The Canton advocate. [volume] (Canton, D.T. [S.D.]) 1877-1897, 1878-01-16
Dayton, D. T. |
January TO- 1879 [

i s. Dayton, D..T.
January, 10. 1878.
In the Sioux Valley Nsvs or the 5th
Inst, is q communication from b. b
Burke, wherein he characterizes the county
Board as law dsfying, and accuses them
Of ignorance u constituting the Stat1tes. .-
AZ 1 was member Of the Board at the
time referred to, ! desirs 70 show to lyour
readers that the statement made By Burke
Is false, and only promptsd by malice. He
attempts 70 create the impression that the
Commissioners willfuly planned the for
nation Of School District 56, and further
that they forced the Cosaty Superintend-
ent to form that district The facts are
IS follows: District SO was formed by the
Superintendent, April u, 1877. On the
2Sth OF April, he Withdrew from the Office
OF Register Of Deeds the notice OF for,na.
tion, after having fled it according 10 law,
and at or about the same time he inform.
ed Mr Gould that ne had decided not to
issue the notices for the frst meeting An
appeal was then taken BY Mr.. Gould to
the Board Of County Commissioners as
provided for in Section IS Of the Schoo;
law. This appeal brought for the consider
alton Of the Board the question, Whether
twas the sdnty Of the Superintendent to
issue the notices as by law required,
Sec. 16, $. y, says - = The County Su-
perintsndent ssazl, (making it obligatory
within is days after he ha. formed Dis
trict issue the notices for the first .meetine
appointing the place &c, SO you will see
that School district after it is founded
has. certain rights, guaranteed it by law,
the same as any other person, whether
either came into existance Legally or 9th.
erwise,
The matter was decided on May 9th,
1877, to-wit: that it was his duty to issue
the notices and he was 80 instructed.
Now did this decision form School
district 56, or force the county Superior
dent to DO any act but what the law enjsin-
Cd upon him. and again did 1t prejudice,
or in any way abridge the rights Of Dist.
SS and SO, not in the least, for Sec. Is saws,
any person agrieved BY the acts of the
county Supt, in forming any School Dist.
shall have the rsh. &c sPPss. Z: Is tic Ii
Of County Commissioners, il said appeal
be taken within 50 days from date of
change or formation, this gave districts IS
and 80, until June 18th in which to appeal.
Had they done this. the question Of forms-
ton would have been before the County
Board, and had they sustained the Supt. in
in doing an illegal act, then this charge Of
legalisi;sg might have some foundation
But they wanted their right 70 appeal, and
pstitioned the eounty Supt. 70 destroy Dist
56, which he succeeded to do, on the 9tl,
day Of June, 1877. o. s. Clifford, attorney
for Dist. So, appealed from the decision Of
Supt. Jacobs, to the Beard Of County Com
mlssioaers, the Board designated Monday,
Sept. Sd, 1877 for q hearing, and the case
was ably argued BY o. s. Clifford for the
appellants, and Messrs Jacobs, Burke. and
Falcon in the interests Of Dist. % and SO,
and after careful Investigation of the
facts in and the Law governing the case.
The Board decided that they cannot de-
stroy Dist. So without the consent of ma.
jority of the residents Of said district, and
in this you will see, that their grievances
whether real or insasinary, they hsd taken
course exactly the opposite efthe provis-
ions Of Law to obtain redress.
Next came the appeal from the decision
of the Board to the district Court (Which
this willful decsivsr entirely ignores. )-|
Case was called Oct. IS, R. f., rettigrew
appearing for district cS and So, and o. s.
Clifford for 56. Mr.. Ps:tigrew produced
the petition on which the district was
founded, read the papers and decision ap-
pealed from &c. Judge Shannon said that
il Was too late to 50 back TO the formation
and gave, IS his opinion that school Dist.
SO was:a corporation Dsfacto, and could
not be dissolved without the consent Of
the residents ofsaid district and ordered
that the decislon Of the Board Of %. Cont
missioners BE- affirmed.
# they were dissatisfied with this decis-
ion, they had a legal and adequate rsmsdy
In IN appeal to the Supreme Csurt Of the
Territory. Did they accept Of this wise
provision Of the laws No Sirl but ii de-
ffance Of Law they say, they have appeal
cd to the Territorial Superintendent, IL
though no one inidistrict 50 knew any
thing about it until a.tsr tho decisisn was
had In the matter, and then only By hear
say / have been reliably Informed that
on the 18th Of Dec. q few persore rot to,
gether, and las John Browns indictment
ready at the instigation Of the dl and
not having fear Of Gbd before his eyes viii
fully planei this grand, coup ds a, and
selected : COMMITTEES 70 represent them be-
fore Supt. Cation on the 18th. &
These psrsons started for Elk Point and
on the 18th they had N exparte hearing,
and then and there the Territorial Supt
gave the coup -de-gracs 10 district Sc, IN d
g-aRgp VS1N