Jasper County Democrat, Volume 23, Number 3, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 April 1920 — SUPREME COURT PUTS ITS O. K. ON COUNTY UNIT LAW. [ARTICLE]

SUPREME COURT PUTS ITS O. K. ON COUNTY UNIT LAW.

In a decision upholding the county unit road law, handed down last week, the supreme court said: This Is a suit by the appellant as plaintiff to enjoin the defendant* from doing any acts toward the collecting or spending money for the construction of a highway under the county unit highway law of IIU. Acts 1919, page 63K The trial court sustained a demurrer to his complaint. The appellant contends that the law is unconstitutional. The court holds that the fact that the title of the act speaks of the bonds to be Issued as “county bonds while the text of the law shows that they are to be bonds of a taxing - district with the boundaries of the county, does not Impair the validity of_the law. The fact that the b° ar “ “ empowered to first view the high way and make a written report as to the utility of the project, and Is later empowered to hear remonstrances does not make the law invalid, as the constitution permits county boards to act both in an administrative and judicial capacity, while the fact that they act in both capacities will not tend to Prejudice the board while acting In Its judicial capacity hearing remonstrances. Ths taxing district created operates under the sovereign taxing power of the state and the provisions of the XIV amendment of the United States constitution ar® not applicable The fact that the law continues In effect the law permitting roads to be constructed for taxing districts with the boundaries of the townships, does not make the law invalid or the fact that the earns party may be taxed aiw oonded to the limit under both doKs not make the law invalid.