The Prescott daily news., 1915-07-13
SUPREME COURT AD-
 JOURNED FOR SUMMER
Last Act was Decision of Hot Springs Racing Ball-twO Other Impor- tant Suits Involving State
 School Fund Disposed of


 Little Rock, July 13.-The Arkan- sas Supreme Court has adjourned un- til Sept. 20, and in few days the judges will have scattred to their sev- leral summer resorts for recuperation rom most strenuous session. There may be sinecures in the public ser vice, but a place on the Supreme Bench is not one of them.
 One of the last acts of the Court was to decide the Hot Springs racing bill on it's merits, sustaining Gov. Hays veto. But it was not unani- nous decision, Chief Justice McCul- loch and Justice Hart having dissent ed. The court holds that all the Leg islative records show that the bill was properly vetoed. This kills the last hope of the Hot Springs fair associa- tion for authority to operate pari-mu- tual system of betting at the State Fair.
 Two other important suits involved the state school funds. It was decid- ed that the method which has always been in vogue for the distribution of the school fund is valid and sufficient, and that it is not necessary that the Legislature should make a biennial appropriation. In fact, it is contin- uing constitutional appropriation of common schools.
 "The thought pervading the whole article covering the subject of school funds" says the court, lis that the funds thus raised shall be used con- Itinuously for the purpose of maintain ling free schools, not to hoard up the money for particular uses, but to dis tribute the same by some just method so that year by year the common schools of the state could be main tained."
 This will set at rest the question that has been recurring with great regularity regarding the distribution lOl lIc COIlllllOH SCHcOl lulu.
 State Aid to high schools, original ly provided by act of 1911, is declared to be in contravention of the consti- tuition, and the action of the Chancel- Tor in enjoining the payment of the funds is sustained.
 If the Legislature had the power to appropriate $50,000 in 1911," saic the Court, that amounted to a con tinuing appropriation and was valiC since the general provision for bien nial appropriations has no reference to school fu1ds.
 I've are of the opinion that the Legislature has exceeded it's power; in the enactment of this statute, so fal as it relates to the method of disburs ing the fund The common schoo funds cannot be distributed in a par tial manner so as to discriminate be tween different localities. If the Leg islature has the power to take S40,O0t of the common school fund and use IL LOT dluHIS IuIdl ilSH StuooiS, lb he'S the power to take $100,000 of it anc use it in the aid of the largest city in the state. Either construction would be an unequal distribution ot the fund which prevents uniformity in its enjoyment.
 Our conclusion is that the Chancel- Tor was correct in restraining the Au- dtor and Treasurer from using the common school fund in the manner specified in the act of 1911, not be- cause a re-appropriation is required every two years, but because the act itself is void Tn attempting to segre- gate $30,000 of the common school fund and arbitrarily distributing it among certain classes of beneficiaries.