Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1911-10-24

lIOAl tue ClICull NONAl Aul NldChdllldS
county. Hon. ]. A Eakin, Judge. Ar
gued and submitted September 2S,
1911. c. D. & d C. Latourette and
Geo. c. Brownell on the brief) for
appellant. H. E. Cross and (Wilham
Hammond on the brief) for respon-
dents. Moore, ]. Affirmed
This is a special proceeding to re-
view an award of arbitrators. The
return to the writ shows that in
Clackamas county, School District No.
As was divided, and from a part of
its territory School District No. lis
was formed. As the boards of direc-
tors of these districts could not agree
upon a division of the assets and liza
bilities it was concluded to settle the
difficulty by arbitration, whereupon
the old district selected Harry Jones
and the new district chose F. S. Ba-
ker. Pursuant to the statute the county
school superintendent, 7, J. Gary, by
virtue of his office, became the third
member of the board of arbitration
The disputed matters being consid-
cred the board determined that
S761.56 was due from the old district
to the new, and an award therefor
was given. To review such action
these proceedings were Instituted the
new district and the members of the
board of arbitration being made par
ties defendant. The cause having been
certified up to the circuit court the
award was reduced to S69630 and a
Judgment therefor having been given
the plaintiff appeals.
Moore, ]. 1t is contended that the
statute authorizing the appointment
of arbitrators, under the circum-
stances hereinbefore detailed, and
containing the following clause: The
arbitrators' decision shall be final,
except that it may be reviewed by
writ of review as the decisions of
other inferior tribunals are reviewed -
Il. o. L. section 4022) violates the
fundamental law of the state by at
tempting to invest in an inferior body
judicial mowers without giving right
Of appeal
The organic act contains the fol-
lowing declaration: Every man shall
have remedy by due course of law for
injury done him in person. property
or reputation" Const Ore Art 1,
section 10. The judicial mower of the
state is vested in certain courts and
all authority not exclusively bestowed
on some other court shall belong to
the circuit court. It. Art. Z, secs.
1 and 9.
1t is argued that writ of review
challenges only the jurisdiction of an
inferior tribunal and however errone-
Gus its determination may be, the
remedy prescribed by the statute re-
ferred to is inadequate and the pro-
visions of the enactment quoted prac-
tically deprives tax payer in school
district, which has been divided, of
his property without giving him an
opportunity to be heard on the merits
in court recognized by the constitu-
tion of Oregon.
1t is incumbent upon state to edu-
cate it's youth which duty may. for
convenience. be delegated to school
districts. These, divisions are vested
with certain powers which they can
employ in the particular manner pre-
scribed AS agencies of the state they
have no vested right to the property
which they may acquire, but hold II in
trust for the general public and such
quasi corporations may be changed
at the will of the power creating
them. In speaking of such artificial
bodies a text writer says: Usually
ftn hn1 - n n
nature, and there is no room to imply
any contract between them and the
state, in t'\air organization as corpor-
ate bodies, except that which springs
from the ordinary rule of good faith,
and which requires that the property
they shall acquire, by local taxation
or otherwise, for the purposes of their
organization, shall not be seized by
the state and appropriated in other
ways" Cooley, Const. Lin. (siXth
ed 205
A school district sustains no higher
relations to the state than a county
occupies and the rule is settled that
the legislative department may divide
counties at pleasure, apportioning the
assets and burdens in such manner as
may be deemed just and reasonable.
Morrow County v. Hendryx, IA Ore.
397; Baker County " Benson, 40 Ore.
207 In discussing this subject a
noted author remarks: IF the legis-
lative action in these cases operate
injuriously to the municipalities or to
individuals, the remedy is not with
the courts. The courts have no power
to interfere, and the people must be
looked to, to right, through the bal
lot-box, all these wrongs" Cooley,
Const Linn. (sixth ed.) 230.
BY the division of school district
the property Of a taxpayer may be
subjected to an incumbrance, but the
burden imposed is equal in the re-
naming territory, and since all prop
erty Is held subject to an exercise of
the legislative will in respect to quasi
corporations property therein sustains
only a consequential injury, for the
redress of which, except in cases Of
fraud in executing the statute, the
owner has no remedy by due course
of law.
Believing that no clause of the con-
stitution was violated as alleged the
Judgment is affirmed.
-O--
PHILADELPHIA AGAINST FOUR