Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1912-12-10
DRAINAGE LAW Of
STATE IS invalid
Supreme Court Holds Act
Unconstitutional Decis-
ion in Bonner Case.

The district drainage law of Idaho Is
declared to be unconstitutional by the
supreme court Of Idaho. In an opinion
handed down late yesterday the high
tribunal in this state affirmed the
judgment for the district court for Bon
ner county In the case OF w. w. Fer
brache versus Drainage District No. 5.
The action was brought to determine
the validity of the organization Of the
drainage district. The lower court sus-
tanned the demurrer to the complaint
and the supreme court aff1rms the con-
illusions reached by Judge John M.
Flynn.
What Law Provides.
The opinion is written by Chief Just
ice Stewart and is concurred In by
Justice Sullivan. Passing on the. case.
the court says in its opinion:
Section 244S of the revised codes
does not require that voter be citi-
zen of the United States. or that he is
resident in the state or county at all,
the only qualification being that he is
the bona fide owner Of real estate within
the limits of such district. This is a
clear violation of the provisions of sec
ton 2. article 6 of the constitution, and
was without the power or authority of
the legislature to prescribe.
1T will also be observed that section
244S prescribes that the voter must be
a bona flde owner of 40 acres or a
limits of such district as established by
the board of county commissioners, or
IL such provision is unauthorized, then
~ l,c HOV,a 10 <,f
real estate within the limits of said dis
trict as established by the board Of
county commissioners.
In Violation Of Constitution.
ut will thus be seen that this pro-
vision is clearly in violation Of section
20. article 1 of the constitution, which
provides: No property qualification
shall ever be required for any person to
vote or hold office except in school
elections or elections creating indebt-
edness.' Also section 4, article 8, which
prescribes: The legislature may pre-
scribe qualifications, limitations and
conditions for the right Of suffrage adj
ditional to those prescribed in this ar
ticle but shall never annul any Of the
provisions in this article contained
1.-THE qualifications prescribed by the
provisions OF article 6, of which section
1 is a part, arc, that legal voter is
every male or female citizen of the
United States, 81 years old, who has
actually resided in this state or terri
tory for six months and in the county
where he or she offers to vote 80 days
next preceding the day of election. II
registered as provided by law.
TT is argued, however, in this case.
that Notwithstanding the provisions of
section 244S are in contravention of the
constitution, yet we are asked that the
law as a whole should be sustained by
the court and the general laws Of the
state applied to the holding Of elections
provided in said act.
Contention Not Well Founded.
This contention is not we'll founded.
and cannot be sustained by the court
for the reason that the provisions found
In section '2448 fixing the qualifications
of voters voting upon the question of
organization Is a specific requirement
OF the legislative enactment, and no
doubt was an inducement for the pas
sage Of such act. for 1t is provided In
the act in said section that IL the first
qualification fixed Ii found unconstitu-
tional another provision is prescribed.
which Is likewise a violation OF the
constitution, and II one Of the qualifi-
cations was not the intention of the
legislature and the second qualification
is in violation Of this statute, 1t is evi-
dent that the general laws relating to
elections should not be applied. and this
provision would defeat the constitu-
tionality OF the entire act.
Judgment Affirmed.
ut Is also settled in this state that
| II the provisions of an act are connect
ed in subject matter. dependent on
each other. and designed to operate. for
the same purpose. or are otherwise so
dependent In meaning that 1t cannot
be presumed that the legislature would
have passed one without the other, then
! II one part falls the entire act must
fall.
IF. therefore. taking this statute az
a whole. 1t clearly appears that Sec
ton 244S was considered and recog-
nized by the legislature as an impor-
tant and integral part thereof, and SO
connected in subject matter with other
provisions of the act. aud other provi-
sions were SO dependent upon section
2448 that 1t cannot be presumed that
the legislature would have passed said
act with such section omitted. then the
entire act must fall,
FOR these reasons the Judgment in
this case ID affirmed
l aubaepihe for thn CanAtal Newa