OPINION.

responsibility of determining, according to their judgment of their local needs, resources and situation, whether the children of the district shall have the benefit of a free school, and what kind of a school they shall have. It was based on the policy of devolving upon the people the direct charge of their schools, giving them needful facilities in the way of legal provisions, and affording them encouragement and help by the school fund dividends.

Such was the system and policy of the school law of 1829. But, as it provided that the money required for the building and maintaining a school house and for the support of a free school in the respective districts, should be raised only by subscription or by voluntary contribution, it was soon found that, owing partly to the still undeveloped growth of educational sentiment among the people, and partly to the inability or unwillingness of many of them to furnish the requisite funds, larger powers should be given to the school districts. Consequently a supplement to the law of 1829 was enacted January 25, 1830, Chapter 21, Vol. 8, p. 21, to supply the defects therein.

Under this supplement, provision was made for the assessment and collection of taxes to raise money for all school purposes, including both school houses and school expenses, not exceeding $300 in any year, with the consent of a majority of the school voters of the district, to be ascertained by ballot at their special meeting. In this rapid and marked transition, within the space of one year, from the old era of no public schools to the new Free School System founded upon voluntary contributions and subscriptions, and thence to the exercise of the taxing power, it was doubtless deemed prudent to impose said prescribed limitation thereon, in order to allay prejudice and avert antagonisms against the newly introduced system.

Time sped on, population increased, interest in public education grew among the more intelligent and appreciative citizens, and demands for better teachers, more comfortable and commodious school houses and improved methods, created needs for larger school revenues, and, consequently, for increased taxation. Natu

OPINION.

rally these improvements would be opposed by those who felt no interest in education, or were averse to paying taxes, and so these needful taxes were often defeated by their votes at the annual meetings, thus depriving those desiring to educate their children both of the aid of the State school fund and of the assessable property within the district.

That, meanwhile, public sentiment throughout the State was increasing in favor of more ample taxation for the building and improvement of the school houses and the schools, and in favor, especially, of not leaving the power of taxation therefor entirely subject to the illiberal, capricious or prejudiced voter, is apparent from a proper consideration of the several provisions of the act in controversy, Chapter 70, Vol. 12, p. 108, entitled "An Act for the Benefit of Free Schools of the State of Delaware" passed March 1, 1861.

At the argument, counsel seemed to consider that these provisions of this statute were designed as a limitation of the powers of the school voters to raise money by taxation. But instead of such a restriction they are, in their general effect, an extensive enlargement of their preceding powers in that behalf, showing a continued legislative tendency, since the passage of the act of 1829, to enlarge the powers of the school districts so as to keep pace with the gradual growth and progress of education in the State, and its consequent needs and requirements.

Section 1 of this act of 1861 imperatively required the school committee to assess and levy every year, for the support of the school of their district-in New Castle County the sum of $75; in Kent County $50, and in Sussex County $30. Section 2 authorized the school voters to raise by taxation, by a majority vote at their annual meeting, for the support of a free school in their district, a sum in addition to that required by section 1 not exceeding $400. Section 3 provided as follows: "That when a majority of the voters of any school district, at their annual meeting ing in April, wish to raise by tax any sum of money not exceeding $500, for the purpose of building or repairing a school house in

OPINION.

their district, they shall resolve by a majority of votes what sum shall be raised in said district for that purpose, which sum so resolved upon shall be assessed, levied and collected by the commissioners of each district, as provided for by section 1, and applied to the purposes for which it was collected."

Prior to this act of 1861, it was within the power and discretion of a majority of the school voters of the district to refuse to raise any money for school purposes by taxation. Then taxation was entirely voluntary, but, under section 1 of said act, it was made compulsory to the extent prescribed therein, and thus a fixed sum, in addition to the school fund allowance, was annually assured. In this respect the previous general policy of leaving taxation and other general matters pertaining to the schools to the discretion and determination of the school voters was partially modified.

But although section 1 thus divested them of their previous discretionary power not to tax, it in nowise restricted their power to tax for school purposes. Taken in connection with sections 2 and 3 of said act of 1861, it really operated as an enlargement instead of a limitation of the pre-existing power of the school voters to raise needed revenue, as already stated. For, prior to its passage, the power to raise school revenues by taxation was limited to $300 in any one year. Thereafter the compulsory sum prescr bed by section 1, the sum of $400 authorized by section 2 and the sum $500 authorized by section 3, amounting to from $930 to $975, according to the county, might be raised by taxation in any year in any district.

That the compulsory tax sum of $75, etc., and the voluntary tax sum of $500 for general school support, and the voluntary tax sum of $500 for building or repairing a school house, as limited in said act, might have been deemed a prudent and sufficient provision, in the legislative judgment, for the needs and requirements of the Free School System throughout the State, in its then stage of development, it is not unreasonable to presume.

OPINION.

But during the intervening period between the act of 1861, and the act of 1898, now in question here, a great advance has taken place in the educational interest and sentiment of the people in various sections of the State; the school system had been changed, enlarged and improved in many ways by legislative action; the school houses, school teachers, school pupils and school text books, in consequence, had been remarkably increased and improved, and therefore a greater necessity had gradually arisen for more ample powers of taxation in the school voters, to keep pace with the changed conditions and the progressive tendencies of the times.

It is natural that the representatives of the people in their legislative capacity, should recognize and respond to these conditions and tendencies, and it is reasonable that courts should keep this in view in interpreting the legislative intention as disclosed by their enactments.

Two legislative enactments have been especially referred to as indicative of the marked changes and tendencies in the growth and development of our free school system. One of these is Chapter 50 Vol. 15, p. 84, passed March 25, 1875. This act made very important changes in the school system. For the first time, during its existence, it introduced a State Board of Education, a salaried State Superintendent of Free Schools, teachers' institutes in each county, uniform text books for the schools and the giving of certificates to teachers after examination by the State Superintendent. This act also enlarged the amount to be annually raised by compulsory taxation in each district to the sum of $100 in New Castle and Kent counties, and $60 in Sussex County; thus again showing the legislative tendency towards more ample school taxation.

The other statute referred to by counsel for plaintiff as showing the like legislative tendency, is Chapter 602 Vol. 19, p. 688, passed April 27, 1893; and especially section 12 of said act which is as follows: "Section 12. By the vote of the citizens of any district entitled to vote therein, a sum in addition to that required to be raised by law, may be raised by taxation for special improvements, additional teachers, or additional salaries therefor, but, in no

OPINION.

case, shall a single, unincorporated district use any of the fund received from the State, for building or repairing school buildings or premises."

The principal purpose of the act of 1893 was the proper apportionment of the School Fund among the respective school districts, and its application exclusively to the objects therein specified, but in no case to the building or repairing school buildings or premises. As the school fund apportionments had theretofore been applicable to the building or repairing school buildings, as well as to other school purposes, it is urged that, owing to the concluding clause of section 12 having made it no longer applicable thereto, it was the design of the preceding clause of said section 12 to give the power to raise by voluntary taxation, without any restriction, any sum deemed necessary by a majority of the school voters for building or repairing a school house, and therefore that the five hundred dollars limitation of Section 3 Chapter 70 Vol. 12, Act of 1871, is designedly superseded by this provision of the act of 1893.

It is contended for the plaintiff that, in the legislative contemplation, "special improvements" in section 12, mean the "building or repairing a school house" as employed in section 3 act of 1861, and, consequently, that the act of 1893 in granting an unlimited power, has repealed the said section of the prior act granting a limited power of taxation. Whilst we do not deem it necessary in the determination of the question directed to be heard here, to pass upon either of these questions raised by said section 12, yet, in the light of the growth and progress of the free school system, and of the gradual legislative tendency to enlarge the taxing power correspondingly, the contention for the plaintiff that in section 12 of the act of 1893, it was the legislative design to grant said power of taxation unfettered by the limitations of the act of 1861, seems to have much support.

We now come to the contention that the act of 1898 has by implication repealed section 3 of the act of 1861. All that may be said in behalf of the similar claim respecting the act of 1893, and far more, may be urged in support of this contention.