The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-03-13
THE SCHOOL APPROPRIATION.
A NOVEL wAy OF SECURING THE
CREDITS or THE aROEERs.

| IL will bs remembered that Of the $4,000 M
propriated By the Legislature ut Its last session
| $4,000 were turned over to Administrator
Tsaacson, who In also thu treasurer Of The School
Board leaving seoso still to ba paid for the same
account OF the amount paid over "a 600 has
been di'bursed ,by the Administrator of FL
| nance and treasurer OF the School Board In
payment of salaries due TO the school teachers
1 for the year 1873 The remainder, as provided
| By the Legislative enactment. goes towards the
settlement of the claims OF the teachers against
| the city TOR the year 1877.
| Yesterday we were informed. not very anthem
| tlcaly, however. that Mr. Lusher. the State Su-
perintendent OF Public Schools. was In posses
1 sion Of the balance of the appropriation. say
t600e but that he declined turning the same over
4 to the treasurer because he understood that II
wns the intention of the school directors to lrst
ascertain which of the school teachers owed
money to brokers, bankers or friends" with
| the inferred purpose Of compelling the settle
ment of the loans; that In order to obtain the
desired information the board would require
| each and every teacher employed In the public
schools to make aft lavit concerning his or her
status In relation to the money lenders.
Surprised at the singular character of the
information. representative of the DEMOCRAT
at the City Hall to iesrn whether he knew any
thing OF the report. Mr.. Isaacson answered
that he understood that It was true and that
Mr. Lushei had 50 expressed himself. but not
to him administrator Isaacsonl however
Meeting Mr.. WIN. O. Rogers, the city super
intendent of public schools. we asked him ii he
had any knowledgs of the natter Mr.. Rogers
answered In the affirmative. saying that he
understood tn t the case was as reclted above
From our conversation with Administrator
Isaacson we learned that he still held the $4,000
! surplus OF the amount turned over to him by
Mr.. Lusher. which, with the $4,000 said to be In
| his possession. and about $500 collected on
| taxes of 1877. made q total OF S115O0 or q little
| more than half Of the amount due to ths
| teachers for December 1879. In other word4
| should he be placed Ia pos -ession OF The $4,000
stil imp I'D by the state he would be- enabled to-
| pay each teacher on MI half of q months salary
Tor the year 1s77. This "half. MONTH business
| is where the shoe pinches The money lenders,
who are anxious to be paid out of the money
specially appropriated by the Legislature,
whereas, had not such an appropriation been
made they would have been com pelled TO aw at
the col ection Of the school proportion OF taxes
Of 1877 to be reinih 1rsed the amounts advan, ed
by them o. rates. bv the way. fully iustifying
almost any amount of delay.
Mr. a asshesPpa anu 9th h o anned 10 could
unfairly To the brokers when the former were
paid the so 600 portion OF the appropriation
talthough there might be some), but cited
several cases where. on the contrary. the teach-
or had requested that the amounts due them
should be paid directly to persons to whom
they had transferred their claims against the
city. OF course the letter OF the law was so
plain that Administrator Isaaeson Ton the advice
oil Mr. Lusher. Mr.. Ihos. J. bemmas, president
I the School Board. and Of the City Attorney
declined doing So. but said that la every case
he would pay the money to the Original
! owners of the CLAIMS. who could personally
settle with those who might have made ad
vances or loans to tnem. And In strict accord
anee to law. were the payments made.
To return to the reported action of Superln-
tendent Lusher, and to his statement of the
the City Hall what has either Mr.. Lusher or the
School Board to do with the matter other than
that the superintendent shall turn over the mon
ey to the easurer Of the School Board. to be dis
rolls to be furnished by the school Board. and
In strict compliance with the law which Mr.
Lusher himself Ia his communication to Ad-
minstratyr Isaacson, under date of February
6. 1879. interprefs In the following words:
The pay rolls OF the City Board OF Directors
being the only proper evidence of the identity
OF persons entitled to the amounts thereon.
and said roll not being negotiable instruments.
and the City Board of Directors AMI all its off,
GERS. g well as the parish boards, being more
over fotb idfen 70 Issue negotiable evidence Of
March 26 1s7): it IL obvious that all advances
or loans made by bankers, brokers, or friends
of teachers, or other employees, on account of
their salaries. are mere personal aecommoda
I'll ns. which have not In any legal sense divest |
cd the teachers and other employees OF their
original and continued ownership OF such sal !
aries.
You are therefore required by the intent Of the
Dtoyiso. to cause payments certified on the pay
rolls TO be made directly to the persons named
therein. as rendering the service or furnishing |
the convenience or supplies. and TO take his or |
her rec lpt therefor IN proof of payment"
. when we received the information ii was after |
business hours and too late to interview Super |
fntendent Lusher himself on the subject.