Bradford reporter. [volume] (Towanda, Pa.) 1844-1884, 1860-05-31

SeaLS VdCdHL, dnu dppOluG OtueIS III tueh oIoou
until the next annual election for directors.
To employ an incompetent teacher" or one
whose competency and qualifications are not
condemned by certificate of the County
Superintendent especially if persisted in so as
to hazard the districts quota of the annual
appropriation, it cannot be doubted is such
neglect or refusal to perform duty enjoined
by law" as would make it the duty of the
Court to remove the directors, and supply their
places bv the appointment of others. But the
question here is, whether these directors are
before US upon the facts of this case, and their
sworn answer to this complaint, in an attitude
which demands such action by the Court.
The teachers referred to in the complaint,
are - BY resolution Of the Board
of Directors, teachers for all the schools were
chosen, and notified but the schools have not
yet been opened, and none of them have, as
yet, been actually employed. None of the
teachers had, at the time, formal certificates ;
but, with respect to all of them except
and-they were all known and admitted to
be entitled to certificates, and either have re-
ceived or will receive them from the Superin-
tendent. The Directors had, at the time Of
their action, O communication from that officer
|
of all the applicants for certificates and CIV
ing assurance that all named upon it, except
-. were entitled to and would receive certi-
icates corresponding with the reported result
of the examination. With respect to all the
others, therefore, there was virtual and sub
stantiaI compliance with the law. As TO-
the Directors acted, they allegc in their answer
upon what was contained in the Supernten-
dents report !; but, they distinctly dislaim any
intention or purpose to violate the law, and
declare that, if the communication of the Sup
erintendeut is not equivalent to certificate,
they are ready and willing to retrace their
steps and obey the law. 1t is to be noticed,
also, in their behalf, that number of those
whose children are taught in the school assign
ed to Mr. -, had strongly solicited his ap-
pointment They had too, report OF his
scholarship from the Superintendent. Under
these circumstances, the Directors do not occupy
an attitude before the Court which calls for
their removal. They only desire to know their
duty, and declare their readiness to do it
And this, the cOmplanantS here say, is all
they want
The only question of any pratcal Importance
in this case therefore, is, was the report of Mr..
Owen, the Superintendent, certificate to Mr..
-? That it was not, or equivalent to one,
we have no doubt whatever. The paper only
purports to be the result of the examination.
1t proceeds to name several in one class, and
STYLES the n " first class " teachers, without
more. 1t theu classes together a number of
others, grading their scholarship with the
statement that certificates will be furnished
them accordingly. Then follows the report Of
the scholarship of Mr. - and another, with
some remarks derogatory of the former, and
with the intimatiOn that certificate will not
be given him except upon contingency stat
ed Was this q" a certificate? p Clearly it was
not The paper itself speaks of Certificates to
be given, as something different and distinct :;
and iutmates that certificate to Mr.. - may
be withheld. The certificate, moreover, is a
document, the form of which is given in the
pamphlet containing digest Of the Acts Of
Assembly, and the decisions of the State Super
intendent. placed in the hands of every Board
of Directors by authority, and familiar to every
one 1t is not easy to see how such a paper
could be mistaken for a certificate.
1t has been insuuated that the Superiuten
dent withheld the certificate improperly and
from personal motives. That, if true, does not
supply the place of a certificate. The question
for Directors in this matter, is, what has he
done not what should he have done. They
are not to determine the qualifications and
competency of teachers That is his duty
Nor is he an irresponsible officer. For sufti-
cieut reasons, he too, may be removed from
sfflce But School Directors are not Constitu-
ted his judges "To his own MASTER" or the
proper tribunal, must he answer for wilful or
uin pf no
The respondents here, will, therefore, distin-
city understand that it will be unlawful and a
violation of their official duty, to take into ser,
vice as a teacher - or any one else, unless
or until he or she shall receive a certificate
from the County Superintendent. And since
their attitude here is one Of willingness to do
their duty, and nothing more is asked of them
no further action is required and the com
plant is accordingly dismissed
By THE Court.