The Portland daily press., 1874-04-01

latter at their late meeting. The following is
the opinion of the City Solicitors
OFFICE OF CITY SOLICITOR,
Portland, March, 31st, 1874
Sir-In reply to your letter of this date
have to say that have examined the statutes
of the State in regard to the questions pro
pounded with the following result:
In the year 1922, by chapter 1876 of the public
laws of that year, the town of Portland was
authorized to elect committee of such num-
Der as should seem suitable to the inhabitants,
upon whom they might bestow certain powers,
6elng substantially the powers possessed by
Superlntenning School Committees ard School
Agents. In the year 1884, by chapter 129, sec
ton II, of the laws of that year, the city of
Portland was empowered TO elect q similar
committee, TO Oe endowed with similar powers.
BY the same section certain towns which were
named, and finally every town in the State
which should so determine by standing vote,
We're allowed the same privilege
In the Revised Statutes of 1910, chapter IL,
section 10, this section II of the 10th chapter
of the laws of 1884 was made into a general
law, whereby every town which should so de-
termine by standing vote should select COM
mlttee OF any number not less than three.
by subsequent section in the same chapter,
the word town was interpreted so as to n
clude city" Having thus covered the VIII ole
ground and given to all the towns AM cti es
the same privileges, the Legislature of that
succeeding the Revised Statutes, repealed in
express terms chapter 1876 of the laws of
1922, and chapter 129 OF the laws of 1884 Sec
tion 3 OF that repeating act which has been
cited by some as modifying this repeal, does
not seem to me to have any modifying effect
whatever. And in this view l am sustained by
the opinion Of the Revising Commissioners
and in those days, at least, Revising Commits
sioners were men of weight-for in their list of
unrepealed acts, l do not find either the act of
1922 or the act of 1884, or any section of either
of them.
As soon as the attention of the City Govern
ment was called to the change in the law the
Committee were elected by express reference to
section 10 of chapter II of the Revised Statutes
of 1910; and continued to be so elected until
that chapter was repealed by the act of August
27, of the laws of 1850. After that time, votes
were passed under the authority of section II of
article l of the last named act, fixing the
number of the Committee. Section II of arti-
Gle of the act of August 27, 1850, was merged
in section 10 of chapter Il of the Revised Stat
utes of 1857.
In 1870, by chapter $50 of the laws of that
year, section 10 was repealed, thereby taking
away all the authority for the election of a
Committee such as we had hi therto had. The
revision of 1871 made no change.
1t has been suggested that the present board
is a de tdcto Committee. AS to that matter, in
the first discussion of this question, one i'm
portant fact was not brought to notice. We
Experimenting School Committee" in the
Statute sense of those words, We have had a
COMMITTEE" endowed with larger powers in
school matters. The right to elect ''Superin-
tending School Committee" and the right to
elect such ''Committee' as we have had,
have existed side by side. So far as have ex-
amined, Notwithstanding some irregularities,
the City Council have always chosen the latter
When, therefore, the Office was taken away,
both the officer de tacto and the officer de jure
En1l kI-r. l.
Ger where there is no office If the Office of
Mayor had been abolished, and its duties i'm
posed upon the Aldermen, the occupant of the
chair at the time could hardly be de tacto
Mayor.
1t has also been suggested that there is
question it three OF the present board are not
properly elected.
My opinion is that they have not been so
elected. If we look at the record alone, they
evidently have not been, and if we go behind
the record it is equally evident that the City
Council never intended to elect them. They
were also elected for stated period, a proceed
ing for which the Statute gives no warrant. 1t
is not, perhaps, necessary, after what has been
said upon the other points, for me to enumerate
the various other reasons which satisfy me that
no principle of law renders it necessary for us
to say that the City Council have elected any
persons to the Office of Superintending School
Committee. In reply, therefore, to your ques-
tion, i say that in my opinion there is no "Com-
mttee entrusted with proper power in school
matters, nor any Experimenting School Com
mittee."
As this leaves our schools without proper su-
pervision and CONTROL it is important that this
condition of things should be remedied as soon
as possible.
The remedy under the Statutes may be reach
ed in two ways
First-The City Council may elect Super
intending School Committee of three, and a
School Agent.
Second-The City Council may elect Super
visor OF Schools and School Agent.
Very respectfully,
T. b. REED, City Solicitor.
Hon. GEO. P. WEscoTT, Mayor.
After some discussion, all the papers relat-
ing to the School Committee question were re-
ferred to Joint Special Committee to report
at the next meeting of the Council what action
it may be best to take in the premises. The
Committee on the part of the board are the
Mayor and Aldermen Smith and Daveis.
Orders Pdssed-That the City Treasurer be
and is hereby ordered to destroy under
the supervision of the Committee on
Accounts, all coupons and bords with cou-
pons ATTACHED, that have been cancelled or
transferred by the issue of registered bonds;
that the City Treasurer be authorized to pay
bills approved by the School Committee
amounting to $1S54S9 for the month of
March.
Petitions Presented and Referred-Of E. G.
P. Smith to erect a wooden building on Dow
stceet; of j. G. Tukesbury to erect wooden
building on tht corner of Franklin and New
bury streets; of Charles F. Lovejoy to erect a
wooden building on Spring street; of Joseph P.
Taylor, to raise building on Pearl street.
All of the above were referred with power,
notice having been given by publication.
The Committee on New Wooden Buildings
reported fayorably on the petition of John
Barbour for permission to build private sta
BILE on Hampshire street. Adopted,
The petitions from Common Council were
referred in concurrence.
Adjourned
IN COMMON COUNCIL.
Petitions Presented and Reterred-Of J. A.
Henderson and ais for sidewalks on Neal
street; of Jonas Hamilton and ais. for resetting
of lampposts on West Commercial, Clark and
York streets; of the Selectmen and fifty ctl-
zens of Cape Elizabeth, that the north west
end of Portland bridge be lighted; of VIM.
Quinn for gas light on York street, of Henry
Flynn, for sidewalk on May street.
The orders passed by the upper board were
passed in concurrence.
The papers relative to the School Committee
were read and referred to Joint Special Com
mittee in concurrence, and the following gen
tlemen added on the part of the Common
Council: President Small, Messrs Hale, Perry
and Gage. Adjourned
REAL ESTATE AND BUILDING NoTEs-We
find the following real estate notes in the Rea
Estate Register for April
The Portland Star Match Co., are making ex
tensive improvements in the way of new ma
chinery, and the enlargement of their works, by
the building of brick addition of some fort.
| feet
Mr.. Fassett is making plans, and will buil'
for an up town gentleman a square, twO-stor,
brick house, 30x39, truncated roof, with orna
mental iron cresting. 1t will contain eigh