FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   >>  
an intrusion that he should pass near her at all. He still saw her face as he bent over Katie. [TO BE CONTINUED.] * * * * * GOVERNOR CLEVELAND AND THE ROMAN CATHOLIC PROTECTORY. BY CHARLES COWLEY, LL.D. It is not often that a Governor's objections to a measure, which his veto has defeated, become, even indirectly, the subject of judicial consideration. Such, however, has been the experience of Governor Cleveland in connection with his veto of the appropriation, which was made in 1883, to the Roman Catholic Protectory of the City of New York. And it must be gratifying to him as a constitutional lawyer, to see the principles of that veto entirely approved by all the judges of the Court of Appeals, as well as by all the judges by whom those principles were considered, before the case, in which they were involved, reached that august tribunal, the highest in the judicial system of that State. By an amendment to the Constitution of New York, adopted in 1874, it is provided that, "Neither the credit nor the money of the State shall be given, or loaned to, or in aid of, any association, corporation, or private undertaking." It would hardly seem possible to mistake the meaning of a prohibition like this; but this prohibition is accompanied by the following modification: "This section shall not, however, prevent the Legislature from making such provision for the education and support of the blind, the deaf and dumb, and juvenile delinquents, as to it may seem proper; nor shall it apply to any fund or property, now held by the State for educational purposes." The question, how far this qualifying clause limits the proceeding prohibition, arose first in the Court of Common Pleas, and afterwards in the Court of Appeals, in the case of the Shepherd's Fold of the Protestant Episcopal Church _vs_. The Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of the City of New York.[A] The Attorney-General of the State had given an official opinion, tending to the conclusion that the prohibition is almost entirely neutralized by the modification. The Judges of the Court of Common Pleas, and the lawyers who argued this case in either court, differed widely upon the question, whether money raised by local taxation by the City of New York, under the authority of the State law, for the maintainance of the children of the Shepherd's Fold, was, or was not, "money of the State," and therefore included in the terms of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   >>  



Top keywords:

prohibition

 

modification

 
judicial
 

Appeals

 

Shepherd

 

judges

 

question

 

Common

 

principles

 
Governor

taxation

 
provision
 
support
 
raised
 
education
 

juvenile

 

proper

 

delinquents

 

accompanied

 

included


children

 

section

 

property

 

Legislature

 

authority

 

prevent

 

maintainance

 

making

 
differed
 

official


meaning

 

clause

 

limits

 

proceeding

 
General
 
Aldermen
 

Church

 
Protestant
 
Attorney
 

Episcopal


opinion
 
tending
 

argued

 

educational

 

widely

 

Commonalty

 

purposes

 

lawyers

 

qualifying

 

conclusion