Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1886-10-01
FRIDAY MORNING. OCT. 1. 1885.
THE QUESTION OF OPENING
THE SCHOOLS,

IHE SCHOOLS.
The question of reopening the county
schools, for the decision of which four
waiting, is pressing one, and we are glad
to hear that Mr.. Roller has petitioned the
Court of Appeals for mandamus in his
individual case. We trust. the Court. in
consideration of the situation of uncer-
tainty that exists, will give it's opinion at
the earliest moment consistent with the
full examination of the questions raised In
this new case. We have read very care
fully the opinion of the Court in the Wythe
case, and it appears to us that, as far as
Augusta is concerned, it hangs on whether
the State Board was right in appointing
Mr.. Grattan (Mr. Rollers predecessor) for
q term of four years, instead of for the un-
expired term of DIR. r. s. Hamilton. Ii
the Courts opinion in Burkes VS.. Hinton,
that appointments to vacancies in constl-
tutional offices must be for the unexpired
term alone, rules then Mr.. Roller loses his
case. Mr.. Grattan, under this ruling. was
not County Superintendent after 1881, 1.-THE
end of DIR, Hamilton's constitutional
term) except as holding over to await his
successor. The mere fact that Grattan
Constitutional State Board of Education
did not entitle him to hold the Office for
two years more than the Constitution
itself permitted him. A constitutional
Board cannot give legality to violation
of the law, and its commissions to effect
that are no more than waste paper. Had
Mr.. Roller been appointed Superintendent
July l. 1881, Mr.. Grattan would have
waved his four years. commission in vain
TO keep Mr.. Roller out. Mr.. Jordan's
present commission for four years is not
good for later than July l, 1889. The
Court says:
sThe public free school system of Virginia
was inaugurated in 1870, and the Superinten-
dents first appointed entered upon their terms
of Office January /, 1871, and held for three
years terms, until July l, 1877, when, under
the amended Constitution, the four-years terms
began; and it now is term of four years,
3 dating from July l., 1877, and each four years
thereafter
It seems to us very clear that the opin-
ion of the Court of Appeals in the above
extract is adverse to Mr.. Rollers petition
The action of the legislature has nothing
to do with Mr.. Jord ans claim to the Of
fee. He was appointed February goth.
and the vacating resolution was not passed
until February Goth, Had he been ap
pointed any time after July 1. IS. he could
have mandamused Mr.. Roller out, accord
ing to the extract from Judge Fauntleroy :
opinion. given above.
Since writing the above we have read
circular letter from State Superintendent
pof Public Instruction. Bnehsaan-embo-
dying an opii&o1 received by him from
Attorney General Ayers. Mr. Buchanan
thus sums up the legal status OF the case:
- "The decision of the Court of Appeals, and
the opinion of the Attorney General as to the
effect thereof, warrant the following conclu-
sions:
81. That the term of Office of all the pres
ent superintendent of schools must end June
80. 1882"
go. That all appointments to fill any vac
ancies which may occur prior to July 1, 1885,
must be made for unexpired term to end June
80, 1889.
.s3. That the superintendent of schools tc
be recognized as legal are: For Highland
county, o. P. Chew; King and Queen county
John Temple; Smyth county, A. G. Pendleton
Surry county. William billiard; Williamsburg
w. c. Constable.
81 That the superintendent of schools to
be recognized as legal for all the other coun-
ties of the State are those appointed since jar
uary 1, 1885,"
The Court of Appeals, yesterday, in the
petition of Roller VS.. Jordan granted Z
rule nisi, and fixad on next Thursday
morning to hear the parties.