| Show THE SCHOOL BONDS ELECTION DECISION opinion of the territorial supreme court in the caw case involving the right of the utah commission to take charge of the school bond election is important as affecting not alone school matters but other political interests of the territory the extremely light vote veto cast at the bond election indicated a popular belief that the interference of the utah commission with it rendered it invalid and that the courts would pronounce it void it was expected that judge A andersons decision would be reversed but it was generally believed that the ground of the reversal would be the proposition that school elections are not public elections and are aft not included within the meaning of that term as used in the legislation of congress Con grees and that they have rather the nature of elections by stockholders of torpor actions judge andersons Ander sens decision was reversed and with considerable em emphasis p ha but not upon that ground the opinion of the territorial supreme court containing scarcely a distinct reference to it hence the question whether or not school elections have ever been of a sort that properly comes under the supervision of the utah commission has not been passed upon by that tribunal the principal reason why judge andersons decision is overturned is a now new one at least it has not so se far as our observation has extended been sug sag geeteh by the press prees nor discussed among citizens it is this the edmunds law authorized the utah legislature to pass laws providing for elections and as soon as that body should do this the functions of the utah commission should cease the legislature has passed a law providing for school elections hence the functions of the utah commission have ceased so far as school elections are concerned the logical inference is that the utah commission has nothing to do wilh any election provided for by territorial legislation enacted subsequent to the date of the edmunds law a proposition which is unquestionably in harmony with the specific language of the latter statute and again gives prominence to the contingency upon which the life of the commission hangs one result of this decision will be the complete sev severance grance of the utah corn com mission from local school elections in eluding school trustees school boards board is in cities elections in regard to bonds etc hereafter all these will be held under the auspices of local officers as provided in the territorial school law the decision does not say whether a school election to is or to is not an election within the meaning of the law of congress gress it is however in harmony with the contention of counsel for the appellant sutherland judd who urged that school elections were never intended to be included in those over which the utah commission were given supervision but if it was the intention of the court to sustain this doctrine and the consequent one that school elections are purely local affairs to be conducted under local laws and regulations it is not clear why the last sentence was added which reads P as follows and we further farther hold that the qualifications of voters must be determined by the laws of the united states when auy any conflict arises between them and the laws enacted by the territorial legislature ll 11 there is just as much reason why the lo local callaw law should govern in respect to the qualifications of voters at a school election as there is for holding that the latter is not a public election within the meaning of congressional statutes if the decision is intended to I 1 maintain the latter proposition it embraces an inconsistency for a declaration that the laws of the united states govern in respect to the qualifications of voters brings the election itself under the operation of those laws and hence within the jurisdiction of the utah commission and it can be excluded from the control of the latter only for the reason teat the present school law was passed subsequent to the date of the edmunds law and its ito provisions relative to elections were contemplated and authorized by the latter the last sentence of the decision is a contradiction of the contention of counsel who won the case which to say the least is a singular circumstance we have no disposition to ho question the legality of the decision but it to is to be regretted that it fails to clear up certain vexed phases of the matter to which it relates it leaves open the question whether or not a taxpayer who is not a registered voter has a right to vote on a tax or bond proposition a purely financial issue relative to which he might under every rule of natural justice ju stice be given a voice but if persons only who are qualified electors under the laws of congress can vote at such elections great injustice will be done to a large class of taxpaying tax pay ing citizens |
