
    Board of Education of Butler Township, Darke County, Centralized School District, v. Campbell et al.
    
      Schools — Transfer of territory from rural to village district— Residents become electors in village district — Power to centralize or transfer territory — Sections 4126-1 and 4692, General Code — Authority of township and county boards —Control of funds and issuing bonds,
    
    1. Residents of a rural school district transferred to a village school district by the county board of education, pursuant to Section 4692, General Code, become electors in such village school district, provided they possess other legal qualifications, and can take no part in school elections held in the school district from which they were transferred.
    2. The power conferred upon townships in which there are one or more school districts to centralize the schools therein, as provided in Section 4726-1, does not supersede the power granted to the county board of education in Section 4692, General Code, authorizing the transfer of school territory from one district to another. When the county board transfers to a village school district a portion of the territory contained within the township seeking to centralize, all control of school funds of such transferred territory and the issuing of school bonds, etc., is by the action of the county board exclusively vested in the board of education to which such territory has been transferred, and injunction will lie to restrain interference with such control.
    (No. 18038
    Decided April 1, 1924.)
    Error to the Court of Appeals of Darke county.
    The questions of law arising upon the controversy in this case require a brief statement of certain preliminary facts. Special district No. 3 and subdistricts Nos. 4 and 8 of Butler township, Darke county, Ohio, all rural school districts, had, prior to March 15, 1921, been duly and regularly transferred to the New Madison village school district by the board of education of Darke county school district, and those three districts thus became a part of the New Madison village school district and were attached to that district for all school purposes.
    On the 15th day of March, 1921, an election was held in Butler township, Darke county, pursuant to Section 4726-1, General Code, upon the question of centralizing the schools of Butler township, and it is claimed that certain electors in special district No. 3 and subdistricts Nos. 4 and 8 signed the petition for such election and participated therein, the election resulting in favor of centralization. The board of education of Butler township centralized school district was duly appointed by the probate court, as provided by statute, and on January 10, 1922, the question of issuing bonds was submitted to the electors of such centralized school district, resulting in favor of the issuing of bonds. At both of these elections the electors residing in special district No. 3 and subdistricts Nos. 4 and 8 of Butler township, Darke county, Ohio, participated and voted, the result of the elections being in favor of centralization and in favor of issuing the bonds, whereupon the board of education of Butler township centralized school district proposed to go ahead, at which time this action was begun.
    By this proceeding instituted in the court of common pleas of Darke county, it was sought to enjoin the board of education of Butler township centralized school district from selling and delivering the bonds in question, and from entering into a contract for the erection of a schoolhouse, and from recognizing the territory embraced in special district No. 3 and subdistricts Nos. 4 and 8 of said township as a part of the territory belonging to said Butler township centralized school district, and also to enjoin the county treasurer and county auditor from paying over to the board of education of Butler township centralized school district the moneys raised by taxation for school purposes in such districts.
    The Darke county school district filed an answer, in which it sets forth the transfer of special subdistrict No. 3 and districts Nos. 4 and 8 to the New Madison village school district, pursuant to Section 4692, General Code, and the due acceptance of such territory by the New Madison village school district, and alleges that such transfer having been made the county board, since that date, does not recognize the existence of district Nos. 3, 4 and 8 as belonging to Butler township centralized school district, and the county board asks that the school funds belonging to school districts 4 and 8 be transferred to the New Madison village school district, and that , the court find that rural school districts Nos. 3, 4 and 8 have been legally transferred to the New Madison village school district according to the terms and provisions of Section 4692, General Code.
    An answer was filed by the board of education of the New Madison village school district, setting forth the due and legal transfer of rural districts 3, 4 and 8 from Butler township to the New Madison village school district and its acceptance, and averring that the school funds of rural districts 4 and 8 have not been turned over to New Madison village school district according to law, and said board of education of the New Madison village school district asks that such legal transfer according to the provisions of Section 4692, General Code, be duly found by the court, and that all proper relief be granted said board.
    To the petition and the answers so filed the board of education of Butler township, Darke county, Ohio, centralized school district, filed an answer and reply, in which it avers the procedure of centralization of the schools of Butler township pursuant to Section 4726-1, General Code, and claims the right to receive the school money for Butler township, and its right to sell bonds and to contract for the erection of a sehoolhouse for such centralized schools, for the purpose of carrying out the mandate of the electors of Butler township. It asks to go hence with its costs.
    Upon the pleadings and the admitted facts the parties went to trial, and in the common pleas court a conclusion was reached as follows:
    “The court being fully advised in the premises finds * * * that at the election for centralization of the schools of Butler township, Darke county, Ohio, held on the 15th day of March, 1921. electors residing in special district No. 3 and sub-districts Nos. 4 and 8 of Butler township, Darke county, Ohio, participated and voted at said election upon the question of centralizing the schools of said township, and that electors residing in the three districts, as aforesaid, signed the ■ petition calling for the election for such centralization to he voted upon, and that electors residing in said districts participated in and voted at the election held in said Bntler township centralized school district on the 10th day of January, 1922.
    “The court further finds that said special district No. 3 and subdistriets Nos. 4 and 8 of Butler township, Darke county, Ohio, had, prior to March 15, 1921, been duly and regularly transferred to the New Madison village school district by the board of education of the Darke county school district, and that at the time of said elections, as aforesaid, said three districts aforesaid were a part of the New Madison village school district, and were attached to said village school district for all school purposes, and that the electors residing in said districts were not qualified electors of Butler township school district and had no legal right to sign the petition calling for an election on the question of centralizing the schools of said Butler township, and had no legal right to participate in and vote at the election for the centralization of the schools of said township, nor to participate in and vote at the election for the issue of bonds of the Butler township district held on January 10, 1922.
    “That by reason of the participation of the electors of special district No. 3 and subdistricts Nos. 4 and 8 aforesaid, and their signing of said petitions, as aforesaid, and voting at said elections aforesaid, rendered said elections for the centralization of said schools and for the issue of said bonds illegal, and that all proceedings pursuant, to such elections were illegal and void.”
    And injunctions were issued as prayed for in the petition.
    The matter was taken on appeal to the Court of Appeals, which.court found:
    “Upon consideration whereof the court finds in favor of the plaintiff and the board of education of the New Madison village school district, Darke county, Ohio, on its answer and cross-petition and against the said defendant, the board of education of Butler township centralized school district,
    “It is therefore considered, ordered, and adjudged by this court that the petition of the plaintiffs J. L. Campbell and George Garland and the defendant, the board of education of New Madison village school district, be sustained and the prayer thereof be granted, and that the cross-petition of the defendant, the board of education of Butler township centralized school district, be dismissed and the prayer thereof denied, and that costs of this proceeding be taxed against the defendant, the board of education of Butler township centralized school district.”
    To reverse this judgment error is prosecuted to this court.
    
      Mr. O. R. Krickenberger for plaintiff in error.
    
      Mr. L. E. Kerlin; Mr. John, F. Maher; Mr. W. D. Brumbaugh; Mr. O. J. Myers and Mr. J. G. Fullerton, Jr., for defendants in error.
   Day, J.

The paramount question presented is: Where territory has been transferred to a village school district by the county board of education, by virtue of Section 4692, General Code, may the electors of the township from which such territory has been transferred, including some of the electors residing in the territory so transferred, by effecting centralization pursuant to Section 4726-1, General Code, and voting bonds pursuant to Section 7625, General Code, proceed to erect a 'schoolhouse, etc., and thus supersede the action of the county board?

An answer to this problem requires consideration of the two sections, 4692 and 4726-1, General Code, and a determination of the powers granted therein. It is provided by law (Section 4679, General Code) that the school districts of the state shall be styled, respectively, city school districts, exempted village school districts, village school districts, rural school districts, and county school districts.

Definition of the various school districts is given by statute, and school territory not included within a city, exempted village, or village district constitutes a rural district, over which the county board of education has certain jurisdiction, within which is included the power to transfer, as conferred by Section 4692, General Code. A discussion of the legislation creating the county board of education and defining its jurisdiction is found in County Board of Education of Hancock County v. Boehm, 102 Ohio St., 292, 131 N. E., 812, in which Sections 4736 and 4692, General Code, with reference to transfer of territory, are specifically considered.

It is conceded that the New Madison village school district is not an exempted district, and is a part of the county school district, and we further assume that the transfer of special district No. 3 and subdistricts Nos. 4 and 8 of Butler township to the New Madison village school district has been entirely regular pursuant to the provisions of Section 4692, General Code. The residents of those three districts, now regularly a part of the New Madison village school district, are, for school purposes, qualified electors in the latter district. The legal title of the school property of the three districts has by virtue of Section 4696 become the property of the board of education of the school district to which the territory has been transferred, and by the same section it is provided that their school funds and indebtedness may be equitably apportioned, and to all intents and purposes all living in those three subdivisions having the right to vote are now duly qualified electors in school matters of the New Madison village school district. Manifestly, they cannot vote in school matters in two districts at the same time, and, being legally electors in the New Madison school district, they cannot be legally electors in the district from which they were transferred, in so far as school matters are concerned.

It is urged that Section 4726-1 gives authority to the electors “in townships in which there are one or more school districts” to vote upon the question of centralization, and that if a majority of the electors in the township vote against centralization, the school districts in the township shall proceed as though no election had been held In other words, the construction contended for is to permit Section 4726-1 to override the provisions of Section 4692, by which the jurisdiction of the county board to transfer territory was granted. This we do not think was the legislative intent.

"While we concede the existence of the civil township as a distinct entity in matters of local self-government, and one of the most ancient in organized government, yet the Constitution has provided, by Section 2, Article VI, that “The General Assembly shall make such provisions, by taxation, or otherwise, as * * # will secure a thorough and efficient system of common schools througnout the state,” and by Section 3, Article VI, that “provision shall be made by law for the organization, administration and control of the public school system of the state supported by public funds.”

Pursuant to this power the Legislature has enacted these sections of the statute, and under Section 4692 has given the power to the county board to transfer this territory to the New Madison village school district. These proceedings, it is conceded, are regular, and to now authorize, by virtue of the provisions of Section 4726-1, General Code, an undoing of the steps taken under Section 4692, General Code, is to give a contradictory construction to the statutes.

It is' our duty to so construe the statutes that they may be harmonious, if that can be done. We do not think that the provisions of Section 4726-1 were intended to override the rights conferred and duties prescribed in Section 4692. The legislative intent seems to have been to confide to the county board of education superior jurisdiction in certain matters, among which is this of transfer of territory. As indicating that purpose Section 4727, General Code, specifically provides that “nothing in * * * Sections * * * 4726 and 4726-1, shall prevent a county hoard of education upon * * * petition * * * from transferring territory to or from a centralized school district, the same as to or from a district not centralized.”

■Sections 4726, 4726-1 and 4727 being in pari materia with ¡Section 4692, this controlling power of the county board in the premises would seem to be apparent in the legislative intent. This court has heretofore recognized the superior jurisdiction of the county board in the matter of transferring territory and the effects thereof.

In the case of County Board of Education of Paulding County v. Board of Education of Benton Twp. Rural School District, 104 Ohio St., 1, 135 N. E., 456, the question presented was “whether subsequent to the taking of a vote on the centralization of the schools of a rural school district, resulting in favor of centralization, and the taking of a further vote authorizing the issuance and sale of bonds for the purpose of procuring a site and erecting a school building in such district, the county board of education is authorized to transfer territory from such rural school district to another school district in the county.” And in that case it was held that a county board was within its jurisdiction and was authorized to transfer the territory even after the vote for centralization.

If the jurisdiction and control of the county board of education in transferred territory after centralization takes place is superior to that of the board of education of the centralized district in issuing and selling bonds, etc., it surely must follow that that jurisdiction and control is equally superior when exercised before centralization has taken place, as in the instant case. We think that the Legislature fully intended to confer this superior jurisdiction upon the county board of education.

Believing that the residents of special district No. 3 and subdistricts 4 and 8, after the transfer by the county board to the New Madison village district, were not electors qualified to vote in school matters in Butler township school district, under the provisions of Section 4726-1, General Code, it follows that their participation in the elections of March 15, 1921, and January 10, 1922, was unlawful, and that the elections so participated in by those who were not qualified electors were not valid, in so far as they affected jurisdiction over school matters relating to the previously transferred territory, to-wit, special district 3 and sub-districts 4 and 8. This being so, the school funds and the matter of issuing bonds for school purposes are under the control of the board of education of the New Madison village school district, and the board of education of Butler township centralized sehool district has no right thereto.

We are therefore of the opinion that the conclusions of the Court of Appeals and the court of common pleas in issuing the injunction in this case were right, and that their judgments in so doing should he affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Marshall, C. J., Robinson, Jones, Matthias and Allen, JJ., concur.

Wanamaker, J., not participating.  