Young v. Trustees of Fountain Inn Graded School

• Decision Date: 06 May 1902
• Citation: 41 S.E. 824,64 S.C. 131
• Parties: YOUNG et al. v. TRUSTEES OF FOUNTAIN INN GRADED SCHOOL.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

41 S.E. 824

64 S.C. 131

YOUNG et al. v. TRUSTEES OF FOUNTAIN INN GRADED SCHOOL.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

May 6, 1902

Suit by J. R. Young and others against H. L. Shaw and others, as trustees of Fountain Inn graded school, for an injunction. Injunction granted.

J. J McSwain, for petitioners. Carey & McCullough, for respondents.

POPE J.

This is a proceeding in the original jurisdiction of the supreme court, by which the petitioners seek a perpetual injunction against the respondents, as trustees of the Fountain Inn graded school, preventing the latter from enforcing a resolution of said trustees for the payment of $2 by every scholar who shall attend said graded school during each year to be paid on or before 1st December of each year, under a penalty, if the payment of such $2 be refused or neglected that the child or children who shall so refuse shall be denied the right to attend such graded school, unless an affidavit shall be made that such child or children so neglecting or refusing to pay the said $2 has or have not the means with which to pay the same. This court is relieved of all care as to the facts out of which the contention has arisen by reason of the following agreed statement of facts "(1) That the petitioners are resident citizens and taxpayers within the Fountain Inn graded school district which graded school district is within the state aforesaid, partly lying in Greenville county, and partly lying in Laurens county; the larger portion, however, being in Greenville county. (2) That the respondents are the legally constituted board of trustees for the said Fountain Inn graded school district, and were such at the times hereinafter mentioned. (3) That the term of the said graded school for this session began on the 9th day of September, 1901, and was contemplated to run nine school months from that date. (4) That the following constitutes the corps of teachers for the said school, to wit, a principal and three regular assistants. There are two other assistants incidentally connected with the school, the principal and three regular assistants being paid out of the school fund. (5) The said school is supported from the following sources, to wit: (1) A tax of four mills which is levied upon the taxable property within the district as authorized by law; (2) by its pro rata of the ordinary school fund, as provided for by the constitution and laws of the state of South Carolina. These funds are no more than sufficient to pay the corps of teachers, if sufficient for that purpose. That, judging from past experience, it is doubtful whether or not this fund will be sufficient to pay the teachers, and to pay the indebtedness of the school district to the general school fund. For previous years the said school district has not had income enough from these sources to pay the corps of teachers, and has been overdrawing from the general fund, by permission and consent of the proper authorities, for that purpose. This statement applies to the conditions heretofore, when only three teachers were employed for the school; but this year it was necessary to employ an additional teacher, and consequently entail a greater expense. Respondents hope and expect, however, to realize enough from the above sources this year to pay in full the salary of the teachers. (6) That the said school district owns a school building within which the said school is taught, which building had three rooms, each 22X30 feet, and a rostrum, 12X22 feet. That these rooms were insufficient to accommodate the pupils and the additional teacher which had to be employed, and it was absolutely necessary for the benefit of the school district to enlarge the building, which was done by adding 22X18 feet to the said rostrum, thereby making it a room of the same size as the others. That it cost to do this $129.50, which amount could not be used from the general fund without impairing the efficiency of the school service. That in addition to this, it was necessary to purchase twenty seats for the purposes of the school, which cost $50, and also it was necessary to have the school building heated during the fall and winter months; and also certain other incidental expenses will have to be met from time to time, such as keeping the building in proper repair, etc. That in order to meet these incidental expenses, it became necessary, in the judgment of the board of trustees, to the proper conduct and management of the said school, to impose an incidental fee upon those who were able to pay it, and the said board of trustees, before the beginning of the present session, passed a resolution requiring of each pupil, except those whose parents would make an affidavit that they were unable to pay the same, an incidental fee of $2, in order to meet the incidental expenses incident to said school, and to assist in defraying the other extra expenses hereinbefore mentioned, without which the efficiency of the school would be greatly impaired. That before taking this action the board of trustees consulted with many, if not the majority, of the patrons of the school, and the said proposed action met with their hearty concurrence; and subsequently the said patrons filed a written indorsement of the action of the said board of trustees, which indorsement is hereto attached, and made a part of this agreed statement of facts. Some of the names appearing upon this indorsement are not patrons of this school, but they are all taxpayers living within the district. That there were last year 129 polls within the district, including white and colored. That there are about 61 patrons of the said school district, and of this number 45 have signed the written indorsement of the action of the trustees in requiring the said incidental fee . Of this number, all have paid the said incidental fee, or are willing to pay, except 1, who is a beneficiary, by reason of his inability to pay. According to the best estimate that can now be obtained, there are only 16 patrons, or those contemplating patronizing the school, that are unwilling to pay the said incidental fee. (8) That your petitioners are resident citizens and taxpayers within the said district. That the petitioner J. R. Young sends three children, --two girls and a boy. That he has paid the incidental fee as to the two girls, but has not paid for the boy. Your petitioner H. J. Watson intended sending one or more pupils, but is unwilling to pay the incidental fee unless the court sustains the action of the trustees in charging the said fee. Your petitioner J. T. Wood contemplates entering one child, but the said trustees require of him the payment of the said $2 incidental fee, in accordance with their resolution. (9) That the said board of trustees have also passed a resolution to the effect that all those pupils who have not paid the incidental fee on or by December 1, 1901, be suspended and prevented from further attending the said Fountain Inn graded school. (10) That your petitioners are able to pay the $2 incidental fee, but are advised that under the school law the said trustees have no right to charge the said incidental...