Waterhouse v. Bd. of President & Dirs. of the Cleveland Pub. Sch.

• Decision Date: 26 September 1874
• Citation: 55 Tenn. 857
• Parties: C. F. WATERHOUSE et al., v. THE BOARD OF PRESIDENT and DIRECTORS of the CLEVELAND PUBLIC SCHOOLS, and the COUNTY OF BRADLEY.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

55 Tenn. 857

C. F. WATERHOUSE et al.,

v.THE BOARD OF PRESIDENT and DIRECTORS of the CLEVELAND PUBLIC SCHOOLS, and the COUNTY OF BRADLEY.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

Sep. 26, 1874.

FROM BRADLEY.

Appeal from the decree of the Chancery Court at Cleveland, ____________ Term, 1874. D. M. KEY, Ch.

P. B. MAYFIELD for complainant.

J. H. GAUT and JNO. RAMSEY for Mayor and Aldermen, cited: Const. art. 2, s. 12.

TREWHITT & SHARP for county, cited: Const. art. 2, s. 29; Code, 491; 6 Col., 127;3 Heis., 691.

MCFARLAND, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

The County Court of Bradley county, and a corporation styled “The President and Directors of the Cleveland Public Schools,” each claim the right to levy a tax for school purposes, on the property and polls within the corporate limits of the town of Cleveland. The County Court claims the right under an act entitled, “An act to reorganize and regulate common schools,” approved July 8, 1870, by which the power is expressly conferred.

By an act passed February 28, 1870, “The inhabitants of Cleveland are incorporated as a body corporate, under the name and style of The Board of President and Directors of the Cleveland Public Schools.”

One section provides that the mayor and aldermen of the city of Cleveland (which city had been previously incorporated with the usual powers), shall constitute ex officio, “The Board of President and Directors of Public Schools.”

Another section enacts, that the Board of President and Directors shall have power to assess, levy and collect taxes on property, polls and privileges, within the corporation, for school purposes--not to exceed the amount collected by the State, and to be collected as other city taxes.

It is under this law that this corporation has also levied a tax for school purposes. The complainants are owners of shares in a bank at Cleveland. The tax assessed by the County Court and by the Board of President and Directors, is the same in amount. The complainants bring the amount assessed upon their stock into court with their bill, and insist that they are not bound to pay both taxes, and pray that the defendants may interplead and determine to whom it shall be paid.

The power of taxation is one that belongs to the State in its sovereign capacity. The exercise of her power is legislative. The Legislature has no authority to delegate this power of taxation, except in such cases as the Constitution authorizes: Marr v. Enloe, 1 Yer., 452; Keesee v. The Civil District Board of Education, 6 Col., 127.

The Constitution provides, that the “General Assembly shall have power to authorize the several counties and incorporated towns in this State to impose taxes for county and corporation purposes respectively.” But no authority can be found for delegating this power to any other corporation, and this is a subject upon which the Constitution should receive a strict construction. The power of taxation is one of too grave...