In re Senate Bill No. 23

• Citation: 48 P. 647,23 Colo. 499
• Parties: In re SENATE BILL NO. 23.
• Decision Date: 02 April 1897
• Court: Supreme Court of Colorado

48 P. 647

23 Colo. 499

In re SENATE BILL NO. 23.

Supreme Court of Colorado

April 2, 1897

The senate passed a resolution submitting to the supreme court senate bill No. 23, relating to the consolidation of school districts, etc., and requesting the opinion of such court as to its constitutionality.

The opinion of the court was delivered in response to the following resolution and interrogatories from the honorable senate:

'Whereas there is now pending before the general assembly of the state of Colorado senate bill No. 23,--a bill for an act to amend an act entitled 'An act for the support and better regulation of the public schools of Denver,' approved February 13, 1874,--which has passed both houses and been delivered to the governor of the state, and by him returned to the senate, without his approval, on the ground that the provisions of the bill are in conflict with certain provisions of the constitution of the state, by virtue of an opinion rendered by the honorable attorney general: Now, whereas, the constitutionality of said bill has been questioned, and thereby an important question upon a solemn occasion has arisen; therefore, be it resolved by the senate of the state of Colorado that the said bill be submitted to the honorable supreme court of Colorado, and the said court be, and it is hereby, requested to give this senate its opinion as to the constitutionality of said bill, as follows:

'First. Are the provisions of said bill in conflict with section 25 art. 5, of the constitution?

'Second. Are the provisions of said bill in conflict with section 7, art. 11, of the constitution?'

J. Warner Mills, Theo. H. Thomas, Jacob Fillius, and George N. Hurd, for constitutionality.

Byron L. Carr, Atty. Gen., Calvin E. Reed, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Platt Rogers, against constitutionality.

PER CURIAM.

The bill submitted with the foregoing interrogatories is entitled 'A bill for an act to amend an act entitled 'An act for the support and better regulation of the public schools in the city of Denver,' approved February 13th, 1874, and the act amendatory thereto, approved February 2nd, 1876.' At the time the original act was passed the city of Denver was embraced within one school district, but, with the subsequent growth of the city, six other districts have been incorporated, and are now in existence, under the general law of the state. These districts are composed of territory partly within and partly without the city limits of the city of Denver; and the chief object of the proposed bill would seem to be to provide a manner in which these districts may be consolidated, and made a part of school district No 1, without the consent of the latter district. The title confines its provisions to the public schools of Denver, and it requires no argument to show that under such a title it is not proper to legislate for districts that lie partly without the city limits. The fact that the original act was passed prior to the adoption of the state constitution, when the title was of no significance in determining the validity of an act, cannot avail for the purpose of upholding the new features, not embraced within the title, that are now sought to be incorporated into the body of the act by the proposed amendments.

Coming now, to that part of the constitution to which our attention is specifically invited by the communication from the honorable senate, we find that this section, in so far as it affects the question under consideration, reads as follows: 'The general assembly shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following enumerated cases--that that is to say: * * * (13) Providing for the management of common schools. * * * (24) In all other cases where a general law can be made applicable no special law shall be enacted.' Article 5, § 25, Const. Colo. In the oral argument with which the court was favored by the friends of the bill, on...