xt78cz32501h https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt78cz32501h/data/mets.xml Wisconsin United States Works Progress Administration 1937 Other contributors include: Robert C. Lowe (Robert Chapin) and Helen R. Sherfey under the supervision of A. Ross Eckler; 11 pages, 27 cm; This bulletin is one of a series presenting state constitutional provisions affecting public welfare; Includes bibliographical references; UK holds archival copy for ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Program libraries; Call number Y 3.W 89/2:36/W 75 books English Washington D.C.: Works Progress Administration Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Analysis of Constitutional Provisions Affecting Public Welfare in the State of Wisconsin text Analysis of Constitutional Provisions Affecting Public Welfare in the State of Wisconsin 1937 2015 true xt78cz32501h section xt78cz32501h O ‘ WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION HARRY L. HOPKINS, ADMINISTRATOR CORRINGTON GILL, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR HOWARD B. MYERS, DIRECTOR • DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH _ • O ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AFFECTING PUBLIC WELFARE IN THE STATE OF WISCONSIN O O I • _ ° FeBRuARv 15, 1957 • O . O A O Q. I5, O O O PREPARED BY ROBERT C. LOWE AND HELEN R. SHERFEY • LEGAL RESEARCH SECTION . UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF » A. Ross ECKLER, COORDINATOR OF SPECIAL INQUIRIES DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH O O • • PREFACE • This bulletin is one of a series presenting • State constitutional provisions affecting public wel- fare, prepared to supplement the Stateby State digests of public welfare laws so as to provide in abstract form the basis for the public welfare services of the several States. • The provisions quoted are those concerned directly with public welfare administration and such others as may substantially affect a public welfare program, even though only indirectly related. It would be impossible to consider within the limits of this study every remotely connected constitutional provi- ° sion. The indirectly related provisions included, · therefore, have been restricted to those concerning finance, legislation, and the methods of constitutional amendment. An attempt has been made, by a careful selec- • tion of the most recent cases decided by the highest courts of the States, to indicate wherever possible how these provisions have been construed. These cases are included in footnotes appended to the constitutional provisions shown. • It is hoped that these abstracts will be useful to those interested in public welfare questions in indicating how State andlocal public welfare admin- istration may be affectedby constitutional powers and limitations. • • • ` CONTENTS 10 Page Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program .................. 1 • Financial Powers and Limitations. ............................ .... 1 Taxation and Assessments .... ..... ....... . ............ . ...... 1 • EX9IHpt3j.OHS...•••.••·•·.••••.••·»••...•.•••.••»••.•»••••••••• 5 Borrowing and Use of Credit.. .......... . ....... . ...... ...... 6 Oth€I‘ IIlCOHl(·3•••••.....••••.••..•.••·••..•.••.••••»•··••••... Appropriations and Expenditures ........ ................ ..... 11 Provisions Affecting legislation ............ ...... ............... 11 O Constitutional Amendment or Revision ............................. 14 I I O O O I • Wisconsin Q ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AFFECTING PUBLIC WELFARE IN WISCONSIN1 • I. Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program No provision.2 • II. Financial Powers and Limitations A. Taxation and Assessments (1) snaté • 1C0nst1tut1on (1848), w1th all amendments to February 15, 1957. The Constltutlon of th1s State 1s not a grant, but a l1m1tat1on of the powers of the Leglslature, and 1t 1s competent for that body to exercise all leglslatlve power not proh1b1ted thereby. Bushnell vs. Beloit, 10 W1s. 155 (1860). 2ThE police power extends to everythlng promot1ve of publ1c welfare, but the exercise of 1t 1s l1m1ted by the letter and sp1r1t of the Const1tut1on. State ex rel. Owen vs. Donald, 160 W1s. 21, 151 N. W. 551 (1915). *The power ofthe government to embark 1n enterprisesof public charlty and bene- • fit can only be l1m1ted by the restrictions upon the power of taxatlon, and to that extent alone can these subjects . . . be sa1dto fall withlnthe pollce power of the · state.•• State ex rel. City of New Richmond vs. Davidson, 114 Wis. 565, 90 N. W. 1087 (1902). A c1ty was struck by a cyclone and almost totally destroyed. To bury the dead, clear up the debris, to prevent the spread of d1sease, care for the wounded, and to rel1eve generally the dlstress of the people, theclty lncurred large expense; to pay this 1t borrowed on 1ts bonds from the State. An act approprlatlng State money to • cancel thls debt was held valid as being for a publ1c purpose subservlng the common interest and well-belng of the people of the whole State. Ibid. An act providing for the treatment ofhabltual drunkards or drug add1cts 1n pr1- vate 1nst1tut1ons at the expense of the counties 1n which such persons resided, when the persons or those charged with the1r support had not the means to pay for such treatment, washeld unconstltutlonal on the ground that lt was not a leg1t1mate exer- ` clse of the pollce power of the State, but 1nvolved the lmpos1t1on of a tax upon a county, without Its consent, for the benefit of private 1nst1tut1ons and 1nd1v1duals • not necessarlly paupers and not necessarily objects of publ1c charity. Wisconsin Keeley Institute Company vs. Milwaukee County, 95 W1s. 155, 70 N. W. 68 (1897). 5To justify the use of the taxlng power, an act 1mpos1ng a tax must be 1n furtherance of a public purpose, 1.e., for the common lnterest and well-being of the people at large. An act. 1mpos1ng an lncome surtax and a property tax for the purpose of pay- ing a bonus to W1scons1n soldiers and sailors of the World War *as a token of appre- c1at1on of the character and sp1r1t of their patriotic serv1ce¤ was held valid as · being for a publ1c purpose. State ex rel. Atwood vs. Johnson, 170 Wis. 218, 175 N. · _ w. 589 (1919). ‘ But where certain mater1al menhad furnished supplles to a contractor for a pub- llc bu1ld1ng, and the contractor, (not havlng been requlred by the State to post any bond or secur1ty for the payment of mater1al men), was paid 1n full by the State and later became bankrupt wlthout paying the mater1al men, an act of the Leglslature ap- propr1at1ng money to lndemnlfy them was held 1nval1d on the ground that *no appro- pr1at1on can be made and no tax can be lev1ed for a mere prlvate purpose¤. State ex rel. Consolidated Stone Company vs. Houser, 125 Wis. 256, 104 N. W. 77 (1905). ° See State ex rel. C1ty of New Richmond vs. Davldson, and page 2, footnote 4. O 1 • • 2 Wisconsin II. Financial Powers and L1m1tat1ons——Cont1nued A. Taxation and Assessments—Continued • (1) State-Continued (a) The rule of taxation shall be uniform, and taxes shall be levied upon such property with such classifications as to forests and minerals, including or separate or severed from the land, as the leg- • islature shall prescribe. Taxes may alsobe imposed on incomes, privileges ( and occupations, which taxes may be graduated and progressive, and reason- able exemptions may be provided.4 *‘ The power to tax 1s not retained by the Legislature for all purposes not men- tloned 1n the Constltutlon; but the mention, expressly and lmpliedly, of particulars as recognized governmental purposes, excludes all others. State ex rel. Owen vs. Donald, 160 W1s. 21, 151 N. W. 331 (1915). ° The purposes for wh1ch taxes may be levied are denominated publlc purposes, not In the broad general sense, but 1n the constitutional sense of such State-wide pur- poses as are contemplated by the functions of government under the system created by the fundamental law. Ibid. Any purpose, whether public or not, not included ln the plan of government cre- ated by the Constitution, 1s outs1de the limitation upon the rlght to take prlvate propertyfor publ1c use by the power oftaxatlon, and outside the power to appropriate • money. Ibid. 4'Constltution, Art. VIII, Sec. 1. · By the add1t1on1n 1908 of the second sentence to this section, the State's sys- tem of taxation was changed from one of uniform taxation on real and personal prop- erty, to a system combining twoideas, namely, uniform taxatlon ofreal property only, and secondly. progressive taxation of persons, based on their ability to pay. State ex rel. Bolens vs. Frear, 148 Wis. 456, 154 N. W. 675 (1912). ”There can be no uniform rule, wh1ch 1s not at the same time an equal rule, • operating alike upon all the taxable property throughout the terrltorial limits of the state, municipality or local subd1v1s1on of the government within and for wh1ch the tax is to be ra1sed.” Chicago & N. W. Ra1lway Company vs. State, 128 Wis. 553, 108 N. W. 557 (1906). An act creating a metropolitan sewer district and providing for a tax levy only on the property w1th1n the l1m1ts of the district was held not to violate the uni- formlty provislons of thls sectlon. ”An Improvement which w1ll conduceto the public health or welfare may be made at the expense of the property whlch will be d1rect1y • benefited thereby.” Thlelen vs. Metropolitan Sewerage Commission, 178 Wis. 34, 189 N. W. 484 (1922). Where a city was almostwhollydestroyed by a cyclone, and a large number of its inhabitants killed or Injured, the c1ty authorities, by the issuance of bonds, bor- rowed from the State for the purpose of burying the dead, removing the debris, pre- ventlng the spread of disease, caring for the wounded, and relieving the general distress. A State appropriation by the Legislature to the clty of an amount suffi- cient to cancel the debt was upheld by the court as being 1n furtherance of a public · R purpose subservlng the common interest and well—be1ng of the people of the whole State. The court declared that lf the object of the appropriation had been merely local to the c1ty, then the rule of un1form1ty of taxation would have requlred that the taxes necessaryto supply the appropriation should have been limited tothat clty, but that slnce the contribution was public and In the lnterest of the people of the State as a whole, the funds ralsedby State-wide taxes were spent legitimately. State ex rel. City of New Rlchmond vs. Davldson, 114 Wis. 563, 90 N. W. 1067 (1902). ,The uniformity clause of this sectlon does not apply to income taxes. It 1s • enough regardlng such taxes that there be no d1scr1m1nat1on1n favor of one as agalnst another of the same class and that the method of assessment and collection be not Inconsistent with natural Justice. Van Dyke vs. W1scons1n Tax Commission, 217 Wis. 528. 259 N. W. 700 (1935). · • • Wisconsin 3 II. Financial Powers and Limitations——C0ntinued #• A. Taxation and Assessments-—Contlnued (1) State——Cont1nued (b) The legislature shall provide for an annual tax sufficient to defray the estimated expenses of the state for each year; • and whenever the expenses of any year shall exceed the 1ncome,the legis- lature shall provide for levying a tax for the ensuing year, sufficient, with other sources of income, to pay the deficiency as well as the esti- ° mated expenses of such ensuing year.5 (0) See page 6, par. (a). (d) See page 13, par. (3). (2) Countiesc ° (a) See page 2, par. (a). The word *1ncome• as used in this section 1s def1ned ••as the profit or gain de- r1ved from capital or labor, or from both comb1ned•'. State ex rel. Wisconsin Trust Company vs. Wldule, 164 Wis. 56, 159 N. W. 650 (1916). All taxes, not property taxes or capltatlon taxes, are exclse or prlvllege taxes. • The word "pr1v1lege' 1s broad enough to cover any specles of tax except the former two and 1s so used in the Wisconsin Constitution. Thus taxes on incomes, inherltances, . Successlons, sales, transfers of property lnter vlvos, and transactions transferring dividends declared and received by the stockholders out of income derived by the cor- poration from property located or business transacted w1th1n the State are all excise or privilege taxes. State ex rel. Froedtert Grain & Melting Company, Inc. vs. Tax Commission of Wisconsin, 265 N. W. 6*72 (1956). Inheritance taxes are excise taxes levied on the rlght to transfer property, and • not on the property itself; they are, therefore, only subject to the general rule of unlformity lnlegislatlon that they must operate alike on all persons similarly situ- ated. Nunnemacher vs. State, 129 Wis. 190. 108 N. W. 627 (1906). A fee exacted from the owner of a business, for the purpose of regulating, super— v1s1ng, and inspecting such business in the exercise of the police power is a police regulation and not a tax; but where the fee exacted and collected so far exceeds the expenses of regulation that lt could not reasonably be clalmed that its purpose 1s merely Supervisory, then such exactlon will be deemed a revenue tax. Wadhams 011 ~ • Company vs. Tracy. 141 Wis. 150, 125 N. W. 785 (1909): Wisconsin Telephone Company . vs. City of Milwaukee. 126 Wis. 1, 104 N. W. 1009 (1905). 5Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 5. Th1s section 1s satlsfied by any legitimate kind of taxation whether direct or lndlrect, whlch in the judgment of the Leglslature, havlng regard to the experience ln the past and the probabilltles of the future, will be suff1c1ent to meet the an- nual public expenses. No express legislatlve estimate of the public needs 1s neces- • sary, nor 1s annual or seml-annual legislation necessary. Such a tax law may provide generally for the future or unt1l changed by the Legislature. Chicago & N. W. Rall- way Company vs. State, 128 Wis. 555, 108 N. W. 557 (1906). 6*The legislature shall establish but one system of town and county government, which shall be as nearly uniform as pract1cable¤. Art. IV, Sec. 25. The Legislature may confer upon the boards of supervisors of the several coun- ties such powers of a local, legislative and adminlstratlve character as they shall from time to time prescribe. Art. IV, Sec 22. • An act wh1ch· authorized counties to enter competitive tenders to the State, of money to be raised by taxation, 1n order to secure the establishment within the county of a State-controlled home, was h€ld valid as being for a proper public purpose, by reason of the peculiar local benefits accruing to a county ln which such home might · be established. Lund vs. Chippewa County, 93 Wis. 640, 67 N. W. 927 (1896). • • 4 Wisconsin ‘ II. Financial Powers and Limitations-—Continued A. Taxation and Assessments·—Cont1nued · _ (2) Counties——Continued (b) The legislature is prohibited from enacting any special or private laws in the following cases: . . .. For assessment or collection of taxes or for ex- • tending the time for the collection thereof . . ..7 (c) The legislature shall provide general laws for • the•transact1on of any business that may be prohlbitedby section thirty- one of this article (see page 6, par. (b)), and all such laws shall be uniform in their operation throughout the state.8 (d) See page 8, par. (2). (3) Other Local Unitsg , (a) See page 2, par. (a). County boardsof supervlsorshave 1mpl1ed authorltyunder Art. IV. Sec. 22, above, to pass any ordinance necessary or conven1ent,such as to levy a tax for the carrying out of a proper publlc purpose designated in an act. In this case such tax levy was • not speclflcally authorized ln the act. Ibid. In the above case it was held that the State could not 'compel' one or more O counties less than all,to make a greater donation than another for the establishment of the home,_but could *author1ze¤ a county to do so. Ibid. 7Const1tut1on, Art. IV, Sec. 31. An act applied solely to special charter cities and provided that reassessment of property mlght be made where an assessment proved lnvalld for failure to observe · the law or procedure thereto relating. It was contended that as the act applied to past assessments,1t could necessarily apply only to certain cltles and was therefore vlolatlve of this section. In holding the act val1d,the court said, '. . . the law applies to the entire class, and the fact that all the cities in the class may not be ln a situation to make use of its provisions does not make lt speclalor private'. Schlntgen vs. City of La Crosse, 117 Wis, 158, 94 N. W. 84 (1903). 8C0nstltut1on, Art. IV, Sec. 32. • 9Organ1zed cltles and villages may determine their local affairs and government, sub- ject only to the Constitution and such enactments of the Legislature of State-wide concern as shall with uniformity affect every city or village. Art. XI, Sec. 3. 'The legislature may •author1ze* a town or other municipality to levy taxes therein for public purposes not strictly of a municipal character, but from which the public have received or will receive some direct advantage; or where the tax is to be expendedln defraylng the expenses of the government or ln promoting the DBBCB, good order and welfare of society; or where lt ls to be expended to pay clalms, • founded ln natural justice and equ1ty,or ln gratitude for public services or expend- ltures, or to discharge the op11gat1ons of charity and humanity from which no person or corporation is exempt.* State ex rel. HcCurdy vs. Tappan, 29 Wis. 684 (1872). *The legislature has no power to 'compe1' a municipality to levy taxes for any of the foregoing purposes until the liability to pay the same has been adjudged by a court of competent jurlsdlct1on.' Ibid. ¤The legislature cannot confer a valld authority upon a municipality to tax it- self for any purpose, which is not . . . a public purpose.¤ Ibid. • The above section was held to impose no llmltatlons uponthe power of the Legis- lature to classify cltles for the purposes of legislation ln accordance with settled practice. When cities under this section enact legislation, that legislation sup- plants 1n that city all enactments of the Legislature with which it comes in conflict, · unless such enactments of the Legislature affect all cities with uniformity. If the • • Wisconsin 5 II. Financial Powers and Limitations-—Cont1nued • A. Taxation and Assessments-Continued (3) Other Local Un1ts——Continued (b) Each town and clty shall be required to raise by tax, annually, for the support of common schools therein, a sum not less • than one-half the amount received by‘ such town or city respectively for school purposes from the income of the school fund.1° y. (0) See page 4, par. (b) and footnote 7. (d) See page 8, par. (2). B. Exemptions The rule of taxation shall be un1form,and.taxes shall ° be levied upon such property with such classifications as to forests and minerals, including or separate or severed from the land, as the legis- lature shall prescribe. Taxes may also be imposed on incomes, privileges and occupations, which taxes may be graduated and progressive, and rea- sonable exemptions may be provlded.11 • . · State legislation affects only classes of cities, 1tlS subordinate to the city 188* islation ln the city which has so legislated, but is still in force and effect for the government of cities which have not acted under the •home PU1€' powers of this section. State ex rel. Sleeman vs. Baxter, 195 Wis. 457, 219 N. w. 858 (1928). A city, authorized bylts charter under its police power to regulate the use of • 1ts streets, adopted an ordinance purporting to be a regulatory measure, which pro- vided for lnspectlon, countlng and recording of all telephone poles erected ln the streets, and which also exacted, for each pole malntalned therein, an annual fee of one dollar to be pald to the general c1ty fund. In an action by a telephone company to enjoln the enforcement of the ord1nauce,the court noted the fundamental distinc- tlon between a regulatory police measure imposing a fee m paythe necessary expenses of Inspection and supervision of a_bus1ness,and a license tax whlch ls a charge lm- posed for a privilege granted and exercised under the power to raise revenue, and • held that on the facts stipulated, the fees sought to be collected so far exceeded the reasonable cost of supervision as to make the obvlous effect of the ordinance a llcense tax lmposed to raise revenue. For the further reason that the power resting solely in the State to determine what occupations shall be llcensed,and what privi- leges or franchises shall be granted by a mun1c1pal1ty,hadnot been delegated by It expressly to the city elther by legislative enactment or municipal charter, lt was held that the munlclpallty was without power to pass such an ordinance. Wisconsin Telephone Company vs. City of Milwaukee, 126 Wis. 1, 104 N. W. 1009 (1905). • 1OConst1tut1on, Art. X, Sec. 4. As to what constltutes *the school fund•, see page 10» Dar. (1). 11Constltut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 1. In regard to the constitutional power of the Legislature to exempt from taxa- tion, leaving out superfluous words, the mandate ls: ¤The rule of taxation shall be unlform upon such property as the legislature shall prescribe'. The right to prescribe what property shall be taxed includes the rlght to prescribe what shall • not be taxed. The power to discriminate between what shall be chosen and what re- jected from the multiplicity of kinds, classes,spec1es,uses and ownership of prop- erty is absolute, except so far as it is llmlted by the rule of uniformity. 'It is uniformity of rule,and not uniformity of subjects, which the constitution requlres.• Nash Sales,Inc. vs. Clty of H11W8UK€8, 198 His. 281, 224 N. W. 128 (1929), and cases , · cited therein. • 1 r • I 6 Wisconsin — II. Financial Powers and L1m1tat1ons—Cont1nued I C. Borrowing and Use of Credit ° I (1) state (a) For the purpose of defraying extraordinary ex- penditures the state may contract public debts (but such debts shall ( never in the aggregate exceed one hundred thousand dollars). Every such • debt shall be authorized by law, for some purpose or purposes to be dis- tinctly specified therein; and the vote of a majority of all the members elected to each house, to be taken by yeas and nays, shall be necessary • to the passage of such law; and every such law shall provide for levying an annual tax sufficient to pay the annual interest of such debt and the principal within five years from the passage of such law, and shall spe- cially appropriate the proceeds of such taxes to the payment of such principal and interest; and such appropriation shall not be repealed, nor • the taxes be postponed or diminished, until the principal and interest of such debt shall have been wholly paid.12 (b) The legislature may also borrow money to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or defend the state in time of war; but the money thus raised shall be applied exclusively to the object for . A church club, maintaining a home and meeting place for 1ts members, by renting I rooms and supplying table board, for the purpose of expanding the interest 111 re- l1g1ous act1v1t1es, and acquiring new members, was held not to be a ¤benevolent assoc1at1on· within the meaning of the statute exempting from taxation the property owned by any religious, sc1ent1f1c, llterary, educational or benevolent association, • on the ground_ that the benevolent activities of the club, consisting of securing positions for a few young men and the furnishing of an lnconsequentlal number of free meals, were not sufficient to brlng the club w1th1n the exemption statute. THB court stated that ••statutes exempting property from taxation are not to be enlarged by construction. Taxation ls the rule, and exemptlon the except1on.· Methodist Episcopal Church Baraca Club vs. City of Madison, 167W1s. 207, 167 N. W. 258 (1918). To ascertain whether a corporation falls w1th1n the statute exempting from tax- ation property used exclusively for rellglous, sc1ent1f1c, llterary, educational or · benevolent purposes, 1t must be judged not only by 1ts declared objects, but also by what the corporatlon actually does. Catholic Womanls Club vs. City of Green Bay, 180 Wls. 102, 192 N. W. 479 (1923). Under a statute exempting from taxation all the real property of educatlonal societies used excluslvely for educational purposes, lt was held that where such a soc lety rented a part of its building for a saloon and barbershop, applying the Dro- ceeds therefrom to the educational purposes of the society, the building was not ••used exclusively for educatlonal purposes•*, and being lndlvlslble, was wholly sub- • ject to taxation. The court affirmed the rule that ••statutes according exemption 4 from taxation are to be strictly construed, and understood to confer exemption only so far as their words. by thelr natural and necessary meaning, go'. Gymnastlc Asso- clation of South Slde of Mllwaukee vs. Clty of Milwaukee, 129 W1s. 429, 109 N. W. 109 (1906). 12Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 8. ·There ls nothlng partlcularly technical about the meaning of the word •debt· as used ln the constltutlon. It Includes all absolute obligations to pay money, or ° its equivalent, from funds to be provided. as distinguished from money presently available or 1n process of collection and so treatable as 1n hand.·• State ex rel. Owen vs. Donald. 160 Wis. 21, 151 N. W. 331 (1915). See page 13, par. (3). · • • Wisconsin 7 II. Financial Powers and I.imitations——Continued _ • C. Borrowing and Use of Credit-—-Continued (1) State-Continued which the loan was authorized, or to the repayment of the debt thereby created.13 . • (c) No script, certificate, or other evidence of state debt whatsoever, shall be issued except for such debts as are authorized • by the sixth and seventh sections of this article.14 (d) The state shall never contract any debt for works of internal improvement, or be a party in carrying on such works; but whenever grants of land or other property shall have been made to the state, especially dedicated by the grant to particular works of internal • improvement, the state may carry on such particular works, and shall de- vote thereto the avails of such grants, and may pledge or appropriate the revenues derived from such works in aid of their completion. Provided, that the state may appropriate money in the treasury or to be thereafter raised by taxation for the construction or improvement of` public high- ways. Provided, that the state may appropriate moneys for the purpose of • . . acquiring, preserving and developing the forests of` the state; but there · shall not be appropriated under the authority of this section in any one year an amount to exceed two-tenths of` one mill of the taxable property of the state as determined by the last preceding state assessment.15 • 13Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 7. See page 6, footnote 12 and page 13, Dal`. (3)- 14Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 9. The ”s1xth and seventh sections of thls article" are set forth on page 6. pars. (a) and (b). , 15Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 10. The State may acquire by gift, purchase or condemnation, lands for establishing, enlarglng and maintaining streets, parks, playgrounds, sites for public buildings, etc. Art. XI, Sec. Ba. What constitute ’•works of internal improvement" within the meaning of this sec- tion 1s a judicial question. The prohibition as to such works is not restricted to those only which appertain to business enterprises and mere avenues of trade and commerce; it extends to every kind of public improvement not necessary or convenlent • for the use of the State ln carrying out its essentially governmental function as limited by the Constitution. State ex rel. Owen vs. Donald, 160 Wis. 2.1, 151 N. W. 331 (1915). An act provided that the proceeds from an income tax levy should be distributed to the local subdivisions for the purpose of providing work and relief for the unem- ployed; the State was authorized under the act to reimburse the local units up to 25 percent of the labor cost of public works undertaken by them. In holding the act valid the court stated that the prlmary purpose of the State .was to subserve the • well-being of the people as a whole (this being of immediate concern to the State), and the means employed to accomplish this end, in this case, the engaging ln works of internal improvement. were merely incidental to the main purpose. Van Dyke vs. wisconsin Tax Commission 217 Wis. 528. 259 N. W. '7OO (1955). The prohibition in the last sentence of this section on appropriations exceed- lng the amount of two-tenths of one mill of the State·s taxable property applies • Q . 8 Wisconsin II. Financial Powers and I.imitat1ons—Continued · C. Borrowing and Use of Credit—Continued • (1) State—Continued V I (e) The state shall never contract any public debt except in the cases and manner herein provided.16 (f) The credit of the state shall never be given, or • loaned, in aid of any individual, association or corp0ration.17 (2) Counties and Other Local Unitsw , . . . No county, city, town, village,school dis- trict, or other municipal corporation shall be allowed to become indebted in any manner or for any purpose to any amount, including existing in- debtedness, in the aggregate exceeding five per centum on the value of the taxable property therein, to be ascertained by the last assessment • for state and county taxes previous to the incurring of such indebtedness. Any county, city, town, village, school district, or other municipal c0r— poration incurring any indebtedness as aforesaid shall, before or at the time of doing so, provide for the collection of a direct annual tax suf- ficient to pay the interest on such debt as it falls due, and also to pay · and discharge the principal thereof within twenty years from the time of contracting the same; except that when such indebtedness is incurred in · the acquisition of lands by cities, or by counties having a population of one hundred fifty thousand or over, for public, municipal purposes, or for the permanent improvement thereof, the city or county incurring the same shall, before or at the time of so doing, provide for the col- ° lection of a direct annual tax sufficient to pay the interest on such debt as it falls due, and also to pay and discharge the principal thereof within a period not exceeding fifty years from the time of contracting the same. Providing, that an indebtedness created for the purpose of purchasing, acquiring, leasing, constructing, extending, adding to, im- • proving, conducting, controlling, operating or managing a public utility only to the proviso concerning forestry, and does not limit in any way the amount of appropriations which may be expended for highway purposes. State ex rel. Ekern vs. Zimmerman, 187 Wis. 180, 204 N. W. 803 (1925). See page 6, footnote 12 and page 13, par. (3). 0 16Consti*ut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 4. For the excepted cases, see page 6, pars. (a) and (b), and page 7, par. (d). For a definition of the term ••debt", see page 6, footnote 12. 17Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 3. The Bnergency Income Tax Act providing that the proceeds of the tax be directly distributed to the local subdivisions on a per capita basis for the purpose of re- lievlng unemployment, was held not v1olat1ve of this section for the reason "that • the state does not lend its credit or create a debt within the meaning of the Con- stitution by making a voluntary lawful gift to a number of Its c1t1zens*. Van Dyke vs. wisconsin Tax Commission, 217 Wis. 528, 259 N. H. 700 (1935). 18See page 3, footnote 6 and page 4, footnote 9. · • • Wisconsin 9 II. Financial Powers and Limitations——Continued • C. Borrowing and Use of Credit——Continued (2) Counties and Other Local Units-—C0ntinued of a town, village or city, and secured solely by the property or income of such public utility, and whereby no municipal liability is created, • shall not be considered. ml indebtedness of such town, village or city, andshall not be included 1H arriving at suchidve per centum debt limita- ti0n.1g • .....____________ 19C onstltution, Art. XI, Sec. 5. This section 1s not a grant of power to a municipality to lncur indebtedness up to the amount specified therein. That grant of power must come from the Legis- lature and the section 1s a limitation upon the power which the Legislature may ex- tend. In no event may the amount exceed five percent but the Leglslature may l1m1t · 1t to an amount less than f1ve percent. Oconto Countyvs. Town of Townsend, 210 Wis. 65, 246 N. W. 410 (1955). This sectlon refers to the individual indebtedness of each mun1c1pal1ty men- tioned, and not to the aggregate indebtedness of municipalities, Thus, in determin- 1ng whether the lndebtedness of a school district exceeds the constltutlonal l1m1t, the indebtedness of a village with boundaries cotermlnous wlth t