New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-09-06

difficult etos imagine. after what has been
narrated.@ There was trial and Judgment
against Messrs. Mead and McNair, who ap-
pealed.
: Before the appeal could be reached IN
the Supreme Conrt, the new constitution
raised the appealable amount from S3oO 10
$500, thus preventing Messrs. Mead and
McNair from having final and decisive
settlement of the question. Their appeals
were dismissed, but, having had the con-
coded right of appeal when they TOOK
them, their dismissal could only amount to
q nonsuit, and only that effect could be IN
voked against the others who, by agree
ment, awaited the result.
They, therefore, came before us as new
petitioners, and we have no more right to
reject their request on account OF the old
ness of the claim than if these events had
happened but yesterday. No positive re-
fusal or decision was ever made OF the
question by the various city governments,
who only desired time, and pleaded that they
wanted a judicial decision.
If it be said that Judge Leaumont's de-
cision was unfavorable, it is to be remem-
bered that it was at the time neither final
nor binding and could not be made so by
subsequent change of constitution.
The only reason assigned is considering
the law and the evidence" Even II 1T be
certain that under the phrase law the
plea of prescription may not have been the
real ground, and the decision was made
upon the merits, it throws no light upon the
question of the right of teachers to vacation
pay. We must look elsewhere for that.
1t seems we need not look far, for Judge
Cooley, in several suits OF teachers who
were turned out last year at the beginning
of or shortly before the summer vacation,
uniformly decided in their favor. There is
also the decision of the Supreme Court in
the case of Philip Prendergast VS.. the Third
Municipality, rendered many years ago,
and the. case of Edward Hallaran VS.. the
city of New Orleans, in the Second District
Court, for vacation salary.
For twenty-five years or more OF the eX-
-istence of the public schools OF New Or
leans, teachers holding situations in them
have uniformly been allowed vacation pay,
save and except only in the year 1867. The
reasoning is this. They have always been
appointed for one-year or during the pleas
ure of the board, but with an annual salary.
For this salary they were to teach all the
time required during the year by the board.
True,sthe salary was divided into twelve
equal parts and paid monthly, but that was
merely period fixed for convenience by
the authorities. Their salaries were stated
at so much per year. and 1t was never sup
posed that during ME two hot months they
should seek for or could obtain employment
sufficient TO support themselves. 1t would
be petty fraud, therefore, to discharge
them at the beginning of the vacation or
just previous, when they had done, practl-
cally, all the work of the year.
l think we must conclude that the Sixth
District Court, the Second District Court,
and the Supreme Court, their decisions
having been final, and having passed upon
the real question at issue THAT OF vacation
paw, have furnished the-law on the subject.
These teachers have persistently but
patiently kept their case before the au-
thorities, and awaited justice. 1t is no ex-
cuse for an evasion of our duty to them
that they have been so long denied. The
city, however, never really passed upon
their claim unfavorably. 1t is not true
economy or Is it the interest of the city of
New Orleans to evade just debt.
/ find the budget. adopted in March, 1862,
appropriated s220,3lS 50 for that year; but
only $l66,70l G. was actually paid out
that year, leaving S53.6l7 10 unexpended
for that purpose. This balance is probably
more than sufficient to pay the debt
claimed; but even if it were not, these
teachers served under a regular contract
at fixed salaries. and the city is not the less
bound because it, after September Is, 1862,
expended the margin of its appropriation
otherwise.
Beside the names of Messrs. Meylor, Cor
don and others petitioning, will be found on
the unpaid rolls other widely known and
approved teachers, such as Mrs. A. +.
Olmsted. Mrs. j. Bartlett, Miss j. Falconer,
Miss L. NJ. Wagner and over hundred
more, whose long withheld salaries the
public will approve the payment Of
The city can not honorably plead pre-
scription. because il has kept the subject
pending itself, and recent decisions of the
Supreme Court Of the United States show
that its former plea of prescription was
null.
Considering the REIMBURSEMENT of all in
terest, which understand they are ready
to make / report an ordinance for the set
Element of this long pending matter.
ALFRED SHAW, Administrator.
An ordinance 10 provide for settlement of
the claims of teachers for salary due for
the year 1862.
Be it ordained by the Council of the city
of New Orleans, That the Mayor and Ad-
mnistrator of Finance be authorized and
directed 10 settle with all claimants of sal
arv who taught in the public schools of the
city during the month OF June, 1867, and up
to the commencement of the vacation of
that year, under regular appointments from
the various school boards. by allowing them
in the proportion of their annual salary for
two months and fourteen days then ensu-
ing, they relinQushing all claims for in
terest to date OF settlement, and accepting
certificates under ordinance No. $50, Admin
istration series: provided that in the cases
where teachers received part pay, or the
schools reopeped al later date, the award
be modified accordingly.
The report was received, and the ordi-
nance accompanying it was read twice pro
forn,a and laid over.
BY Mr. Shaw:
DEPARTMENT OF PUBIC Accounts,
September S, 1871. )
To the City Council of New Orleans:
By the operation of the drainage law, the
various bills against the late drainage
boards have TO be acted on by the City
Council as the successor in power of those
boards.
Several bills have accordingly been filed
in or come under the cOgnizance of this de-
partment.
am without data or reliable means of
information to certify to their correctness,
Some of them, for instance bills for ma
chinery and mechanical work, ought to
have been settled for long ago. While a
portion of the claims appears to be Just
and reasonable, others are doubtless exor-
bitant and ought to be cut down. PrOfes-
sionai services generally will, in my opinion,
deserve to be graded according to the fact
and amount rendered and its effectiveness.
| have some doubts whether the litigation
of the ex-commissioners to keep themselves
in office should be paid for by the city.
Bills in which: ex-commissioners acted in
the double capacity of their office and of
contractors with, or creditors of their
board should be examined as to their rea-
condolences and correctness. All other
bills; too, should be in some manner veri.
fed. for it appears the power of these