Amos v. Mathews

Comptroller as Ernest Florida, State of Amos, W. V. Knott, Treasurer Ap of Florida, pellants, v. Appellee. John E. Mathews, on the Relation of Fred H. Florida, Davis, Doyle Attorney Petitioner, General State, of said E. Governor, al., etc., Respondents. et Carlton,

En Banc.

Opinion January 23, Filed 1930. n

O. K. Reaves, of Tampa; Giles J. Patterson, E. J. L’Engle, Jacksonville; Fred E. Davis, Attorney Gen- eral, and Marvm McIntosh, G. Special Assistant, Talla- hassee, Appellants for in equity cause and Respondents in quo warranto; Gillis, Jacksonville; D. Stuart Mathems,

John E. Hugh Taylor Watson Springs; Y. L. DeFuniak Peti- and for equity cause Appellee Quincy, quo warranto. tioner us for considera- bring before These causes J.

Strum, at the extraordi- validity passed statutes of two tion 14486, 1929, namely, Chapter nary legislative session of 14575, Chapter known One, Bill known Senate Governor on June Five, approved Bill both Senate 1929. 21, cognate parts single purpose— of a are

These two Acts designated road and and retirement of liquidation accomplishment of which bridge bonds—in inextricably are interre- of the two Acts provisions pari They construed materia should therefore be lated. Curry Lehman, 55 Fla. So. v. as one enactment. McMillan, R. 883. 18; 55 Fla. So. R. (Senate Five) primary Bill levies two Chapter taxes, first “a license tax of five dollars to the excise by every gasoline; paid dealer in and the to be State” tax, tax, gas “in herein termed second, addition thereto * * * gallon every gasoline per gallon five cents for of of ** * sold, gallon being made per said tax of five cents ” * * * up ‘separate’ as follows: of four taxes gas gallon per First tax: Two cents for use of the State Department. tax, Road this the five dollar Neither nor required “to paid license tax dealers which is to be State,” litigation. in is under this the attack gas per gallon apportioned cent Second tax: One to be “in in proportion to the several counties collected such ’’ respectively. counties gas per gallon Third tax: One cent apportioned to be to the several in proportion counties that the bonded indebt- including county bridges, roads and for of such edness bridge districts, bears to the bonded tax road and special like character of all the counties of of indebtedness words, apportionment according to In other this State. bridge of and indebtedness proportion bonded road computing which the bonded in- counties, several bridge special tax road and districts such debtedness of Expenditure proceeds is included. counties by gas is restricted and third statutes second here) (with exception payment not material an existing special bonded of counties and tax indebtedness building bridge and districts incurred for the road public bridges roads and and for which bonds were issued unnecessary April 1,' 1929. It is outstanding on controversy whether or not such funds consider this for applied upon be bonds authorized refunding just above mentioned. the bonds gas and third taxes never proceeds second hands of local or district officers. Such reach the supervision Comp- are under the funds collected directly Treasurer disbursed the State troller are agencies bonds, for the or to the holders paying to the disbursements, making however, In such the State thereof. “County ex Treasurer officio.” Treasurer acts as gallon apportioned gas per tax: cent to be Fourth One counties, two-thirds of which équally amongst the several purposes” and one-third “used for school shall be bridges which “in the of roads construction officials, When collected apportioned.” it is paid local officials to gas tax is over to fourth by the statute. latter as directed disbursed (Senate One) Bill Chapter things, Amongst other hereby by Legisla- declared (a) “It that: provides roads, highways all and Florida that ture of built, been constructed or have heretofore bridges which part, proceeds from the bonds issued in whole or pro- or from the by Florida, counties of the State by Special Bridge of bonds issued Road and Dis- ceeds authorizing same, are, the laws have been tricts under and will continue to be beneficial to the and State of Florida substantially general large, at and have contributed to the welfare, development settlement and of the entire State.” (b) requires charged It local trustees bond theretofore county sinking with the administration of funds of for district bonds issued the construction of roads and bridges Treasurer, County to turn over to the State officio, Treasurer ex all funds and securities under the Trustees, together control of said with their records relat- ing thereto, Treasurer, County held the State officio, Treasurer for respective ex of the coun- benefit districts, ties kept separate such funds to be ac- (c) counts. That all bonds of the character under con- shall obligations sideration remain the of the counties and them, issuing (d) districts It authorizes the issuance of refunding circumstances, subject bonds under certain approval of the Board Administration hereafter mentioned, (e) “For purpose- of administering the provisions Act, money and such as is available law,” the Act creates a Board of Administration consist- ing Governor, Comptroller and State Treas- (f) urer. required The Treasurer is keep a separate account for each and road district of all monies received from the local sinking trustees as funds, which accounts are sinking sometimes termed accounts; fund keep separate also to accounts each of all monies received applicable for and to the credit of such upon gasoline from any tax applicable to the of such bonds county, gas which includes taxes two and three levied (Senate Five), any Chapter Bill or received from similarly on personal property appli- tax motor vehicles (g) required cable. The Board of Administration is an- nually on or before June 1st to estimate the amount of money several available to the counties and districts for year just the next fiscal from each of the sources men- tioned, give County and to notice to the several Boards Commissioners, officials, and to district of the amounts respectively. In arriving available to them at the amount participating subdivisions, so available to the several apply moneys shall in sinking Board first the several fund If accounts. those funds are sufficient to meet current requirements any county the Board apply shall next moneys any available, or estimated to available, become the credit of gas that from personal taxes and property taxes on In apportioning motor vehicles.

amounts so available to the several counties and districts sinking from sources other than the accounts, fund required Board apportion each or district proportion such of the available funds as the amount participating particular bonds of that subdivision bears aggregate to the all participating amount of bonds to which proceeds applicable, of the taxes are is, propor- that tion participating to the bonded indebtedness. It parenthetically here remarked that the ap- last mentioned portionment apparently would include arising funds from gas tax, the second and would therefore be in conflict with apportionment particular of that provided tax for in Five, Senate Bill “in proportion which is collected several If counties.” the amount available from the sources mentioned is sufficient to meet all maturing prin- cipal sinking interest and requirements during fund any fiscal year, no ad tax valorem shall be levied year. local officers for in that If the amount stated, then purposes for the is not sufficient so available levy a officials shall sufficient local or district respective in counties or districts valorem tax ad any such ad valorem proceeds The up make deficit. by monthly local be remitted tax so levied shall County Treasurer, Treasurer, ex to the officials by officio, him for the benefit of such to be disbursed (h) 14 and 16. The Act or district. See Secs. expressly provisions declares that its are intended for the State, property taxpayers benefit of owners rendering agen- purpose for the assistance to the several already performed part which the functions cies have resting roads, in and that on the State the construction of obligate it or intention of the Act to is not the indirectly State, directly, contingently, pay- or any ment of of the bonds referred to. Chapter levying 1929,

Neither Acts an addi- per gallon upon gasoline tional or sixth cent tax for edu- purposes, Chapter 14574, cational nor Acts of re- quiring automobiles, the collection of an ad tax valorem on proceeds of which are to administered by said Board applied payment Administration and to the of bonds of the character to, hereinabove referred are involved in this litigation. constitutionality filed in which the have been

Two suits questioned. are and Five is a Bills One One of Senate brought County in the Circuit Court Leon taxpayers suit seeking injunction E. Mathews an by John appellee Comptroller prevent and Treasurer to against them collecting levied Bill the taxes Senate Five and from any moneys, disbursing from prevent them otherwise prescribed functions for them performing the Senate quo The other suit is the nature of war- Bill One. having filed in ranto, the information been this Court Attorney the name of the State on the relation of the Gen- eral, against Governor, Comptroller the State against Treasurer, such, the State and as ex-officio County authority Treasurer, questioning re- of said spondents offices, powers to exercise the franchises and Bill created Senate One. injunction suit is now before us on defendant’s

appeal enjoining from the decree of the chancellor cer- respects tain the distribution of certain of the taxes to be pursuant Bill holding collected to Senate but Five, levy complainant of each of such taxes valid. The below suit, appellee in that here, assignments has filed cross of challenging ruling error the correctness of the chancellor’s levy that the and collection of such taxes are valid. The quo upon warranto is before us a demurrer to the informa- tion. Substantially questions the same constitutional are raised in both suits. The two causes will be con- therefore together. sidered against the statutes under consideration: is asserted

It vagueness, indefiniteness, am- they are void for (a) That uncertainty, (b) they That violate Sec. biguity, and they misleading, in that are Art. 3 of the Constitution briefly expressed title, that the subject subject properly and matters more than one Acts embrace Pace, R. (See Richmond v. 103 So. E. therewith. connected 647.) (e) apportionment alternative methods of That the Bill Five an unlawful provided in Senate constitute dele- (d) gation legislative power, That the statutes violate relating 11 Art. 16 of the Constitution to claims See. State, against (e) That the inclusion of the Gov- ernor, Comptroller, and State Treasurer as members Administration, required these officers are of the Board of more one perform the functions of than office under “to contrary government time,” of the State at the same Constitution, (f) That 15 of Art. of the Sen- to See. 1 Art. 3 of the Constitution ate Bill violates Sec. One delegates legislative power it to the Board of Ad- that 3 in ministration, and that it violates See. of Art. that provides filling in a it creates new offices and them contrary manner to the Constitution. immediately foregoing propositions designated as

The (a) (f), inclusive, have been considered Mr. Chief separate opinion prepared by Justice Terrell in a him and expressed by herein. filed The views Mr. Chief Justice propositions just agreed Terrell the six stated are to. validity against of the statutes as other asserted objections constitutional will now be considered. The two statutes, (1) taken together, provide for: levy cer- taxes; tain (2) excise an apportionment amongst thereof counties; the several (3) application proceeds designated (4) taxes to purposes; plan administration of through such funds a Board'of Adminis- composed tration of State officers. constantly borne mind

It should be excise, valorem, not ad involved are taxes. here validity levy: First, as to the of the understanding helpful to an of what It will be is to fol- principles the outset a few reiterate at of constitu- low to universally (1) tional construction sanctioned: It is the interpret law, courts to legislate. function of the not to (2) are not concerned with the mere Courts wisdom or legislation long legislation as such policy squares so (3) power Constitution. The Courts have no with the to Legislature down an Act of the unless provisions strike Act, them, clearly or of the some of violate express some necessarily implied inhibition of (4) or the Constitution. Every indulged must reasonable doubt in favor of the rationally interpreted Act. If it can be to harmonize with

17 duty the Constitution it is the of the adopt courts to (5) construction and extent, sustain the Act. To the how ever, clearly that such an Act express implied violates or mandates Constitution, of the the Act must fall—not mere ly because the court decrees, so but because of the domi nant authority force of the Constitution, superior an legislature both the judiciary. Such an Act never becomes a law. County, See Jackson Lbr. v.Co. Walton 116 771; So. R. Catts, 735, Lainhart v. 73 Fla. R. So. 47; State v. Bryan, 293, 50 Fla. 39 So. R. 939. question approaching power legisla

In levy taxes, ture to it should further be borne in mind that grant power our State Constitution not voluntarily legislature, by but is a imposed limitation people themselves their inherent law making power, through legislature, exercised under our Constitution power which otherwise be would absolute save as it tran powers granted scended the the State to the Federal . Stone, Government. State v. 634; Fla. R. So Cheney Jones, 14 Fla. 587. possesses, The State therefore an sovereignty, attribute of power the inherent im pose all expressly implication not clear in hibited State or Federal Constitutions. Gunn, Amos v. 84 Fla. 615; Cooley, (4th So. R. ed.) Taxation p. 149. Where the expressly Constitution prescribes the man doing thing, ner of it impliedly being forbids its done substantially in a different manner, though even the Con stitution does in express prohibit doing terms thing in such other Weinberger manner. v. Board of Instruction, Public 112 So. R. 256. ‘‘ * * * spirit true of constitutional interpretation give is to full liberal construction to the language, aiming * * * fidelity spirit ever to show to its purpose. provisions, Constitutional operating by whether way of 18 limitation, according

grant or are to be enforced to tbeir spirit,’ any legisla- can not be evaded ‘letter and and which, though trespassing letter, tion terms ’’ destroy grant yet in substance and effect limitation. or S., 283, 45 L. Ed. 862. Fairbank U. U. S.

This court has held that “the courts should not declare inoperative ground a statute to be void or on the that it opposed spirit ‘supposed’ to a is pervade Johns, 228; Cooley’s Constitution.” State v. So. R. (7th ed.) p. necessarily Lim. 239. Const. But it does not every follow that in ease the point courts must able to express some disregarded, out inhibition which has been or express disobeyed, some command which has been before courts set can aside a as invalid. statute “The intent organic statutory provisions or is the essence of the law ‘ and such intent implications be shown and in- tendments’ express provisions; as well as words of implied provisions organic statutory or law are as effec- express tive as the provisions, when implied provi- such judicially sions are declared to exist.” Getzen v. Sumter 45, County, 85 Fla. Advisory So. 104. And in re: R. Opinion, 94 Fla. So. R. this Court said that spirit “the as well as the letter” of constitutional inhibi- preserved tions “should be given full force and effect.” restraints, Constitutional therefore, may be found either express language employed purpose or in the clear- ly, though impliedly, thereby. object evidenced constitutional construction is to ascertain and effectuate the intention people in adopting it. That intention and purpose is the “spirit” Consti- obligatory tution—as as its written word. spirit, That however, can not consist sophistry of mere nor fanciful conjectural theory. It must be found in implica- those tions and clearly intendments which express flow from the

19 light when considered of the Constitution mandates leading up its events and historical circumstances people in purpose of from all of which the adoption, 102, Butler, v. 70 Fla. gleaned. State adopting it is to be R. Warnell, 318, 58 Fla. 50 So. 771; Mugge v. 69 R. So. 716; Lakeland, 508, 61 Fla. 54 So. R. 645; v. Brown 98; 37 R. 249, 739, 102 R. A. L. Greer, 88 Fla. So. v. 45, 104; R. Rath- County, 89 Fla. 103 So. v. Sumter Getzen 408; L. Holland v. N. R. 34 R. A. Wirth, 15, v. 45 E. bone Hurlburt, 44, 24 State, 455, 523; People Fla. v. Mich. Cooley (7th ed.) 98, 242. 103; p. 9 Am. R. Const. Lim. adopting in purpose people the Constitution entirety. as an should be deduced from the Constitution construing applying' provisions and Therefore, considered, Constitution, provisions such should be separately, provisions. but co-ordination with all other Ex Mugge Warnell, 318, 645; parte 58 Fla. 50 So. R. Lakeland, 406; Pricha, 70 Fla. 70 So. R. Brown v. Fla. R. 716 . So. solely that when a tax is levied principle In view of levy by the Constitution the prohibited for a classify the second and third well to now illegal, it will be they are levied as State ascertain whether gas taxes to county taxes, apply, since different rules will or as they are the one or the other. The whether depending on separately. gas tax will be considered fourth against the Acts that both for is contended It levied as In gas third taxes are State taxes. second is contended that the construction the Acts it defense function and bridges purpose; is a State of roads have constructed roads referred to in could the State a State pay have levied excise tax to Acts and could therefore, having counties and districts them; per- resting building upon the State a function formed having recognized as roads, such roads of and the State may State, that the State now the it follows beneficial to levy apply it in payment a excise tax and State con- bonds, proceeds the of which were used to and district obligation roads, long the so as the State assumes no struct by the pay bonds, which, asserted, to the it is is avoided no express provision in the Act that the State assumes obligation proceeds applied shall be but that the of the tax gratuity, payment of such bonds and further Bill express declaration in Senate One that such appropriation proceeds specific the tax is for the taxpayers State, benefit of property owners of the and argument not of the bonds. From this the conclusion is levy reached gas taxes, that the of said second and third taxes, State is valid. assailing Those Act purpose contend that the roads, tax question is not to construct for the roads in have already been completed, constructed and but its pay is to ; off payment district debts that the obligations such violates the clear intendment of Sec. Constitution; Art. and that being the tax tax, payment and the of local and district being debts not “expense an of the State” within the meaning Constitution, '2 Sec. of Art. to which the State is levying confined in taxes, levy is void. duty

It any is our to resolve doubt as to the character of the tax in favor of such a construction as will harmonize levy Constitution, with the grave to avoid doubts score, on that if can rationally it done. Hiers v. Mitchell, 116 So. R. 81.

Sec. of Art. 9 of the Constitution is as follows: Legislature “The provide shall raising for revenue defray sufficient expenses of the State for each pay prin- sum year, fiscal and also a sufficient cipal existing and interest of the indebtedness of ’’ State. Cheney Jones, 14 Fla. it is in the fifth In stated “ * * * subject legislative power over the

headnote: limited, purposes of taxation is also because the several may which in like prescribed; be levied are manner purposes Legislature the several for which the cause being expressly taxes to be levied named in the Constitu- purposes being defraying sufficient for tion, these expenses conducting of government the affairs of the of the Discussing proposition body State.” this of the opinion, and with reference purpose to the and effect of Sec, 2 of Art. 12 (now 2, of the of 1868 Constitution Sec. 1885), Art. “Measuring Constitution of the Court said: power Legislature by the of the the terms of the Constitu- respect tion in levying taxes, to the of we find that it is permitted defray ‘raise revenue expenses sufficient to the (which expenditures may State’ includes such be Legislature authorized prohibited and which are not Constitution), pay principal and ‘to and interest existing indebtedness of the provision State.’ This is so broad perceive that we can not it to be necessary to the due all powers government exercise of of to travel any legitimate object. outside of it for It erects a boun- dary also, which we think protect was intended to people from errors which sometimes have been committed by Legislatures. prescribes It what done, how far Legislature may go levying taxes; principles to, alluded it is a limitation wanting in di- rectness to a prohibition.” amount to

Except contemplated by otherwise the Constitution, necessarily construction would preclude levy the direct exclusively pur- for an Legislature of a tax confined, of Art. 9 being so far as Sec.

pose, the or levy purposes taxes for for concerned, to the of interest. sovereign has a in which the State purposes the Constitution 1885 is revision of The Constitution of 1868 was Art. 12 the Constitution of Sec. of of of 1868. 2 of Art. 9 the Constitution verbatim as Sec. of retained verbatim in the that Section Con- re-adopting* 1885. In of knowledge did so people with stitution Cheney It is placed on it v. Jones. there- construction people were with that con- presumed fore that the content along re-adoption with it adopted struction language of the would have Section, otherwise the Section altered- the Constitution 1885. been provides: 6 Art. 9 Sec. of of the Constitution power Legislature provide “The shall have only issuing repelling for the State bonds insurrection, pur- for the suppressing invasion or or refunding pose redeeming already issued, bonds ’’ rate at a lower of interest. Advisory 114 So. Court Opinion, In re: R. this said anti-bonding just quoted: provision with reference spirit “The as the letter this Section should well be given preserved and full force effect. Its purpose and away by any be frittered should not defeated or narrow ’’ Hathaway or technical construction. See also v. Monroe, 149; Green, 119 R. 116 So. State v. So. R. 66. gas taxes,

If the second and third taxes are State levy clearly repugnant thereof is and to Sections 6 of Constitution, Art. 9 of the and fall. must therefore The following just reasons lead us to the conclusion stated :

Generally may public bridges roads speaking, and county purpose purpose. or a either as a State constructed county. usually large at and the They benefit both State they recognized located. This Court has this are which building. County, in road Lewis Leon dual County, v. Walton R. 146; R. Jackson Lbr. Co. So. So. Undoubtedly, upon could have taken itself the State 771. public roads here under original construction pay could have levied State taxes to and consideration progressed. construction But the State did not them as Undoubtedly, also, and had so. the counties districts do authority them, county legislative to construct as for and voluntarily they purposes, and chose to so construct district they progress them to local because deemed essential them prosperity. counties and districts could have re- they not; they money by frained, but did borrowed the Legislature issuing bonds and constructed the roads. The merely authorized, compel. it each did not So of the coun- districts, necessary choice, of its own took ties and ground steps to issue bonds the con- question county (or struction of the roads constituted a district) purpose, was, although which it the same con- projects might accomplished have been struction purpose. roads, as a Construction of State these however, projects completed as local has been and that only payment transaction is at end. There remains an obligations of the local thus incurred. The pay district bonds to for those roads were and vali- issued legal dated as and district bonds. Hence their purely obliga- became fixed as status and district They tions, purpose. not, issued for a local were and could obligations. be, bridges That the construction of roads these resulted alone, in benefit to the State be conceded. That fact however, preclude does not their construction as local a im- purpose, expense an

or nor render thereof subject sense, any public a proper of local In taxation. improvement city which benefits a a benefits or also justify the State to some extent. But if the State can assuming by itself in to these pay bonds State taxation merely acknowledges it because that the constructionu of by a State, the roads were benefit to the then same process reasoning justify in pay- the State counld itself ing off, by every taxation, any State bond issue incurred municipality building public streets, thus central- izing power pay to im- taxation the cost of' local provements in manner not contemplated our Consti- tendency tution. already in this direction indicated by the introduction at Legislature the same session of the Which at Senate Bills passed, One Five were of sev- undertaking eral bridge Acts to create “road dis- qualify tricts” of certain towns so to bonds such towns, paving purposes, issued street participate in proceeds gas taxes now under consideration.

It is clear purpose, expense, State or State can any rest upon general not such broad and conception of just State benefits as that referred to. Local taxes must pay improvements already be levied to for local con- structed, though even there is an element of incidental general benefit them. In Martin v. Dade Co., Muck Land So. R. this “ said: In view

Court limitations contained See. * * 6 of Art. 9 of the State *, Constitution the State (with legally funds) any can not manner, form or directly, indirectly, contingently either or 'pay’ or be obligated pay any part whole of the principal or interest of the bonds authorized to be issued the Ever- glades Drainage plainly District.” It was stated that the only “obligate” could not itself pay such directly, bonds, “pay” them, but that it could not either indirectly rule, contingently. or The same and for the reason, applies same to bonds issued counties and dis- building project tricts for road when the was undertaken completed purpose, a local and the bonds issued and obligations. validated as local inconsistency

It would be more than mild to hold that authority while State was without those issue bonds instance, the first it could nevertheless authorize its subordinate subdivisions them to issue and the State sub- sequently levy pay obligations a State tax which the place first could not issue or assume. That “ ’’ payment such gratuity, would be made as a and not as obligation, an situation, does not aid the when in- tendments of Sec. 6 of Art. 9 the State is inhibited from “paying” bonds of this character. in- The conclusion is escapable plan that such a would constitute an indirect accomplishing method of which the State can not do directly, and pre- would afford a convenient means and a nullifying provisions 6 Art. 9 of Sec. of cedent Constitution. It has more than once been this held by Court, and re-affirm, we now that the Constitution 'contem- plates expenses that the State, including its activi- building paying roads, ties shall kept be within .for its year,” virtually “revenue for each fiscal that is basis, expense not, by any cash and that such plan can of circumlocution, anticipated bonds, be the issuance of except in the expressly recognized cases in the Constitu- In Advisory Opinion, tion. re: 850; 114 So. R. v. Green, 116 66; So. R. in connection with which should Hathaway Monroe, recently read 119 So. R. 149. As year as the proposed constitutional amendment authorizing the State to bond itself for the construction of roads was polls. 1919, p. at the Acts 341. defeated

By Constitution, 5 Art. 9 coun- Sec. of the several may impose ties be authorized to assess and taxes for coun- ty purposes. for purposes, Therefore, and no other bonds by purposes,’ be for issued must issued county purposes only, tax could law- and for otherwise no fully pay levied to them. It follows that when these be issued, they bonds were were issued and validated as for then, County (or district) purposes only. By logic what 2 6 9 view of the inhibition of Secs. and of Art. of the pay Constitution, a State tax be levied to them?. expressly Bill Senate One declares that these bonds payment of which re- applied these to be “shall are obligations special bridge main of said counties or road and districts, respectively, and each of said counties or districts legally shall be liable for full amount of bonds its so outstanding.” said, it and From what issued has been original it must be clear that while the construction of bridges may purpose, roads and constitute a dual and one accomplished appropriate which can be either State or taxation, it local does not follow that after such roads have completed projects been constructed and local bonds pay thereof, have been issued as local bonds to the cost payment similarly such can a that the bonds constitute justifying imposition dual of State taxes to 2 pay obligations, such local for the reason that Secs. 6 9 prohibit of Art. of the Constitution intervene to payment obligations of such with State funds. To hold clearly spirit purposes otherwise would transcend the payment 6 of Art. 9. of See. Since the of such bonds can lawfully “expenses State,” constitute raising Legislature for which purpose of revenue imposition limited of State taxes Sec. Art. levy taxes, if taxes, of these would repugnant be provision also to the latter of the Constitution. taxes, City taxes, as of Lowell support

In these In that case the Oliver, (Mass.) is cited. Allen levy cities a State tax to reimburse sustained the court soldiers. The Court previously paid to State bounties for legitimate is a object' appropriation says: “If ** * in principle distinction one, we can see no valid money object yet right specific to raise between defray right to it to the ex- accomplished and a raise object after has been attained.” penses of the same it “ If the postulate appropria- that assertion is important ’’ subsequent legitimate As explained tion is a one. 534, rais- Agawam Hampdon, v. 130 Mass. the case of function and remains ing support is State and of soldiers a notwithstanding municipality a has advanced such, that levy a tax State expense. the So the State later that apply not municipalities. reimburse such We can pay tax to the levy in this of a State principle the State obligations incurred for of counties and districts bonded building projects, local because of roads as See. of the by prohibits payment 9 of the the Art. Constitution obligations, consequently of such See. of Art. 9 State prevent pay of State taxes to levy intervenes to also ‘‘expenses they obligations, those local since are and consequently appropriation State taxes State” object.” purpose “legitimate such would not be In a bounties, although a municipality the case the soldiers’ money, thereby purpose first advanced the is not trans- obligation a pro- muted into form of which the State is pay the case issue, hibited assume as is under our being roads, here not to Constitution construct district) pay existing (or but to off an bonded debt. acts, districts, voluntary the counties and their Here fixed obligations, placed have the character these that the can not enter in a field of taxation State

them levy of State taxes. Leland, (N. Y.) 65, strongly In Wend. re- Thomas by appellants these taxes as to sustain lied raising money taxes, general purpose tax “the * * * a canal, public highway, was to ‘contract’ a which Legislature believed would be to benefit of the City Utica, such, independently of the bond the ordinary case is the one of local im- taxation to ‘make and prove’ highway.” provision No constitutional inhibited payment question. debt there in Our Constitu- payment tion inhibits the with State taxes of the debts here question. Cooley, (4th ed.) See also Taxation See. p. 3568.

For stated, gas the reasons the second and third can not be sustained as taxes. gas

Can the second and rationally third taxes be consistently regarded taxes ? judgment It is our they can, because the revenue to be derived therefrom applied solely is to be purpose. to local To raise revenue purposes for local Legislature sole aim of the in im- posing taxes. these directly

Whether a tax imposed by Legislature, but proceeds which applied are to be to local purposes, is a State tax or a subject tax seems to be the conflicting opinions. Pennsylvania

In it is held tax, that the character of a as a State or local tax by is determined the Act which imposition authorizes its by and not the use to be made the revenues to be derived therefrom. Elliott Phila delphia, 229 Pa. 215, 225.

In Jersey New it' held is that all directly by levied State, State, county whether for municipal purposes, are taxes. United N. J. R. R. v.Co. State Board of Assessors, 67 Atl. R. 438. legislative A declaration as to the

. character the tax great is of weight, although necessarily controlling. 95; See 251 U. S. 250 U. 459. In S. the absence of such express declaration, an however—and we have none these Acts—the purpose for which the revenue is to be raised, and which controlling it is to be applied, affords a guide to the nature of the tax in the superior absence of contravening indicia. principle expressed by Judge Cooley thus

Youngblood v. Sexton, 32 Mich. 406, 20 Am. R. 654:

“In sense, one undoubtedly, any tax levied general law tax; is a State but if moneys are to put uses, to local only substantial difference between that and one levied local action consists in this: one case the State levies tax, and in the other it levy. authorizes the All taxation must be authorized State, and we know of no reason why all taxation for the ordinary purposes govern- ment not be general under levied laws when no express provision of the Constitution forbids it. Such legislation is novelty no in this State or elsewhere. Highway and school very taxes are commonly levied way; in that the local authorities, as to them, some of having option, no being but put under legal compul- sion to assess and collect them. The school mill tax may be taken as an illustration. Collected under a general law, it was put nevertheless to the uses of the community paid which it; and it was in proper no anything sense more than a local tax. Neither is the ’’ tax question. now in

We conclude, therefore in the absence superior contra- and third that the second

dieting Act, circumstances taxes, be pre- it is to county are levied as since gas taxes levy. legislature the intended a valid that sumed county purpose the taxes, these taxes are Since levy is lawful. levy are their if these taxes taxes th$t

To hold State they county levy illegal, yet if are taxes their be would for application proceeds the a which and the to levy valid, a involves no tax, could not State is the State inconsistency thought principle. legislature If the or levy tax, power prescribe it has the power has the revenue, long to be made of the so as the use the use so is consistent with the Constitution. The Con- prescribed county a pay forbids the use of State tax to stitution bonds, county pur- but it use of a tax for that sanctions the county tax, however, If a the revenue pose. levied as be- county funds, not a State fund. These revenues comes treasury though custody State, never enter the may Treasurer, be thereof committed to Coun- ty ex-officio, virtue of express Treasurer an constitu- provision legisla- tional which will noticed later. The hereafter, as we shall ture, power also see has direct- county ly levy may purposes. an excise tax for It there- county apply payment obliga- fore revenue to the apportioned amongst tions, provided properly is it contemplates levy counties, as Constitution of coun- ty levy taxes for but purposes, county purposes. may importance

It be said that it is no to the tax- whether tax be a State tax a tax— payer or levy from thereof exacts him the same toll in event. It be conceded either that the con- taxpayer public same tributes the sum to either in- coffers But whether it is a State tax tax stance.

31 question prime importance apportionment the amongst tax the several counties, consequently the question answer to that exerts a vital influence re-distribution of the benefits amongst tax people pay who it. respect

With to the contention that if these taxes are levy compulsory levied taxes the direct and impairs principle thereof the State of “local self government,” let us now consider and ascertain the intent people respect that as evidenced adoption of the Constitution. dividing government

After of the State into three departments, legislative,- judicial, executive and the Con- stitution in 3 thereof, Articles and 4 offices, creates certain namely, Senators and members of Representa- House tives, a Cabinet, Governor and his to the incumbents of offices, together which with certain subordinate officers by law, governmental created are confided the affairs of legislative departments and executive of the State. These officers, together with Department the Judicial pro- government. vided Art. form the State The authori- ty of territorially these officers throughout extends State, except as judicial to certain of the officers. See Advisory Opinion, 13 Fla. 687.

Having thus constituted the State government, Con- stitution in Art. 8 directs its attention to local municipal affairs. In 1 Sec. of Art. 8 the Constitution ordains that “the State shall be divided political into di- visions to be called counties,” and Sec. of that Article provides that “the several they counties as now exist are hereby recognized legal political as the divisions of the ’’ requires State. Sec. 24 of Art. 3 Legislature to estab- system lish a uniform government. Sec. 8 contemplates

Art. counties, such, may incur in- duly prohibits authorized. Sec. debtedness when any county. county seat' of legislature removing from the general as the recognizes county commissioners 5 Sec. for provides 6 county. Sec. of board administrative in each electors county officers of the election gen- provide was to of which the obvious \eounty, of local administration for the officers erally local compensa- and duties functions, “powers, whose (cid:127)county ex- while the That is, law.” prescribed tion shall be recognized the Constitution of officers is istence these wholly powers are t'heir government, of part plan of our 544, Co., 54 Fla. Evening Parker News statutory. v. See 69 R. Ricker, 70 Fla. So. 309; R. 45 Bowden So. R. 805. 73 Fla. 74 So. 694; Stephens v. Futch, authority is limited to such officers territorial of county of- 12 all county. provides of that 15 Art. Sec. from the except' county paid shall be ficers, officers, school 10 Art. general respective of these counties. Sec. funds of county 18 officers. Sec. provides for first election of provide poor 3 13 for the requires county of Art. each county 3 Art 7 county. provides Sec. of that each legislature. shall have Art. representatives Sec. of county requires keep each that officer shall his office keep at the seat, and his records there. fundamentally powers It is that true all local have must origin grant by their in a the State which is the fountain of authority. Nevertheless, source provisions those just cognate the Constitution above and other quoted, pro- visions, clearly imply,—and spirit it is therefore the Constitution,—that performance of State functions shall be confided to officers; the performance of purely functions local concern be shall confided officers. clearly Save as is otherwise contem- plated by. the Constitution, compromise there can no origin with that principle, of which is more ancient than the Constitution itself. In a similar sub- England, division of ex- the realm of functions performance for the re- from the earliest clusively local in character existed recognized times, possessing English corded counties Taylor’s powers in concern. See purely matters of local Constitution, I,Vol Origin History English p. 41, 42; Vol. p. 190. Even when our Constitution II, adopted, existing transportation was facilities for coupled geographic with location communication, many counties, journey of our were such to the capital by legislative representatives resident such jour- counties often involved a tedious and devious ney of several -weeks. Such isolation from the seat of the government State rendered indispensable the continued performance by of local purely local functions officers delegated powers by whose prescribed were Constitution and origin statute. So settled and of such ancient was plan for that the administration of affairs of local purely subject concern that it did not express become the of an provision in the was Constitution, necessary, nor such when plainly it appears so from implications express of language that a preservation continuation and prin- n ciple as an incident to our form of government sowas clearly assumed. See 24 of our Rights pro- Declaration of vides: “This rights ennunciation cpp- of shall not be impair deny st'rued to others retained people.” That rights certain 'by are retained the people is therefore , clearly implied. says

This declaration and others, Mr. Justice Brown, speaking for in City this Court State v. of Stuart, 120 So. , ‘ R. even limit to some extent the exercise of- the 337 tremendous, but inherent and well powers, established, taxation and eminent domain.”

34 legislature

Under Sections 5 and 6 of Article 8, pos- plenary power sesses the “powers, over duties and com- pensation” in officers. Thus it was held State 349, v. 87 100 Fearnside, 256, Fla. So. that R. “there is nothing in prohibits legislature our Constitution enacting taking boards of away from statute from the only whole part, commissioners, but roads powers public their and control of supervision bridges, elsewhere, since lodging powers such highways is vested general public of all control limitation or any absolutely constitutional without State County, Lbr. v. Walton Jackson Co. restriction.” See also Fla. 363, So. 777; R. Johnson, 116 So. 630; R. Martin 477; County, State v. Walton So. R. 464. And Co., Muck So. R. it is v. Dade Land county tax appropriate here refer to the fact that col- by the State in are utilized officers and other local lectors taxes, might a sense which of State local collection purely of a officers these performance to be be said function, non-discretionary but that ministerial usage, and long the sanction has received custom in no duties local officers these wise performance officers vested these the discretion with interferes it Conversely, long has of their local duties. performance officers to collect for State automobile practice been taxes and to remit company license express county pro- as taxes as portion counties .thereof several performed by These functions the State by statute. vided not interfere additional duties do with are officers as State But duties officers. constitutional their county part officers as a of our form of local existence performance purely and for the local government, func- by Constitution, clearly recognized although tions, possesses powers possible legislature the broadest nature consistent with the constitutional existence of those officers, in determining powers the extent of their local and duties. Therefore, legislature while the may shape local regulate institutions and the frame work of local government with powers, reference to local it can not abrogate these constitutionally recognized institutions take to itself the complete and of local direct exercise functions in purely matters of local concern.

It is county contended in this that a arm case is mere agency of the merely State—that it is “the act- ing locally.” foregoing resume of our constitutional system negatives theory this so far as the administration purely local affairs is concerned. It is true that a county agency is an of the having State, no inherent power, but deriving powers its wholly from sovereign paraphrase language It is also true, State. of one herein, principle self-govern- the briefs that the of local ment county does not constitute independent each “an sovereignty, managed by having legal a board rights.” Nevertheless, their as existence local entities for pur- local poses well their legal existence as political divisions recognized State is the Constitution. The same power legislature, namely, which created the sovereign recognized people, counties. While a in the performance of certain agency functions is an armor State, it is something also more than that. If a were no more than agent a mere State,—the acting locally,-—bonds issued a county would effect constitute State bonds, and therefore virtue of Sec. 6 of Art. 9 of the Constitution would be void ab initio. While the agency is an of the State, it is un- also, der our Constitution, to some extent at an least, autono- mous, self-governing political entity with respect ex- clusively local affairs, performance of which func-

36 State, for creator, the and it from its distinguished tions mat acting purely in local obligations and when acts its seen; This, as have we responsible. not ters State-is validity of .the to sustain in order be conceded must 116 So. County, Walton Co. v. Lbr. bonds. See Jackson W. R. 85 N. City Lac, of Fon du 771; R. O’Connor Hurl 115; People v. E. R. Wirth, 45 N. 327; Rathbone v. 103, prin 9 Am. R. seq.; 44, 89, 93, burt, Mich. et though in-view approve generally, ciples which cases we the-plenary legislature cities, power over w.e.de apply Johns, R. to 228, clined State v. So. th.ese legislative appointment..of a certain to defeat principles (4th Ed.) 415; Cooley, Cooley, city officers. Taxation Sec. McQuillen (7th Ed.) p. 334; Lim. Munc. Const. seq. Corp. 164, et Sec. n Article 9 to taxation and relates of the Constitution ‘‘ - legislature shall ordains thereof

finance. Sec. defray ex- to raising revenue sufficient provide for' year, and also a sufficient fiscal for each penses existing in- and interest pay principal to sum Having prescribed thus State.” debtedness State, attention is defraying expenses for means governmental subdivisions. given needs of local .to the power impose has Ho inherent course Of if must derived from power, exists, it' be taxes. The legislature 5 Art. 9 that “the shall provides State. Sec. incorporated counties and ‘authorize’ several cities for impose and towns the State assess municipal pur- for other purposes,, no * * (cid:127) *. poses -legislature may provide' also for levying special capitation tax ‘and a tax on licenses.’ capitation year tax one But shall exceed dollar a applied .exclusively and shall pur- common school poses.” provided raising Thus the means is revenue

37 county municipal purposes perform- for local and ance of local functions. clear,

It is that our Constitution contemplates therefore, exclusively accomplished by that an purpose State must be taxation; exclusively purpose, State an in which sovereign interest, by county the State no taxation. has etc., 557; Cooley, R. 108 W. R. Chicago, State, R. Co. v. N. 687; 13 Fla. Taxation, Advisory Opinion, Sec. 314. See In v. 21 R. 290. So. 367, 38 Fla. State v. Burns, held that the 514, 33 R. this Court 623, 44 Fla. So. Dickson, valorem levy an ad compel not legislature could purpose. In exclusively an Jordan tax for 298, R. the issue of County, 68 Fla. 66 So. 48, v. Duval county ad valorem tax to levy of a bonds armory approved an was this Court because erect legislative act not thé “authorized but did command” bonds, iii legislature issuance of the the act the reason ably recognized in the circumstances erection of county purpose. See also armory a dual State 42 197, 52 Fla. Pilot Comr's., Board of County Comrs. v. 196; County v. Jackso 697; 120 A. S. R. Duval R. So. (2nd 196, 339; 18 R. nville, Cooley, Taxation, Fla. So. 36 petition on Ed.) Lakeland, 314. In A. C. L. See. particular it “A re-hearing, 115 R. was said: 672, 686, So. lawfully locality be taxed for the cost district or can ’’ benefit; only undertaking general which results in a of an single may project But a some instances constitute may justify levy of ap and therefore dual purpose; See Skinner v. 26 propriate Henderson, 464; 118, Leon 91 121, County, Fla. 7 So. R. Lewis v. Fla. 146; Jackson Lbr. County, R. Co. v. Walton So. 771; R. Fla. 116 So. Rushton v. State, 422; Fla. 345; DeLand, 78 So. R. Stuart v. 71 Fla. etc., 71 So. imposed R. 32. And a local tax by competent one, local essentially a project authority where general indirect and some incidental may be though there 263; 13 Pac. R. 27 Portland, Port of v. benefit. See Cook 744; Steiner R. 163 Pac. 533; Clausen, v. L. R. A. State (4th Ed.), 286; Taxation Sullivan, Cooley, 23 N. W. R. v. 812, 86 So. 80 Fla. 315; Owen, v. see also Hunter Sec. general of large a to a extent project 839. And when R. a local peculiarly and benefits benefit, especially but also just community may be taxed for a the local community, or proportion appropriate special to such the cost (4th Ed.), 315; peculiar Taxation See. Cooley, benefits. Williams, v. Atl. 24. held State R. It has also been high authority case, that in a such when circum- and justifies stances as to the coordinate local benefit it, community local taxed for the whole cost. Mobile v. Kimball, 102 691, U. S. L. Ed. 238. But seé Hasbrouck opinion v. a Milwaukee, Wis. well reasoned to the contrary. also (4th See Taxation Cooley, Ed.), Sec. 428.

If, however, Legislature undertook impose to a tax people county pay one alone salary to State officers created Articles 4 and 5 of the Constitution, or if the State undertook tax a single county alone for the erection of a building such as a State Capitol Prison, or State Asylum, or State Insane there would be no in saying hesitation there was no such power in the Legislature, because such a tax would at least violate the guaranty constitutional equal protection of Ryerson the law. See Utley, v. 16 Mich. 269. if Likewise, a tax were imposed upon people of the whole State to pay salary given of local officers county, of a or to erect building public purpose purely of a local na- serve ture, wholly any governmental unrelated to State, county or function of the poor as for instance a farm a stockade for county the confinement of prisoners, or a county purpose, statute as a hospital authorized seriously deny such a that the collection of' no one would intendment, letter, of the clear if not the tax would flout 286; Sullivan, 77 N. W. R. Steiner our Constitution. (4th Ed.) 318. Cooley, Taxation See. principle a tax of the

There is no difference between just imposed and a tax a State tax nature mentioned obligations throughout pay the entire the bonded building of roads the several counties incurred bridges, building bridges such roads and when the solely previously undertaken and consummated has been (or district) such project, as a the status of exclusively obligations previously bonded fixed as (or district) obligations. though even the This is true building public may constitute a dual State and roads though instances, appropriate function in and even bridges constructed as or district roads so may projects also be beneficial to State. question “flexibility”

On of the so-called of our Con- changes wrought by stitution meet the modern condi- tions, pertinent it is to note here the views Supreme expressed Court of the United States in Euclid v. Ambler Co., Invest. S. U. L. Ed. 303. It was there said with reference to the Federal Constitution: “While the meaning guaranties varies, of constiutional scope never application of their expand must or contract to meet the constantly new and different conditions coming which are operation. of their changing within field In a world * * * impossible it is that it Regu- should be otherwise. lations, wisdom, necessity validity which as applied conditions, existing apparent they are so uniformly are century ago, now a even half sustained, a century ago, probably rejected would have been as arbi- trary and oppressive.” To that wholesome doctrine we necessity for a unified present But neither

subscribe. system “through” to accommodate demands roads by automobile, nor a desire to render of modern' travel payment aid to of bonded State local subdivisions by constructing obligations incurred them local roads already completed projects but which State local system willing accept to now as beneficial to State wide pow justification centralizing for roads, any affords contemplated by in a ers of local taxation manner Constitution, ignoring sep for barriers nor constitutional necessity arating government. and local system highways may conceded, such be and additional may imperative, revenue for local but such subdivisions objects accomplished those must be the means contem by plated our Constitution and with methods consistent government thereby principles the fundamental or dained. The can one Constitution not be made to mean thing time, subsequent at one and another at time. some Butler, 70 Fla. 69 So. R. 771. county taxes, it gas are third the second

As the Legislature whether to consider pertinent next becomes officers, may levy local directly compel the levy, or By “county tax,” throughout used tax. of a exclusively county pur- an meant tax for opinion, is this sovereign or re- no interest pose in which the State-has with no connection the duties and which has sponsibility, in its relation- to State: of the any upon opinion decide do not this to We intend directly power legislature to question relating to the -taxes, for district as instances impose certain local Everglades Drainage formed local District districts petition. being specific There no limitation the Consti- upon levy tution the formation of the direct such-districts, in' upon of taxes that character rests part principles Lainhart v. those now consideration. than under other R. 47. Catts, 73 Fla. 75 So. 735, had under Cheney Jones,

In the Court Fla. impos- legislature consideration the limitations levying distinctly State taxes. It ing was held .in State to the legislature taxes is limited de- fraying expenses In that case the Court State. was not with power legislature concerned directly impose Moreover, taxes purposes. Court in that had imposition case under consideration the valorem,

adof only. What is said there has reference only an ad valorem tax imposed as a tax. When (now it is said therein that the section under consideration 9) legislature of Art. prescribes Sec. far the go how levying “in taxes,” necessarily the Court levy- meant “in ing ad valorem taxes purposes.” question for State No concerning an tax excise was so presented, the Court did not concern itself with that nor matter, provisions with the of the Constitution with reference again thereto. We af- firm what was said in Cheney v. Jones applied to the character of taxation there under consideration, namely, an ad valorem tax for State purposes, levied under Sec. 2 of 9Art of the Constitution.

Here, however, we are concerned with an excise or tax, license levied as a county tax. We must, therefore, consider provisions other of the Constitution, including Sec. 5 of Art. 9. In Article of the Constitution the people recognized ‘‘ ’’ legal political

counties divisions of the pro- vided for officers. In Sec. 2 of Art. 9 the Consti- requires legislature tution itself provide revenue defray expenses sufficient to of the State. In Sec. 5 of pertains Art. which levy to the of taxes to meet' the county (and expense local municipal) government the ‘‘ legislature that The shall is command of the Constitution incorporated cities and ‘authorize’ the counties several in for towns impose’ and to ‘assess purpose.” no other municipal purposes, and for and 9 that 5 of Art. of Sec. language that in the urged It is counties,” the several shall ‘authorize’ legislature “the legis- that “when implied is only limitation etc., impose taxes, such and to assess authorizes counties lature to assess an authorization shall limited to authorization county purposes only,” impose such taxes power of imply upon the that a limitation it “does directly legislature impose” taxes on the counties county purposes. for local of Art. 9 is con 2 and 5 language Sections When the our in light and is considered trasted, however, light construc government and stitutions Cheney 9 in of Art. placed what is now Sec. tion that supra, judgment the framers Jones, v. it is our legis withhold from the did Constitution intended to directly compel power levy, lature or to exclusively an county ad valorem tax for local levy, already herein. Local administra local defined is, exclusively affairs which affairs, local tion sovereign such, undoubtedly interest State has no To contemplated our withhold co Constitution. power ordinate of local determination as to taxation in exclusively concern, matters of local would leave little of (4th government. Cooley, local Taxation Ed.), See Sec. seq.; et Jackson Lbr. v. Co. Walton County, 116 So. People 771; Mayor, R. v. etc., 17; Pope Ill. v. Phifer, (Tenn.) 700; Morgan Heisk v. Sehusselle, 81 E.N. 814; People R. v. Common Council of 28 Mich. Detroit, 228; Glades v. Board of Water Commissioners, 122 Mich. 366; People Village of Pelham, 109 N. R. 513; E.

43 Omaha, 871; v. 200 N. W. R. 610; 46 A. L. R. 602, Cooley, (7th Ed.), Const. Lim. p. 337. t'o clearly

We wish be understood, however, that just view expressed with county to reference local taxes exclusively levy ad valorem for an confined to the of is, local a purpose, purpose that which the has no State sovereign responsibility interest and which has no con- nection with the duties the county of in its relation State. legislature To the rule that the power has no levy or compel county levy a county a ad valorem tax there are exceptions as well established as the itself, rule of some which it will well be to notice here order to any avoid misunderstanding of the scope just of the rule stated. Amongst exceptions those are:

(1) When the of the tax is one of both local and general concern, is, that purpose, dual sup- such as the port public schools, protection public health, safety and morals, and the construction of roads and such bridges, roads and bridges constituting parts of the system of highways, as to which the State has plenary control, but the “construction” of roads and bridges parts system of the State highways is to be distinguished payment from the or district obligations expended of which for proceeds were roads bridges already as purely projects. constructed local So this Court approved legislature has an act' of the re- quiring a purchase board commissioners to land since, the erection of court house, explained by Mr. in a concurring opinion, Justice “it is of im- such Brown portance to the there a reasonably adequate court (the house each that it building of a court house) exclusively is not a county purpose.” State v. Tyler, R. 760. Apgar So. See also v. Wilson, So. 78; City Chicago R. v. Manhattan Cement Co., 53 N. E. 321; Richmond 848; Pace, 69 A. S. R. A. 68; 45 L. R.

R. R. 212. Bass, Pac. 647; Rogers v. E. R. 103 So. county require the tax is to of the purpose When the (2) duty legal politi- its as “a fully perform properly to is, agency in an State State,” division of cal power Obviously, possesses State to government. insurgency government. No local prevent a condition of community right the inherent to decide for itself local has legitimate will or will bear its share of whether it general pertaining government, in matters burdens right. Legislature could not confer such a the State directly impose tax, excise, therefore ad valorem or purpose enforcing legitimate sole for the contribution general several counties expense to the of the State purposes, purpose for State even when exclusive of any purpose. local element of

(3) imposition necessary When the of such a tax is county compel obligation a lawful resting to fulfill consequence corporate it in action taken virtue authority sovereign State, derived from the as for in- payment stance the of its bonds. foregoing excepted (1)

In each of the cases, (3), sovereign has a purpose interest for which the Consequently tax exclusively is levied. is not purpose, a local and such a tax would exclusively not be possesses local tax. Therefore the State ample sovereign power in directly levy such cases to such a tax, excise, compel levy by ad valorem or or to its local officers. In such cases in which the sovereign State also has a in- terest, people right to be taxed have no absolute ato in determining voice whether the levied, tax shall be save they may through be representatives heard their Legislature.

45 yet exception, a fourth There remains to considered taxes, inhibiting in the case of excise or to the rule license levy by the direct the State of a tax.

Having provided raising in Sec. of Art. for the expenses State, revenue to meet the under thé clearly language Legislature of which Section could taxes, impose taxes, excise or license as well as ad valorem purpose; having provided for a State and after Sec. Legislature of Art. that the shall “authorize” the sev- ' ‘‘ ’’ impose eral counties to assess and purposes, which ad also would embrace both valorem taxes., immediately excise there follows almost in the same provision: Legislature may Section the further “The also ’’ provide levying licenses, is, for a tax on that excise taxes. (Italics supplied.) significant It is that the latter provi- relating sion is found in Sec. 5 of 9Art. to municipal taxation, provision already having been made raising for purposes, revenue for State under which excise as well as ad valorem imposed taxes could be for State purposes. significant It although is also that capitation the tax, sentence, required authorized the same ap- to be plied exclusively designated a purpose, to purpose no of application specified taxes, was for except license of course necessarily applied that it must purpose to if county tax, levy as a because in the levied of State taxes Legislature by 2 the is confined Sec. of Art. 9 to State purposes.

We can not assume that of the framers our Constitution idly. impute purpose used words We must some to the language found in 5 of 9 Legislature Sec. Art. that “the may provide levying also for a tax on licenses.” The designed accomplish object. clause was some It is our judgment quoted provision that virtue of the found 9 contemplates 5 of Art. the Constitution only Sec. not 46 several counties may “authorize” Legislature “Legisla- but the taxes, impose license excise

assess levying or license excise provide “also” ture” authority having been confined to This broad taxes. then view of purposes, for State levy of such taxes levy all taxes not in- power of the State inherent authority Federal Constitutions hibited levy by Legislature of such taxes for extends to Gunn, 285, 84 Fla. Amos v. purposes. See local 615. R. So. provision object quoted we not the If that was utterly superfluous, be- it, would be disregard for it must levy Legislature could an Art. 9 the under Sec. of cause portion the first purposes, and under tax for State excise Legislature could “authorize” the 5 of Art. of Sec. purposes. levy local officers for local súch a tax quoted phrase was to then, Unless, im- authority Legislature to “also” recognize the county purposes, what was its taxes for local pose excise has been followed since with object? practice 6421, taxes, Chap. occupational license see reference to 1920; 1051, L. 804 R. G. S. Sec. C. G. Sec. Acts 1915, levying Acts of Chap. 6881 1927. See also being the first operation automobiles, taxes oh license tax. county tax, the second a State phrase expressed here as to The view consideration, well as the fact that it was intended as under merely taxes and occu- all license or excise not

to embrace by history taxes, is sustained pational license 1885, Convention of which phrase in the Constitutional Convention, proceeding of that on found will be and 350. 186, 269, 273 to pages may “provide” levying for such excise Legislature by delegated thereof imposition a direct or either taxes authority levy to local pur- officers to such tax a for local pose. With taxes, reference' to excise the choice of method rests Legislature. with the Williams, See Canova v. Fla. 509, 27 So. R. holding may Legislature that the delegate to authority cities the impose and collect license taxes. The rule would be the same as to counties. gas

Since the second and third taxes are taxes, excise regarded county and since taxes be as these taxes for authority purposes, and since the Legisla- of the tax impose ture to such a for directly purposes is expressly recognized by quoted provision of See. Art. 9, levy we conclude that the of said second and third gas valid, taxes taxes is no principle violates government contemplated by of local self the Constitution. The administration of such taxes the Board of Admin- provided by One, istration Senate Bill will be considered later.

Second, apportionment as to the of the second and third gas amongst taxes the several counties:

Wé have demonstrated that these imposed taxes are State, county, taxes, not and we so hold. requirement

There is no constitutional that taxes levied taxes, is, general as State “expense State,” expended or shall be particular community disbursed Legislature where collected. The wide, has if plenary apportionment application discretion proceeds tax, of a except as restrained the Con- Hauge, stitution. State v. 289; N. W. R. L. R. A. 522; Cooley, (4th 1918 A ed.), Taxation Sec. 1813. State imposed as such and collected from all the counties may properly expended in the construction of a State road located in one wholly county, only or few coun- ties, building wholly located county. in one

n uniformity, equality and intrinsic also that It is settled in- taxes,.is not imposition of ad valorem essential v. Hiers excise taxes. imposition in dispensable 326; 60 64 Fla. 81; Neff, Jackson Mitchell, 116 So. R. But in the Shaw, Ex 157 Pac. R. 900. 350; parte So. R. geographic uni- must be imposition of taxes there excise par- which throughout taxing district to formity suph nor be laid applies, a tax can neither tax and ticular to taxing districts so as amongst different apportioned for the bene- taxing district people tax the of one effect in which the for a taxing fit of another district Cooley, Taxa- have no concern. people of the district taxed seq. 348 et tion, (4th Ed.) 310-318, Secs. one tax in county excise a may impose legislature

The tax imposed as a if another, but and not in 'county county revenue, tax would of such proceeds throughout imposed uniformly must be tax such im- legislature The which the tax levied. county in privileges, or privilege, tax one class pose an excise on higher privilege at on one another, or rate and not on however, legislature power, has no another. The than on the people tax on of the whole an excise impose even comity purpose. exclusively purely attain a State to power impose an Conversely, legislature has no excise any county alone, group of of one people tax defray general expense, than all, counties less special from which such counties receive' no benefits not enjoyed all. comnion gas

As the second and third taxes, are taxing county. apportionment territorial unit is the revenue from both these taxes must therefore be to the several in the proportion counties collected therein re- spectively, proportion to the bonded indebted- apportion ness. To such according revenue to the bonded of the several counties would result some indebtedness counties, receiving' less collected in counties than is those than col- while other much more counties would receive compelled that to so would lected the former be therein, denying the contribute to the thus latter, debts of the equal being protection of tax the law, the counties, and the bonded of pay to the bonds the several off being in the same of the several counties indebtedness An gasoline proportion relative sales the therein. lead “equal” amongst several, division counties would result, county tax, greater when tax is a to the same being amount collected counties in others. some than county tax raised county funds have been When legislature has no such imposed purposes, for revenue may take the raised that it control funds so over one moneys so collected from citizens county, it the benefit of the citizens of another divert to directly by legisla- the tax though imposed was even we aware which principle of which are is no ture. There power taxing within it is the doctrine sanctions to contribute legislature compel one system of another. Under our constitutional debts arbitrary power government, or unlimited is not com- any legislative; government, mitted to branch of the State judicial. though the legislature Even executive impose county purposes, excise taxes can not take it the revenue thus raised in for county purposes one county, the debts other pay it some appropriate funds public that as revenue is assumption leg- it' itself, must at the legislature act raised disposal. principle If that taxa- islature’s absolute so, go together will representation have vanished'. tion and 286; Foster, v. 99 Pac. R. Simon v. Northrup, Yemhill See 560; Hampshire Franklin, R. v. 83; Pac. 16 Mass. In Davis, Edwards v. 398; Flatbush, 60 N. Y. Lands in re: Mayor Philadelphia, 359; Sharpless W. R. 24 So. Savings Ass’n. v. 759; 147; 59 Am. Dec. Citizens Pa. St. 455; v. (U. S.) 655; 22 L. Ed. Terrett Topeka, Wall 20 650; v. (U. 43, 3 L. Ed. Merriwether S.) 9 Taylor, Cranch 472; 197; 26 L. Ed. Mainstee Lbr. Co. S. Garrett, U. Utley, 468; Ryerson Twp. Springfield, of 52 N. W. R. v. 1818; Mich. 269; (4th Ed.), 1817, Cooley, Taxation Sec. seq. 26 R. C. L. et 41, 335, 69, So. R. 97 Fla. City Stuart,

In v. of State that through Mr. held Justice speaking this Court Brown, legislature over power of plenary in of even view the legislature Constitution, 8, 8, the had under Art. Sec. cities city of a so as power arbitrarily enlarge no the limits to contiguous essentally of rural compel the residents but territory operation of to contribute to the debts cost municipality. of 314, it is said: (4th Sec. Ed.), Cooley

In on Taxation authorizing contributions to legislature "An Act a purpose or for private purpose, for a mere levied be people from one in which the though public, it be is which, they interest, have no would not be whom are exacted commanding periodical payment law, but a sentence another. portion people certain sums or class of one principle acceptance ap- This has met with universal ’’ proval because it is as sound in morals as it in law. is with what was said in the herein conflicts Nothing said v. opinion Johnson, concluding paragraph Chap. Chap. R. 477. When 6883 and 363, 72 So 71 Fla. consideration, under there are con- 6881, Acts materia, pari the result is that the fifteen per strued collected, license taxes automobile which cent of all was the required subject Chap. 6883, and which was paid be for the Treasurer to the State maintenance of the State tax. a State and collected as levied is Department, Road the taxes tax from distinguishes that completely fact That here under consideration. third apportionment to the this view against

As may although these taxes be urged that gas it tax, ostensibly upon levied may they be although taxes, and really they are retail dealer gasoline, paid v. (See Panhandle Oil Co. upon consumer 857; Foster 72 L. Ed. Co. 277 U. Mississippi, S. 570; 47 A. L. R. and hence 917), 285 W. R. Graham, So. a tax analysis taxes constitute in the ultimate these although consumption gasoline; gasoline county, gasoline bought in one the same is used-indis- criminately territory embracing, many over a perhaps, Therefore, contended, justifica- counties. it is there is no fixing in tax, tion the situs of the purposes appor- for of tionment, in county the in gasoline which bought, the is it because is in consumed the indiscriminate use of roads in other counties. gasoline

In reciprocal. this use' of is respect, the Gaso- County in purchased might line Leon be in used several along County. No. 1 Conversely, counties Road to Duval gasoline purchased County in Duval might be used in Leon and in the intervening counties. The County, claim that principal termini counties would 'profit thus over inter- vening largely counties dispelled by is of statistics the State, which show that proportion the gasoline of pur- chased in the several counties coincides substantially with population. all

Furthermore, purchasable taxes on commodities are passed along to the consumer in one form or another. Re- gardless of whether ultimately the tax is paid by the dealer or the consumer, it is a tax either on privilege the dealer to sell, or on privilege the of the customer pur- wholly in privilege is exercised event the In either

chase. occurs, even purchase county where the sale the commodity purchased so though consumption the But that does occur other counties. sometimes tax of distribution. alter situs of the 84 Fla. 94 So. R. a tax this In Amos v. Gunn, gasoline. a tax was on sale character construed deny county in which a No one would that' the (which occupation directly tax is levied license collected is legislature, 1927), See. 1051 Rev. see Gen. Stats. is a revenue which that retain, must be allowed to locally whether it be collected county, county. officers for the benefit Such taxes are levied upon privilege conducting the several businesses and occupations in- respective counties. The merchant, especially the merchant, wholesale exercises the privilege selling given his wares in a county, but these are wares frequently used and consumed in other counties. The shoe merchant sells shoes that are worn the streets and roads of other counties and cities; the automobile dealer sells automobiles which are used and upon the roads of other counties; grocer groceries sells which are con- sumed in counties, yet other it would not seriously con- tended that of situs, where privilege of sale, or of carrying on the business exercised, should divide the revenue so derived with other counties into which the commodities sometimes be taken for consumption or use.

Though the gasoline derived from revenue taxes has largely constructing been used roads, and though it is peculiarly appropriate for that purpose, nevertheless the primary of the tax in present basis its form is not as a tax upon the use of roads, upon but privilege the of selling gasoline. paid This tax must regardless be of whether along the an automobile propelling in gasoline is to used be stationary en a boat, aeroplane, or in a motor an roads, or percentage a purposes latter substantial for which gine, is used paid, this tax is gasoline sold, and on which it strictly speaking, fisheries, and the like. So sawmills, place a the tax is to can not said that the be justify apportionment roads, on the use of its tax so A theory. might imposed upon on that' tax or that toll be privilege appropriate mileage in as on or cases, a basis (See ley & otherwise Car Hamilton v. 74 L. Ed. Snook, (U. S.) 250) and different rules of and ap construction portionment might apply to such a tax. necessarily compared to be gasoline

These taxes are upon oper- with respect this automobile license might susceptible of automobiles. latter ation ultimately roads, a upon construction as tax the use of though question. we do not now consider that' true, tax, of a it is apportionment

The distribution invalidity levy, so that the separate from in a sense validity necessarily affect the may not apportionment of the levy if tax is levy. Nevertheless, of the of. uniformly by legislature, proceeds of the but laid reference arbitrarily apportioned without tax are taxing districts in and for units or' collected sums (in are collected this ease which the taxes the benefit of counties), the result is as much denial of several though levy uniformity equal protection as itself uniformity. similarly lacking in was majority court, opinion the distribu- In the tax the basis of bonded of the third relative tion hold, invalid. of the several counties is We indebtedness therefore, specific provisions Act, as well under the principles law, upon general that the alternative Act, is, apportionment'provided method of 54 in proportion to the amounts collected the several be in

counties, respectively, apportioning must followed gas amongst third second and the several coun- ties. Mr. particular

The view of Justice Whitfield this respect as the in proportion is that distribution to bonded validity, be indebtedness of doubtful he con- therefore holding in the that the curs here alternative distribution proportion to the amounts collected in the coun- several ties, provided Act, be followed.

As apportionment gas to the of the fourth tax: The apportionment is, of school taxes under our Con- question stitution, generis. sui See v. L’Engle, 40 24 400; 541; Fla. So. R. Constitution, Art. 12. Sec. of Art. Constitution, as it has remained since amendment adopted 1894, is: shall be

“Provision made law apportion- for the ment and distribution on interest the State School Fund, and all including other means provided, special tax, support maintenance public free schools among the several counties the- proportion State in average attendance schools in the said respectively.” counties In 1926 9 of Sec. Art. was amended to read as follows:

“In provided addition to the tax for in Section County this Article the School Fund shall consist proportion of the interest of the State School Fund and of one apportioned mill State tax capitation all county, taxes collected within the coun- ty and all appropriations Legislature which County shall with all other School Funds appor- by provided law be and distributed tioned as by County Board Public of be disbursed the and shall solely maintenance support’and of Instruction Provided, apportionment that such public free schools: by general made based shall be law and distribution of classification to be principle de- upon some declared by Legislature.” termined together. 9 Art. 12 be 7 and of must construed

Sections mandatory containing apportionment a method of 7, Sec. modified, to has been the extent school funds of embraced in Sec. 9 of operation proviso effective Art. not 1926, 7 of 12 was amended but Sec. Art. as 9 of by of the amendment Sec. adoption repealed containing The effect of proviso mentioned. Art. upon question of together, two considered Sections is 9 of Art. 12 funds, that Sec. apportionment of school Legislature authority yields to the the Constitution “by general revenue apportion school proper a statute principle classification upon declared law based some ’’ Legislature. determined be 14573, Chapter held See. The chancellor has that 3^2 law, appor- that such Acts of constitutes ‘‘ ’’ for, upon aggregate provided a basis of tionment therein counties, must be followed in the several attendance gas tax. the fourth distribution two-thirds of law 14573, supra, general is a Conceding Chapter that law, assuming special from a but distinguished pro- apportionment therein deciding that the method of principle of a “declared vided for school funds 9 of contemplated proviso in See. classification” may effect of the further, Art. whatever apportion- Chapter upon the provisions 3y2 of See. of that purposes “special ment revenue” for school ' for, particular provided question we not now Act do it is it that the presented, decide because not now is clear of Chapter 14573, supra, title which is:

“AN Providing- Raising Special for the of ACT of in Purpose Revenue for the Education State This Gasoline; By An Providing Upon Additional Tax Property an Ad Valorem Tax Real on all and Personal Appropriating State and All Interest Received All Deposit on in State Monies on the Various Banks the of State.” provisions 3y2

is not sufficient to embrace the of of Sec. apportion purporting Act and “all distribute in Treasury funds the State to the of public credit free school fund.” Wade v. Atlantic Co., Lbr. Fla. 628, So. R. 72. necessarily (Sen-

It Chap. supra, follows that Bill legislature ate has 5) provided appropriated and revenue for public schools, contemplated by free as of ap- amended See. 9 Art. but' has made no effective portionment proviso thereof under of that Section. Therefore, apportionment and of distribution two- gas thirds the fourth tax must be “t'o the several coun- proportion ties in average State to the attendance the. respectively” schools in said provided counties as Sec. of Art. 12 of the Constitution, such funds to be used in the several county counties for purpoáfes. school It is unnecessary specifically classify this tax to determine whether it is a tax, or a county tax, whether it is apportionment either event its is controlled by the Con- ' ... stitution. remaining

As to the one-third of the fourth gas tax: legislature course, Of’ could impose a State excise tax construction roads distribute it ‘. n equally” counties, sovereign amongst the several having revenue, save complete control over its own as limited the Constitution. While the construction county roads it a dual function constitute State and It only. county function may properly constitute also one- apportioned legislature to us that when appears of roads ‘‘the gas tax for construction of the fourth third apportioned” it is bridges to which accomplishment of primarily the had in mind legislature with purpose, building by the road county, although local roads in reference desirable parts of the might also become roads some of them these view, to the system highways. leads This State’s im- gas fourth tax is hold that one-third wé such amongst apportioned and county posed as tax must in each proportion in the collected counties the several county. .(cid:127) from derived to of the revenue

Third, application as the taxes: these impo- legislature may compel the we have the seen,

'As requiring the ful- purpose of local for the of taxes sition of counties or other local subdi- obligations of fillment through corporate action of the incurred visions derivej The authority from the State. taken virtue of therefore, application the of the legislature direct may, gas to the and third taxes derived from second revenue bonds, county bridge road and payment'of the levy county of legislature also the The direct maintaining roads, constructing the of and for- system high- forming part roads of.the State’s of such may, ways. therefore, appli- direct' the legislature ‘‘ gas of the cation one-third of the tax to con- fourth the - bridges of and it struction roads to which n nn - nnn " . apportioned.” is the fourth one-third of of this apportionment That the gas third must the and tax, taxes, well as of second gas as there- proportion collected counties be to the several already pointed out. been in, has application The distribution two-thirds gas Constitution, tax for schools is controlled fourth already pointed Art. out. Sec. as application proceeds second and As gas payment' special district roads third taxes to bridge apportionment amongst after the sev- bonds, already pointed eral counties in the manner out: opinion, It is the of the writer well as of view of this Mr. the proceeds Justice that of the second and Ellis gas applied payment third taxes must be to the bonds It only, district bonds. is true Constitution specific against payment erects no barrier against pay- of district bonds county, it does bonds, by ment bonds, other local State. express There is no relating limitation the Constitution levy by legislature pur- of taxes local district poses. In opinion just of those members of the Court mentioned, above however, necessarily it does not follow that the power the,legislature in that transcendent respect.

Undoubtedly origin- these district roads could have been ally county projects constructed as county and with funds. they But were not people so The constructed. of the dis- voluntarily tricts chose to construct them as district projects they regarded because them peculiar as of benefit to people the of the district. This was done without the participation consent or of people of portions the other of county. The county construction of roads is accom- plished according to recognized one plan, construction essentially dif- and according to another roads of district 630. R. 112 So. County, Walton plan. ferent See guarantees protection equal process The due to of taxation the burden clearly imply that Constitution only upon obligation laid existing must be public pay off an Cooley on Taxa- In obligation rest's. whom the those any ex- it said: “To (4th is 314, p. Sec. Ed.), tion in order to relieve compelled pay man to tent that is one resting upon them, his public properly others of a burden and as plainly property private is taken for purposes appropriated payment palpably as it would be if to people obligations or the which the discharge debts par- might private owe to payments thus relieved his ’’ ties. ' voluntarily have been obligations Here the district district of t'he people alone, assumed created and under no obli- county large at obligation. The a district bonds. They are district pay to those bonds. gation pro- county taxes,, and the gas taxes are and third second ap- bonds in the district' county funds. To include ceeds gas third proceeds of the second plication of the authorize) people (not compel to would be effect the construction t'o large contribute, at county, but to the might a road which benefit they have not obligation which existing payment of an upon a defined but which rests created nor assumed county only. I cannot assent to portion established large at t'he compelling people of plan district existing debt, an established as a to contribute people of the of which neither the in the creation debt, representatives, any had nor large, at their chosen Stanley decided Nov. (Montana) v. Jeffries voice. See Pac. R. 134. 1929,

In Brevard County, term, 'decided at this the Act “authorized” did “compel” but assumption the county the obligations. district The action of the county officials of County Brevard voluntarily taking over the obligations district authority under as distin- guished compulsion from the legislature, tantamount people to the of the acting through their county, chosen representatives, county commissioners, voluntarily as- suming the obligations, legislature having de- district clared county the district roads to be roads beneficial to the In us, such. the case now before however, apply proceeds of the second and third taxes to the payment of obligations district in invitum, would be therefore compulsory. The legislature might authorize the several counties to take over district' bonds, pro- ceeds'of expended which were the construction of roads .for which constituted appropriate an county purpose, as it has done with County by reference to Brevard Chapt 1929; 13937, Acts of Having done if so; author- voluntarily ities then assume the district-bonds as a indebtedness substituting county therefor, bonds these latter might bonds participate application in. proceeds gas legislature if fit sees to remove provision restricting participating bonds is- those .to prior April sued 1929. This would not be an indirec- In tion. t'he circumstances last the people named through counties, their chosen will representatives, have voluntarily assumed the indebtedness as for a which is appropriate county purpose in view an. character of roads. hand,

On the other however, Mr. Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice and Mr. Justice Buford are of t'he Brown opinion should, that district ap- bonds included plication of these funds for the same reason stated in The this decided at County Brevard, of Florida v. of view that term, being of the Court of the these members applica- the legislature may as authorize the direct as well subject, purposes, for the tion of levied and funds the imposed the and collected in this since are case, as legisla- for the excise taxes and since the which may in impose excise the Consti- ture taxes is hot limited herein, already pointed legisla- out so that the tution, levy directly county ture and the excise taxes direct application payment' of the therefrom to revenue district bonds several counties.

Therefore, respect decree of this chancellor réversed. revenues administration of these to the

Fourth, as of Administration: through the Board ' n 6 of Art. 8 of Con- In'1914 ah amendment to See. there Prior to amendment adopted. stitution was county treasurer constitutionally recognized had been Amongst the amendment of county. things, other each lan- county and this treasurer, the office 1914 abolished in the section: guage was inserted provide shall law for care legislature

.. “The funds, provide custody county all and shall and out all reporting paying method such funds.” possible the legislature commits to the broadest This authority custody, paying “care; reporting to county legislature all funds. vests out” It authority provided to Board of Administration create One, custody, reporting Bill for “care, in Senate authority county out” paying of such funds. The are concerned, so far as the funds extends board, agent mere no further. The board is the fiscal- designated authority It purposes. has no any discretionary perform with functions reference local of- properly belong funds such which ficers. the Board of is not

The creation of the Administration county contrary of of the treasurer to re-creation office of the 6 Art. 8 as Constitution, intent Sec. of merely places amended. No such is created. The Act office upon additional officers ministerial duties certain State not of which do interfere with the constitutional duties 86 Whitaker v. So. 251. Parsons, such officers. See R. Improvement In v. Road 277 W. R. District, Cone So. 544, sustaining the Arkansas, Harrelson Act in upon relied in appellants, question regarded the taxes there were soundly as State taxes. It was sovereign held that “the has complete control over its from taxa revenue derived tion,” might that to apportion and such taxes according the several counties to population apply and gratuity obligations. same a to payment In of local case, that have appear there does not to been however, presented or to considered question that' court vital case, which confronts us in ap this whether such namely, plication of State taxes would violate the of intendment against constitutional inhibitions the issuance of State In bonds. Martin Muck Co., supra, v. Dade Land dis we tinctly directly indirectly held “the that State can not ‘pay’ Bonds) (Everglades such bonds Drainage District taxation 6, without violation of Sec. Art. State Constitution.” is the latter proposition It which leads us the conclusion that gas to the second and third imposed by county imposed Bill Five are Senate taxes, legislature.is presumed since have a intended levy, valid which leads further conclusion that county revenue constitutes funds and therefore must be apportioned as set hereinabove forth because the funds county one cannot pay be diverted another debts of county. requires that one-half 2453, 1927, Rev. Gen. Stats.

Sec. county and special from road realized of the funds in towns shall be cities or bridge upon property tax levied county to such cities by the over commissioners turned maintaining the roads repairing to be used towns County In thereof. Duval Commissioners and streets 36 Fla. So. R. sub- City of Jacksonville, requirement sequent held that such was cases, it was as bé- with Sec. 5 Art. Constitution conflict to other than ing diversion of revenues holding rests the reason purposes. That instances, and for municipality, appropriate streets maintenance, public constitute roads purposes component part. municipality is a of which not neces- highways, highways all are All streets are but legis- of of sarily plenary In control streets. view the in of the and and view wide highways, lature over streets legislature prescribing in to the discretion committed county legislature, purpose for the above purposes, may, county adopted aid mainten- stated, and has, county a city and as of roads streets located in the ance reason such streets legitimate county purpose, for the city and was also county purpose. both Such serve in controlling reasoning Arkansas case of Sanderson Nothing R. said City Texarkana, of W. 105. So. ap- apportionment opinion this with reference to here involved conflicts plication of the revenues expressed by views Court to the with or alters the this validity 2453, supra. of operation Sec. recapitulate:

To

We hold: gas and third taxes is not purpose

1. The second existing county and dis- pay but off roads, to construct trict bonds. legislature

2. power levy The no has State tax paying county or district bonds. If levied as State taxes, gas second and third taxes would be repugnant to the constitution and their void. levy

3. The second and third gas taxes, well as one-third gas tax, are held to fourth taxes, - levy thereof as such is valid. The revenue from these taxes becomes funds.

4. apportionment The gas the revenue from the third tax in proportion to the bonded indebtedness of the several counties is invalid. Apportionment' of the revenue from second, third and one-third of gas the fourth tax must be to the several counties the proportion collected therein respectively. application gas

5. The and third second taxes to payment "county and district road bond indebted- ness, apportionment after to the several counties as above stated, application is valid. The of one-third of the fourth gas tax to the in the county, construction roads is valid. apportionment provided

6. The for school funds in Sec. Chap. 14573, supra, “aggregate days on a basis of 31/2 attendance” the several apply counties does not to the portion distribution of that gas of the fourth tax devoted purposes. to school from revenue two-thirds of the gas fourth tax levied Senate Bill appor- Five must be proportion tioned'to several counties “in to the aver- age attendance schools the said respec- counties tively,” provided by as Sec. Art. of the Constitu- tion.

7. 'Creation of the Board of Administration Senate Bill authority One is but valid, of that board to ad- minister arising revenue from the second and third gas taxes,.is;confined to the “car,e, reporting and custody, paying out” of such funds. Any

8. surplus arising funds from the second and third gas taxes and to of any county, the credit after apportion- as ment hereinabove pointed out, should remitted such to be used for the construction and mainten- ance of bridges roads and therein.

In the chancery cause, appealed the decree from is af- in part firmed in part, reversed and the cause re- manded for proceedings further consistent with this opinion. quo

In the warranto, demurrer to the information is sustained.

It is so ordered. J., J. Whitfield, Ellis, Brown and Buford, concur. as Comptroller Florida, of the State Amos, Ernest V.W. as Ap Treasurer of Florida, Knott, pellants, Appellee. Mathews, v. John E. on the relation of H. Florida, Fred Davis, Attorney General Doyle of said State, Carlton, E. Governor, and Members of the Board of Adminis and Ernest Comptroller, et al.

tration, Amos,

Division A. The extraordinary C. J. legis- session Terrell, lature 1929 enacted Bill One, Senate which is now Chapter 14486, Florida, Laws of and Senate Bill Five,

Case Details

Case Name: Amos v. Mathews

Court Name: Supreme Court of Florida

Date Published: Jan 23, 1930

Citation: 99 Fla. 1

Court Abbreviation: Fla.