Evening journal., 1919-09-17

tiles, II the existence Of the law de-
pends upon the vote OF the people. or
the will Of one man even, IL is an un-
constitutional delegation OF legislative
power; but IL the law is complete In
and Of itself, the fact that It provides
for an acceptance OF any Of its proyi-
sions by certain State agencies does
not make it a delegation Of legislative
power and, therefore, invalid. This
principle is applicable TO the Act 'un-
der consideration. To hold otherwise
would overlook the important element
OF the Act herelnbefOre indicated, viz:
that II establishes by sweeping gen
eral provisions a new general system
of government OF all OF the free schools
OF the State, whether IL be accepted or
not by any one, or all, or none, OF the
school districts, school committees, or
boards of education; and that il stands
as the law relating to such schools
Independent OF such acceptance, reiec-
tion or failure TO accept.
Ihere can be no doubt that the School
Code was in force and operation be-
fore any acceptance OF its provisions
by any district. State and County
Boards OF Education were created by
the Act and clothed with certain pow-
ers and duties co-extensive with the
State or county and operative from
June 30 OF the present year whether
It's provisions were accepted or not. In
sense it revolutionized the public
school system Of the State, and its ex-
istence required the approval OF no one.
s., The Act is not invalid because the
taxes assessed and collected Hereunder
would not be uniform. The Constltu-
tion provides that the capitation shall
be uniform throughout the county
and requires that such tax shall NOT
be less than three dollars nor more
than six dollars annually. We are IN
able to see that the requirement OF
ths statute affects In any wise the
uniformity OF the capltation tax. II
may be uniform so far as anything in
the Code is concerned. The Consti-
tuition also provides that "all taxes
shall be uniform upon the same class
OF subjects within the territorial
limits OF the authority levylng the
same," and II is contended that prop
erty taxes could not, under the act.
be uniform within the territorial linn
its Of the authority levylng the same
which means the county.
But we think the words within the
territorial limits levying the same"
means the school district in which the
taxes are 10 be used; and that the Levy
Court is, under the statutory provl-
sion, merely the agent, or machinery,
through which the taxes are actually
levied and collected. The Levy Court
has no discretion in the matter at all,
the duty is mandatory and must be
performed for the district that fur
nishes the budget. The taxes must. Of
course, be uniform in the school dis
trict, and that in our opinion would
be a compliance with the consttu-
tionsl requirement.
/. The Act is not invalid because X
provides for the collection Of taxea
based upon a county assessment pre-
viously made, and from which no right
OF appeal Is given In the Act. The
assessment upon which the school
taxes are based was made for county
for county taxes, and under
the law any taxable has an opportun<
ity 20 make complaint TO the Assessor,
Board OF Assessment, and Levy Court
for the remedying OF any wrongs, or
the correction Of any errors In the as
sessment. II the same assessment is
used as the basis for school taxes,
there can be no more reason for an
other opportunity for complaint and
correction than there would be before
the leyylng Of another county tax
based on the same assessment. The
general assessment continues for four
years. subject 10 annual revision. and
il is not essential that more than ons
right of appeal. or complaint, should
he given no matter what may be the
nature OF the tax. The important
hing Is the right and opportunity to
be heard as 70 the assessment
, The act does not dlvest vested
rights or impair the obligation OF som
tracts within the meaning OF the Fed
aral Constitution. No security Is taken
rom the owner Of school bonds thai he
reid or enjoyed before the passage OF
he code. The property OF the district
which constituted his security when
he bonds were issued remains the
same. and his right TO enforce the coll
ection OF principal or interest when
iue may be enforced by appropriate
,ction in the courts OF the state. The
1eyv districts created under the o0de
expressly assume all the obligations OF
he old and the only change that could
fleet the bondholder at all would be
n the remedy for the collection OF Ms
lebt. There could be no deprivation
,r lessenlng of his contractural rights,
he obligations would remain unlm-
)afred.
G. The act does not treat OF two sub
ects within the meaning OF the Con-
titution 10 does treat in a general way
4 the care, training and education a
ependent children brought into this
tate. and while this is a subject that
nav seem to be not closely related IN
he subject of free public schools en-
raced i'm the title, we do not think tho
ne subject is so incongruous or for
ign 10 the other as 10 make the act
Invalid. In no law, perhaps. could tho
raining and education Of such children
e more appropriately treated Of them
q an act providing for system Of free
ublc schools for the state.
IL may not be necessary TO state The
init Of our duty, or power, IN replying
o your communication, but lest there
lay be some persons who have a mis-
AIKEN notion OF our duty we will say
hat the only thing we are called upon
0 do and the only thing we can prop
rly do under the law, is to express 10
on our opinion upon the-constitutlon-
lily of the school Code.
In conclusion we say, that after The
lost thorough and careful examination,
Ie have been able TO give your ques-
on I'm the time we thought WAS DrOnpr