Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1874-08-12
Public School Regulations.

a uniform rule that any scholar absent
without permission of committee or teach
er, should be suspended. On Corpus
Christi day the children of Roman Cath
olics were absent without such excuse, In
attendance on services of their church.
They were suspended by the committee
for the remainder of the term. Their pa
rents prayed that an injunction might issue
to restrain further suspension for that
cause. Chancellor II. H. Wheeler refused
to grant the injunction. The main points
of his opposition we give, as they touch
good many questions in which our readers
are interested. He says:
The public schools of this state are pro-
vided for by laws enacted by the leglsla-
ture at various times according to pro-
vision in Sect. Al of the constitution, where
in it is declared that a competent number
of schools ought to be maintained in each
town for the convenient instruction of
Youth" There could not well be a school
for convenient instruction without some
authority to control the sessions of the
school and attendance of the scholars rest
ing somewhere besides in each parent sew
orally. In providing for the schools the
legislature has provided for this necessity
by making it the duty of the prudential
committee. $780, and of the town superln-
tendent, 5 10, Chap. %, Gen. Stats, " to
adopt all requisite measures for the inspec-
ton, examination and regulation OF the
schools and for the improvement OF the
scholars in learning" and by making the
measures of the town superintendent para
mount in cases of disagreement OF differ
cnce between them. Laws OF 1872, %.
Under these provisions of the laws, the
schools maintained are such us the commit
tee and superintendent make them by the
measures they adopt pursuant to the au-
thoritv given them by the same power that
created the schools. As they are regulat-
ed they are for the benefit of all the youth
of the districts maintaining them proper
| to attend school who comply with the reg
ulations. These laws have conferred upon
the parents of all such children the priv
ilege of sending their children to the
schools upon compliance with all the meas
ures lawfully adopted, but not an absolute
right to send them without regard TO the
regulations.
In delegating to committees and superln-
tendents the authority to adopt all requisite
measures for regulating the schools, the
/ legislature conferred upon them trust
very important to scholars and parents AS
| they are connected with the welfare of the
schools In determining what measures
to adopt and how to enforce them. the conf
mittee and superintendent act in a capacity
that is in its nature judicial. SO long IA
they act within the scope oftheir authority,
and not in violation of any law OF the
state, their decisions in respect to these
matters, subject to the superiority OF the
superintendent over the committee, are
/ final. The right of parent TO send his
child to school and the right of the scholar
to attend school are each subordinate to
| this authority of the committee and super
/ ntendent This is apparent from the de-
/ cision made in Guernsey VS. Pltkln, 81 t.,
/ 224. where it was held that the committee
might lawfully exclude scholar from
/ school for refusing to write English COM
/ positions when required. Also from Spill
/ er vs. Woburn, y, Allen, 127, in which II
WAS decided that the committee could pro
perlv exclude Il scholar from school for
/ refusing to bow her head during prayer at
J the opening of the school in the morning.
according to Il regulation made by the com
mittee Likewise from DOnahOe pro. ami
: =.
the power of the committee TO require all
scholars to read from the common version
of the Bible and to cXpel the plaintiff
/ from school for refusing to comply with
! the requirement was fully sustained. 1t
/ is said in argument for the orators that al
/ though the committee may have this author
/ itv as to scholars when they are actually
ut school. it does not extend 80 far rs to
/ give them any power to eXpeI Il scholar
! for ANYTHING done away from school or for
not attending school. But in Sherman vs..
/ CharlestoWn. 3 Cush.. 160 it was decided
that the committee could lawfully exclude
a child from school whom they deemed TO
I be of n licentiouS or immoral character,
although such character was not manifest
ed by any acts of RIGHTEOUSNESS OF i'm
morality within the school. Further, tar
diness and irregularity in attendance dis
turb the operations and hinder the useful
ness of any school wherever they exist. and
therefore punctuality and regularity are
essential 10 the well being of the schools
rs well in respect to scholars who would
not as to those who would be tardy or IL
regular. The prevention of tTdiness or
/ absence and the promotion of punctuality
and regularity would favorably affect the
school itself and the scholars actually there,
and regulation that would accomplish or
advance those things would be requisite
measure for the improvement of the
scholars in learning. As to the authority
of the committee to exclude scholars, Allen
j. in Stevenson vs. Hall, II Barb, 222
said. speaking Of trustees who are similar
officers: . The trustees have the power
and it is their duty to dismiss or exclude n
pupil from the school when in their iudg-
ment it is necessary for the good order and
proper government ofthc schools so to do
And Shaw Oh. j. in Spear vs.. Cummings,
% Pick 226, said: " But it is asked what
is the remedy of parents and guardians
whose children are refused the benefit of
schools designed for the instruction of all
We think if Il child of proper age and
qualifications is rejected by the master the
proper course for the parent is to appeal
to the committee. If so, on their requisi-
ton, the master should refuse to accept
the pupil, they would have ample means
to enforce their authority by means of their
contract with the master. If they shall
approve and confirm the act of the master
we are to believe that there is good and
sufficient cause for the rejection of the pu-
pill. The law will not presume that the
committee who are invested with the power
vi SuperInlenuehCc anu management VIII
act arbitrarily and unjustly in matter sub
mitted to their Judgment"
1t is also urged in argument that the en-
forcement of this rule for the reasons for
which it was enforced against the children
of the orators in this instance is contrary
to that part of Article Ill. of the Constitu-
ton, which declares that no man can :" be
justly deprived or abridged of any civil
right as citizen on account of his religious
sentiments or peculiar mode of religious
worship; and that no authority can OF
ought to be vested in or assumed by any
power whatever that shall in any case in
terfere with or in any manner control the
rights Of conscience in the free exercise Of
religious worship" Pope Urban ", in