Pohl v. State, Bohning State

Decision Date07 June 1921
Docket Number16492,16493
Citation102 Ohio St. 474,132 N.E. 20
PartiesPohl v. The State Of Ohio., Bohning v. The State Of Ohio.
CourtOhio Supreme Court

Constitutional law - Compulsory education - Teaching by English language only - Sections 7762-1 and 7762-2, General Code - German language prohibited, when - Public, private and parochial schools.

-

The plaintiff in error in each of the above entitled causes was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of twenty-five dollars and costs in the mayor's police court of the village of Garfield Heights, Cuyahoga county, Ohio, Emil Pohl, having been a teacher, and H. H. Bohning, a member of the board of trustees, of a certain parochial school, known as St John's Evangelical Lutheran Congregational School, in the village of Garfield Heights, it appearing that Pohl did on the 8th day of September, 1919, in said village, impart instructions in and teach the German language to pupils in such school who had not completed a course of study equivalent to that prescribed in the first seven grades of the elementary schools of the state of Ohio, and that Bohning, as a member of the board of trustees of such school did cause Pohl to impart instruction and teaching as aforesaid, contrary to the provisions of Sections 7762-1, 7762-2 and 7762-3, General Code. Error was prosecuted to the common pleas court, where the judgment of the mayor's court was affirmed; error prosecuted to the court of appeals, where the judgments of the common pleas court and the mayor's court were affirmed; and error prosecuted here to the judgments of the courts below, the only question here made being as to the constitutionality of the sections of the Code above referred to.

Mr Harry F. Wittenbrink; Mr. George B. Okey and Mr. Timothy S Hogan, for plaintiffs in error.

Mr. John G. Price, attorney general; Mr. R. A. Baskin, prosecuting attorney, and Mr. Frank J. Merrick, assistant prosecuting attorney, for defendant in error.

BY THE COURT. While much consideration in arguments and briefs has been given to the wisdom of the provisions of Sections 7762-1 and 7762-2, General Code, this court is of opinion that such argument might better be addressed to the legislative branch of the government.

Courts do not sit to review the wisdom of legislative acts, nor do they possess such power. On the contrary, the policy, the advisability, and the wisdom of all legislation, subject to the veto of the governor and the referendum of the people are subjects for legislative determination exclusively. The inexpediency, injustice or impropriety of a legislative act is not a ground upon which the court may declare the act void. The remedy for such evils must be sought by an appeal to the justice and patriotism of the legislature itself.

Except as limited by the Federal and State Constitutions, the power of the general...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Pohl v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • June 7, 1921
    ...102 Ohio St. 474132 N.E. 20POHLv.STATE.BOHNINGv.SAME.Nos. 16492, 16493.Supreme Court of Ohio.June 7, Error to Court of Appeals, Cuyahoga County. Emil Pohl and H. H. Bohning were in separate proceedings convicted of teaching and causing to be taught the German language in a parochial school.......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT