Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-09-30
schools Nos the Private Property OF
school Boards.

schools Not the Private Property or
school Boards.
The supreme court of Illinois has recently
decided q case OF considerable interest under
the school laws of that state. The case arose
In 1871, and was that of one Frances 9. Post,
who resided with ner parents In the school
district; was entitled TO the BENEFITS Snd
privileges OF the public school; and was Q
pupil therein. The pupil was In . class
which, under the rules established by the
school directors, were required to study
bookkeeping as part OF the prescribed
course of education In the school. She had
been directed by the principal Of the school
TO get the books, but declined, because her
parents objected to her pursuing that study
She and her parents were notified that unless
she complied with the requirements she
would be expelled the school. Subsequently
she was fOrcibly expelled. She Instituted an
action Of trespass against the directors and
the principal of the school; and, on trial In
the court below, the jury found a verdict In
her favor. and ed the damages at 1856.
The questions raised by this case were
important, as involving the right OF the
schooi directors to prescribe course of In
struction not expressly warrant ted by the
law; the power OF the directors to enforce
that study against the wish OF the pupil and
of the parents; the power OF the directors to
expel for any other cause than disc Oedieut,
refractory, or incorrigibly bad conduct. The
Court meets all these questions and authori-
tatively determines them. Toe school law
OF the State enumerates photography, read
Ing In English, penmanship, arithmetic,
English grammar, modern geography, and
the history OF the United States, as the stud
les OF the public schools. The law adds, how
ever, "that nothing herein contained shall
prevent the teaching In the com non schools
OF other and higher branches than those
enumerated In this section" The Court
holds that the design of the law ma kers was
to give all the children OF the State the op-
portunity 10 acquire, free OF charge, a knowl-
edge Of the enumerated branches required to
be taught All school regulations mast have
this purpose In view; that Is, the purpose of
the law. The law clothes the directors with
the power TO expel pupils, but only "for dis
ooedient, refractory, or incorrigibly- bad con-
duct" and this forfeiture OF school priyil-
eyes can only be enforced, and the right lost
after sll other reasonable means have failed
The Court, waving decision whether the
directors may compel the study OF ali the
enumerated branches, meets the other ques-
tions emphatically thus:
The question here presented is, whether
the power has been granted the directors to
compel scholars TO study other and higher
branches than those enumerated In the law
1t Is obvious to the minds Of all that the gem
eral assembly did not intend TO clothe the
school directors with power to erect and
maintain seminaries, academies, colleges, or
universities, and compel the teaching OF the
those bodies.
"Tne attempt to exercise such power
would be futile. II would bankrupt the peo-
pie, fail to impart the education designed to
be conferred by such Institutions, and would
not, IL Is believed, materially elevate the
standard Of education among the great body
or the PEOPLE, as only small number have
united the capacity and inclination TO &C.
that none would contend that the permission
10 teach other and higher branches could be
tortured into the meaning that II embraces
The courses pursued In such Institutions. We
regard this as true beyond all dispute. There
IL, then, limit 10 the power TO have other
and higher branches taught In our common
schools.
"Parents and guardians are under the re-
10 their care and nurture, of preparing them
for the discharge of their duties In after life
Iaw-givers IN all free countries, and with
few exceptions in despotic governments,
have deemed IL wise to leave the education
and nurture OF the children of the state to
the direction OF the parent or guardian This
institutions. The state has provided the
means and brought them within the reach Of
school education, but leaves IL to the parents
and guard iaDs to determine the extent to
which they will render IL available to the
This IL comprehensive, and is so reasonable
and just that 1t must meet with general &C
ceptance. The tendency TO cripple the COM
mon school to build up higher branches OF
education Is general, and as the Chic ago
Tribune well says, In commenting upon this |
case. TO encourage or promote 1t is to weaken |
and destroy the common school. That paper |
adds, with just point: |
cit Is time that public attention, and |
ESPECIALLY attention school "A
and boards of education, should be given to /
this subject. The great purpose of the public |
the children In the state to have, at the pub
lie cost, instruction In certain studies, and /
these are enumerated To be orthography, |
English grammar, modern geography and |
the history Of the United States. fhe COM
mon school system does not include taxation /
Tor any higher class OF studies than these, IL /
being the purpose OF the law to instruct az \
the children In these, and TO let those seeking |
higher education do so at their own and |
not at the expense of the public.
The court, after its view OF the law,
affirmed the judgment Of the circuit court |
for damages for the forcible expulsion of this /
young lady, holding The action OF the school |
directors and principal TO have been without
authority OF law, and grossly violative OF |
me rights OF the pupil to the privileges OF |
"The court lays down the rule within which |
pnPils can be suspended ,s or expelled from
justify the Chicago system of suspensions |
and explosions. The child In Chicago, no |
matter how obedient and tractable, who can
get through years schooling without be-
ing suspended or expelled two or three times,
is Fortunate. Indeed, school boards, as a gen
erol thing magnify their office, and forget that
The schools are not their pirate property; that
me schools not charitable Institutions, and
Thai schools t0eTe NOT created for school boards.
The schools the property Of the public, intend
ed for The free Instruction Of the children tOItO az
tend Them q matter Of right and not Of form,
and any rule intended or having the effect
TO exclude q child 10 a direct violation OF the
spirit and letter OF the law"
The Chicago Times In commenting upon
the decision characterizes IL as q wholesome
one; says that by IL "school officers are re-
minded that they have been getting above
their business" and that "it settles whether
parents have any rights In directing the ed
ucstion of their children that school officers
are bound TO respect"
II will doubtless strike our readers how
ever, that the grievances experienced In