xt7g7940vt0p https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7g7940vt0p/data/mets.xml Vermont United States Works Progress Administration 1937 Other contributors include: Robert C. Lowe (Robert Chapin) and  David S. Lander under the supervision of A. Ross Eckler; 5 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/V 59 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 Vermont text Analysis of Constitutional Provisions Affecting Public Welfare in the State of Vermont 1937 2015 true xt7g7940vt0p section xt7g7940vt0p   V ,/ '
I •   J  
· W O R K S P R O G R E S S A D M I N I S T R A T I O N
HARRY L. HOPKINS, ADMINISTRATOR
Connnusrou GILL, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
H0wAR¤ B. Mvzns, Dunacron
• DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH
•
O
ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
AFFECTING PUBLIC WELFARE IN THE STATE OF
VERMONT
•
I •
•
I
 I •
  I' MAY 1, 1957
I O "II
•

 O l`
O
I
O
O
I
I  
PREPARED av
ROBERT C. LOWE AND DAVID S. LANDER ,
LEGAL RESEARCH SECTION ,
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
A. Ross ECKLER, COORDINATOR OF SPECIAL |NQUlRlES
Dnvnsnou OF SOCIAL RESEARCH  
• X
O
O

 •
•
PREFACE
•
This bulletin is one of a series presenting
State constitutional provisions affecting public wel-
• fare, prepared to supplement the State by 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, legis lation, 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 and local public welfare admin-
istration may be affected by constitutional powers and
limitations.
•
•
•

 ?  .
O
6 
O

 •
•
•
•
CONTENTS
Page
•
Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program .................. 1
Financial Powers and Limitations ................................. 1
Taxation and Assessments .................................... 1
A · Exemptions .................................................. 2
· Borrowing and Use of` Credit ................................. 3
Other Income ................................................ 3
Appropriations and Expenditures ............................. 3
• Provisions Affecting Legislation ................................. U
A Constitutional Amendment or Revision ............................. 4
•
•
•
•

 
 •
Vermont
•
ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AFFECTING
PUBLIC WELFARE IN VERMONT1
•
I. Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program
No provision.2
•
No charter of incorporation shall be granted, extended,
changed or amended by special law,except for such municipal, charitable,
educational, penal or reformatory corporations as are to be and remain
under the patronage or control of the State;3 * * *.
° II. Financial Powers and Limitations
A. Taxation and Assessments
(1) state ’
. That every member of society hath a right to be pro-
° tected in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and therefore is
· bound to contribute his proportion towards the expence of that protec-
tion,4 * * * and previous to any law being made to raise a tax, the
• 1Const1tut1on (1793), with all amendments to May 1, 1937, as published ln the Vermont
, Legislative Directory (1937), by authorlty of law. (Vermont Publlc Laws, Secs. 9091-2).
'The Constitution 1s not a grant of power to the Legislature, but is a limita-
tion of its generalpowers. * * * The Leg1slature*s power 1s practlcally absolute,
except for constitutional l1m1tat1ons * * *.* Rafus vs. Daley, 103 Vt. 426, 154
A. 895, 697 (1931).
*Referr1ng to the police powers of a state,1t has been said that they are noth-
lng more or less thanthe powers of governmentinherent ln every sovereignty. * * *
• It is inherent in the states of the Union, and 1s not a grant derived from or under
a wrltten Constitution. * * * Subject to constltutlonal llmltatlons, a state Leg-
lslature is authorized to pass measures for the general welfare of the people of the
state 1n the exerclse of the police power, and 1s 1tself the Judge of the necessity
or expediency of the means adopted.” Ex parte Guerra, 94 Vt. 1, 110 A. 224 (1920).
2The law 1s 'sol1c1tous” that poor persons should be supplled with needed assistance,
but l1ab1l1ty for poor relief 1s a statutory matter. Peabody vs. Town of Holland.
107 Vt. 237, 178 A. 888 (1935).
• 5Const1tut1on, Ch. II, Sec. 65, as amended 1913.
4The requirement of this section of proportional contrlbutlons for the support of the
government was not lntended uarestrict the State to methods of taxation that operate
equally upon all of 1ts lnhabltants. Thellmltatlon lmposed by this section does not
prevent classlflcatlon of property for purposes of taxation, or the adoptlon of any
schemes of taxation, provided that they do not offend the Federal Constitution. In
regard to taxation this section has the same meaning as the Fourteenth Amendment to
• the Federal Constitution. The Leglslature has a wide dlscretlon ln classifying prop-
erty for purposes of taxatlon under the State and Federal Constltutlon. It 1s only
when the classlflcatloh is manlfestly unreasonable and arbltrary that the court w1l1
· 1
•

 •
2 Vermont ·
II. Financial Powers and Limitations-Continued
•
A. Taxation and Assessments——Continued
(1) State-Continued
purpose for which it is to be raised ought to appear evident to the Leg-
islature to be of more service to community than the money would be if
not collected.5 •
(2) Counties and Other Local Units
No provision.8 •
B. Exemptions
* * * all religious societies, orbodies of men that may
be united or incorporated For the advancement of religion and learning,
or for other pious and charitable purposes, shall be encouraged and pro-
tected in the enjoyment of the privileges, immunities, and estates, which ·
they in justice ought to enjoy, under such regulations as the General
Assembly of this State shall direct.7
declare it unconstitutional. A statute which provided that the assessable value of
shares of stock should be based on a determination of the total capital investment O
necessary to produce an income of 6 percent, computed from the actual dividends
pa1d the preced1ng year, was héld valid. Clark vs. City of Burlington, 145 A. 677
(192e). A
The same pr1nc1ples were stated in State vs. Caplan, 100 Vt. 140, 155 A. 705
(1927).
*Th€ equality clause ln the Federal Constitution and the proportional clause in
the Vermont Constitution are In effect the same as far as the question of classifi-
cat1on 1s concerned.¤ A gross retail sales tax statute, which contained graduated •
rates from one—e1ghth of 1 percent to 4 percent based on the volume of sales, and
which exempted from B5 to 95 percent of retail merchants, was held to violate the
Federal Constitution as providing for an arbitrary classification. Great Atlantic
and Pacific Tea Company vs. Harvey, 107 Vt. 215, 177 A. 425 (1955).
5Const1tut1on, Ch. I, Art. 9.
The meaning of this section is that ¤the purpose for which the tax 1s raised
must be * * * public * * *. But what is a public purpose within that meaning •
1s a question for the Legislature to decide, andconcernlng which lt has a large dis-
cretfon. which the courts can control only. lf at all, in very exceptional cases.¤
It was held that a statute authorizing a clty to raise money to build a public wharf
did not violate thls sectlon. Clty of Burlington vs. Central Vermont Railway Company
et el., ez Vt. 5, 71 A. eze, ez7 (1909). ·
Shunlcipal corporations whether cities, towns, villages, or counties are creatures of
the State, holding and exerc1s1ng only those powers and privileges granted by the
Legislature. The State exercises control over all EHEIP activities including the •
power of taxatfon. The State may modify or withdraw all such powers. A statute
provfdlng that municipal light plants located outside of a city should not be exempt
from taxation was held valfd. Vfllage of Hardwick vs. Town of Wolcott, 98 Vt. 545,
129 A. 159 (1925).
7Const1tut1on. Ch. II. Sec. 64. _
In a case which held a Masonic temple not exempt from taxation on the ground
that the town had not voted a tax exemption as required by statute, the court stated •
that the rule that exemption statutes are tobe strictly construed 1s not affected by
this section. Grand Lodge of Vermont F. and A. M. vs. City of Burlington, 104 Vt.
515. 152 A, 568 (1952).
Under the statutes property used directly for charitable purposes may be exempt
from taxatfon; but not property. the fncome from which only 1s used for charitable ·
purposes. Ibld.
•

  
• ?j,y"'
Vermont 3
A II. Financial Powers and Limitations——Continued
• i ~
C. Borrowing and Use of Credit
(1) state
No provision.
v (2) Counties and Other Local Units
No provisi0n.8
• D. Other Income
No provision.
E. Appropriations and Expenditures
No money shall be drawn out of the Treasury, unless first
. appropriated by act of legislation.9
III. Provisions Affecting Legislation
A. Regular Sessions of Legislature
• The General Assembly shall meet biennially on the first `
· Wednesday next after the first Monday