. Indiana and Indianans : a history of aboriginal and territorial Indiana and the century of statehood . ernment in the administration of local school affairs; and thisis certainly interesting in connection with the plea of the Court in theearlier cases that it was their duty to enforce the Constitution withoutregard to clamor or criticism. Here you have two constructions of thesame provisions of the Constitution, by the highest court of the State,diametrically opposite, and unless it is assumed that the members of theCourt, at one time or the other, were either imbecile or dishonest, you aref
. Indiana and Indianans : a history of aboriginal and territorial Indiana and the century of statehood . ernment in the administration of local school affairs; and thisis certainly interesting in connection with the plea of the Court in theearlier cases that it was their duty to enforce the Constitution withoutregard to clamor or criticism. Here you have two constructions of thesame provisions of the Constitution, by the highest court of the State,diametrically opposite, and unless it is assumed that the members of theCourt, at one time or the other, were either imbecile or dishonest, you areforced to the conclusion that the Constitution was so faultily written asto give legitimate basis for two conflicting constructions. The historical ** City of Lafayette vs. Jenners, 10 Ind., p. 70. 486 INDIANA AND INDIANANS interest lies in the problem of tiiuling some rational explanation of the facts. As to the Courts, the natural presumption would be that the earlierjudges were more in touch with the purpose of the Convention, as theywere not only contemporaneous with it, but Judge Hovey and Judge. Judge B. K. Elliott Pettit were prominent members of it. On the other hand, neither ofthem took any part in the debate on the school sections, and the debatedid not involve this question, but was confined to other features, thechief of which was the disposition of the State University, as abovenoted. It is manifest that the prohibition of local and special legislationproviding for supporting common schools, and for the preservation ofschool funds, which is made so prominent in Judge Hoveys argument,has nothing to do with the case. No stretch of language could make theschool laws of 1852 and 1855, or tJie tax sections of those laws, either INDIANA AND INDIANANS 487 local or special. They apply equally to all parts of the State. Theonly room for difference of construction of the words is in the meaninggiven to the word uniform. The Constitution of 1816 provided: Itshall be the duty o
Size: 1471px × 1699px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, booksubjectmedicine, bookyear191
