Oct. 10 as the time when the tax shall be
certified to the county auditor, and an
other section extends the time to Nov. l,
and it is only by examination OF special
acts that the proper officers can learn
/ their duties in regard to these tax ieVies.
walter Chaplin, who defended the va
rdity of the st. Paul act when 1t was de-
clared Invalid by the old supreme court
said yesterday: q.
"Nothing more need be done In the 81.
Paul case. No reargument or reappllca-
tion to the court of any kind Is necessary,
as all that need be done is to add the
extra ~ mills in the tax levy next Octo-
| ber" - s..o ooo
The schools are merely short the sl2o,Ooo
which might have been secured under the
sale of certificates based on such levy
last October.