Board of Education v. Andrews & Co.
Board of Education v. Andrews & Co.
Opinion of the Court
The errors assigned on the charge of the court and on the admission and rejection of evidence are, in our opinion, immaterial in this case. The question is whether these tellurian globes should be classed as appa/ratus or not, within the meaning of the statute, section 3995, Revised Statutes, limiting the power of school
The statute then fixes the amounts that may be so appropriated in any one year by the various classes into which school districts are divided, the amount allowed the class to which the defendant belongs being seventy-five dollars. We recur, then, to the question, What is the meaning of the term “apparatus,”as used in this statute? Though a latin word in form and origin, it is in common use and as much a part of our vocabulary as any other word in the English language. It is defined by lexicographers as an equipment of things provided and adapted as a means to some end; any complex instrument or appliance' for a specific action or operation, of which mechanical or chemical instruments are given as-examples. Webster’s and The Century Dictionary. We are satisfied -that the term was used by the legislature in this sense, and that the globes in question are apparatus within the meaning of section 3995. ' The legislature must have intended to designate something used in the schools by the term “apparatus.” But no effort has been made to show what was in fact intended; and if the instruments in'question are not such, then we are left to infer that the legislature used the term ‘“apparatus”' in a vague and meaningless sense; or, in other words,that itmeant nothing. Such a construction is not admissible. The common acceptance of the term, as used in our schools, includes such instruments as these; and that the legislature used it in this sense, there can be no doubt. Nor is it material, as we think, that
By the contract, the board was to pay $500 for eighteen of the globes. One-thind of this was paid, and the suit is brought to recover the remaining payments, amounting to $333.32, with interest. The character of the globes, as apparatus, is shown by the undisputed averments of the answer; so that the contract exceeded the powers of the board and is void for that reason. Therefore, upon the pleadings, judgment should have been rendered for the defendant below.
Judgment of the cwcuit court and of the common pleas reversed, and judgment on the pleadings for the defendant.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.