Associated Schools of Independent District No. 63 of Hector v. School District No. 83 of Renville County
| Decision Date | 27 June 1913 |
| Docket Number | 18,089 - (185) |
| Citation | 142 N.W. 325,122 Minn. 254 |
| Parties | ASSOCIATED SCHOOLS OF INDEPENDENT DISTRICT NO. 63 OF HECTOR v. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 83 OF RENVILLE COUNTY |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Renville county to recover $157.50 for instruction furnished certain nonresident pupils in the agricultural and industrial departments of defendant's high school. From an order Powers, J., overruling defendant's demurrer to the complaint, it appealed. Affirmed.
State's authority over municipalities.
1. The state has the power to require of its municipal subdivisions the performance of duties of state concern, and to demand that they raise money and disburse the same for such purposes.
Public schools -- duty of legislature.
2. The maintenance of public schools is a matter, not of local, but of state concern. The state Constitution provides that "it shall be the duty of the legislature to establish a general and uniform system of public schools" and that "the legislature shall make such provisions, by taxation or otherwise, as * * * will secure a thorough and efficient system of public schools in each township in the state." These provisions were inserted, not as a grant of power, but as a mandate to the legislature, prescribing as a duty the exercise of an inherent power.
Public schools -- power of legislature.
3. The legislature may require a school district of the state to furnish public school facilities, and it may provide that if such district does not supply the required facilities it shall pay tuition to another district furnishing such facilities to its pupils. A law of this state providing that one or more rural school districts may become associated with a high school for the purpose of affording education in agriculture, manual training and home economics, including cooking and sewing, and further providing that such associated schools may charge nonresident pupils a tuition which shall be a charge against the school district in which such nonresident pupils reside, is within the legislative power.
Public schools
4. The power of the legislature to impose a system of public school education upon local communities is not limited to the common branches. If the legislature sees fit to require public education of boys in that which pertains to successful agriculture, and of girls in that which pertains to successful housekeeping, it has the power to do so.
Public schools -- Constitution.
5. Such legislation does not violate the constitutional requirement of equality of taxation so long as the law operates alike on all persons and property similarly situated. For similar reasons it does not violate the requirement of a "uniform system of public schools."
Taxation in school districts.
6. The funds to pay such an obligation may be raised by taxation. There is ample power in school districts to raise money for all necessary purposes.
Right of action.
7. An action may be maintained on such a demand. The fact that previous statutes relating to school districts provide only for actions on contracts or for acts or omissions in the nature of tort, is not important. This act creates an obligation, and a right to its enforcement arises by necessary implication.
Rieke & Hamrum, for appellant.
O. A Allen and J. M. Freeman, for respondent.
Chapter 247, p. 291, Laws 1909, chapter 82, p. 97, Laws of 1911, provides that any high school, graded school or consolidated rural school having satisfactory rooms and equipment and having shown itself fitted by location and otherwise to give training in agriculture, may, upon application to the state high school board of this state, be designated to maintain an agricultural and industrial department to consist of courses in agriculture, manual training, and home economics, including cooking and sewing.
The act further provides that one or more school districts maintaining rural schools may become associated with any such high school, and in such case the high school shall be known as the central school. Section 3 provides that such associated schools may charge nonresident pupils, attending and receiving instruction in such department, tuition, to be fixed by the board, not exceeding $2.50 per month for each such pupil; and that said tuition so fixed shall be a legal charge against the school district in which said nonresident pupil resides, and shall be paid by such school district out of the funds of such district.
The complaint alleges that, pursuant to these acts, certain common school districts of Renville county became associated with Independent School District No. 63, of Hector, under the name "Associated Schools of Independent School District No. 63 of Hector, Renville County, Minnesota" for the purpose of maintaining an agricultural and industrial department; that said Independent School District No. 63 is a duly formed and organized high school and is the central school of plaintiff, and was, prior to the association of said schools, designated by the proper authorities of the state to maintain an agricultural and industrial department; that plaintiff had fixed a charge of $2.50 a month for tuition and instruction furnished in said departments to nonresident pupils; that during the school year, from September 11 to June 12, plaintiff furnished instruction in said departments to eight pupils, resident within defendant's district, and this action is brought to recover the sum of $2.50 a month for the time of attendance of each of said pupils.
Defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrer was overruled and defendant appealed.
It is contended that to tax defendant district for tuition of pupils residing therein and attending plaintiff's school creates unequal taxation; that it constitutes the taking or appropriation of the money of the district without compensation and without due process of law, and without a hearing to defendant and for a purpose it may not desire. These contentions cannot be sustained. They are based on too narrow a view of the power of the legislature over its municipal subdivisions and over matters of education.
1. It has never been doubted that the state has the power to require of its municipal subdivisions the performance of duties of state concern, and to demand that they raise money by taxation and disburse the same for such purposes. These municipal subdivisions are mere auxiliaries of the state, created by the state as a means of exercising its political power in an orderly manner. Being thus subordinate agencies of the state, they are subject to the control and direction of the legislature in matters of internal government, and the legislature may require such public duties and functions to be performed by them as fall within the general scope and objects of municipal organizations. Commissioners of Laramie County v. Commissioners of Albany County, 92 U.S. 307, 23 L.Ed. 552; County of Mobile v. Kimball, 102 U.S. 691, 703, 26 L.Ed. 238; Washer v. Bullitt County, 110 U.S. 558, 4 S.Ct. 249, 28 L.Ed. 249; County Commrs. of Talbot County v. County Commrs. of Queen Anne's County, 50 Md. 245; Marengo v. Coleman, 55 Ala. 605, 607.
2. The maintenance of public schools is a matter, not of local, but of state concern. When the Constitution of Minnesota was adopted, its framers inserted these two provisions:
"The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it shall be the duty of the legislature to establish a general and uniform system of public schools." Section 1, article 8.
"The legislature shall make such provisions by taxation or otherwise, as, with the income arising from the school fund, will secure a thorough and efficient system of public schools in each township in the state." Section 3, article 8.
The object of these provisions is "to insure a regular method throughout the state, whereby all may be enabled to acquire an education which will fit them to discharge intelligently their duties as citizens of the republic." Board of Education v. Moore, 17 Minn. 391, 394 (412 416). These provisions were not a grant of power to the legislature, for all the powers there mentioned would have existed without such grant. They were inserted as a...
To continue reading
Request your trial