Newark post., 1919-09-17
LAWYERS ARGUE
VALIDITY OF
SCHOOL CODE
Seven Objections Voiced Bv
Opposition; Judges to Give
Opinion Soon

Although much local interest CEN
tered in the School Code hearing held
in Dover on Friday, few persons from
the town heard the arguments on that
day as far as could be learned. Very
little enthusiasm was evident on the
part of those who in the past have
allied themselves with the opponents
OF the Code. Both sides however,
were anxious to hear the outcome and
watched the papers intently to learn
whether or not the threatened demon
stration became a fact. Manv fol-
lowed the arguments with keen inter-
est, although public meetings and
newspaper reports published at the
time was considering the acceptance
of the Code had made the public fa-
miliar with the arguments pro and
con.
In opposition to the Code, Robert
G. Harmon, former Congressman L.
Irving Handy and City Solicitor John
W. Huxley, of Wilmington, and James
H. Hughes, of Dover, presented argu-
nlents attacking the constitutionality
of the Code by voicing seven objec,
| tions:
! Fiat It delegates legislative
power.
Second-lt was at passed by a
two thirds vote
Third-It requires a capitation tax
that is not uniform in the county in
which it is levied.
Fourth 1t requires taxation on real
and personal property, that is not uni
form nthe county, viz, in the terri
torial limits of the authority levying
the tax.
Fifth-It provides foc the creation,
change and abolition of school districts
in a manner that is not by general
law.
Sixth-It treats Of two subjects, one
only of which is expressed in the title.
Seventh-It divests vested rights
and impairs the obligation of con-
tracts, viz, in changing, lessening and
taking away the security of the hold
ers of school bonds without their con-
sent.
Another objection offered by James
II. Hughes was to the effect that it is
in violation of the 18th amendment 20
the Constitution of the United States
which provides that mo one shall be
deprived of life, liberty and property
without due process of law"
Arguments in support Of the con-
stitutionality of the new school legis-
lation were heard from Henry Ridgely
of Dover, who was the chief speaker
in its support and who, in his brief,
went into an exhaustive and thorough
examination of the legislation, and
presented what is believed by some Of
those who heard it from the boor, to
be convincing and irrefutable argu-
ments in support of it's constitutional
ity.
Others speaking in the afternoon
were: Attorney William S. Hilles, of
Wilmington, and Attorney General
David J. Reinhardt, who appeared for
the State in support of the code.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Rein
hardt's talk, which was brief, Robert
G. HarmSn spoke for about half an
hour in rebuttal, and the case was IN
the hands of the court for determine
ton.
The chief argument in the after
noon was made by Henry Ridgely, OF
Dover, in support of the code. He
said that Article 10 of the State Con-
stitution was the storm center Of the
whole proceeding. Referring to the
proceeding of the convention at which
the State Constitution was adopted,
he said that Aone of the delegates IN
discussing school matters said that
any general school law was neces-
sarily a conglomerate piece of legls-
lation
Mr. Ridgely's brief went exhaus-
tive,v into constitutional and technical
questions. He said that Article III Oh
the Constitution was the Alpha and
the Omega of the school proposition
in the State, and that Article 8 has
nothing to do with the free public
school system of the State. Referring
evidently to the manifestation OF SEN
timent against the code, Mr.. Ridgeiy
said that the real party in interest
the little boys and girls of Delaware
were not in the court room OF III
Dover. .,
, Mr.. Ridgely was followed by VIII
liam S. Hilles, of Wilmington, Who
said that the question before the
court was the. most momentous ano
imnortant that had come before tine