Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1913-08-30
TWO OPINIONS ON CAPITOL tx.
TENSION cAsE AID TO
SPEEDY DECISION.
SAME CONCLUSIONS REACHED
FROM DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS
State Satisfied With Manner IN Which
Case Has Been Left for Appeal to
Supreme Court Before Tax 10 Col.
lsetsd-stats Proceedings With Pre-.
liminary Work Ordered.
Special to Times Republican.


Des Moines. Aug 30.-The fact of
two written opinions by district judges
On various phases of the law providing
for millage tax to be used in en-
largement Of the capitol grounds and
erection of new buildings will be Of
great advantage to the attorney general
In the preparation of the appeal case.
AS a matter of fact the trial to the
supreme court 10 as an original suit,
since there Is no disputed evidence. The
opinions of the district judges serve
merely as guides to the attorneys.
State officials and members of the
Legislature and others interested in the
welfare Of the state have studied the
two opinions and find, after closer ex-
animation, that they disclose so much
diversity that it Is a pretty safe guess
the supreme court will not follow either
Of them very far. Attorney General Cos
son calls attention to an interesting
feature, that " lille Judge Apologize de-
cided the main question in about
twenty pages Of copy. Judge Hunter
utilized forty-two pages in his opinion
and only devoted two of the forty two
to the one single question that was be-
fore him. 1t will be recalled that the
only question before Hunter was the
millage tax proposition which involves
the divisibiiity of the law. He decided
adversely to the state and devoted two
sheets of the opinion to that subject.
All the rest related to what was not
before him at all. But Judge Applicable
had before him all phases of the con-
troversy and he ruled opposite to Hunt
er as to the divisibility of the law.
Conclusions From Different Views.
Most significant however, was the
fact that in his opinion Judge Apple
gate. while reaching the same con-
clusion as Hunter, takes <an entirely
different view as to the presidents In
regard to the right Of q state to author
lie the use of a fund to be raised by
taxation before it is raised and Its re-
lationship to debt. Judge Hunter made
use only Of the precedents cited by the
complainants, and ignored those by the
defense, thus making it appear that
there was no ground for controversy
at all on that point Judge Apologize
cited two courts as taking a view
which sustains the position Of the COM
plainants and then cited also decisions
III 1SuOOG lSlduOs Sn1uASSOSd, SoAAAoA AAAs
and Arizona as sustaining the position
of the state He therefore concluded
that it was no easy task to determine
on which side was the preponderance
OF precedents. He held. however. that
the two courts were more nearly right
than the four. This clear distinction
between the two opinions opens the
way for the state to insist upon the
Iowa supreme court sticking to its pre-
vious decisions and sustaining the will
Of the legislature.
There is general satisfaction with the
way the case has been left, for it gives
a chance for early determination by the
supreme court before the time for the
collection Of the tax which the legis-
lature imposed. and at the same time
leaves the state officials free to go on
with the preliminary work which the
legislature placed upon them.