The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1888-11-02

The PUBLlC INTERESTS COMMIT
TED TO THEIR CARE, ARE NOT
SUITABLE FOR THE EXERCISE OF
PUBLIC FUNCTIONS"
A full report Of the proceedings In the
case OF the Bloomsbury School Directors
appeared In the COLUMBIAN at the time the
matter was in progress, aud our readers
will remember the circumstances. After a
full hearing the court of this county re-
moved the board Of directors and appoint
ed others In their stead. and filed an opin.
ion In the case which was prepared after
many days of ca .eful Investigation. From
this decision j. q. Brown, J. ]. laval and
l. Hagenbuch, three of the removed direct
ors, appealed TO the Supreme Court, and
the case was argued last April, but not de-
cided until October 4.
Under ordinary circumstances we should
| say nothing further than TO print the opin-
ion, but in justice TO all concerned we are
compelled to call attention to the action
OF one OF the parties, who in the columns
OF his newspaper, the Republican, publish
ed some most remarkable articles, in which
the writer, ]. G. Brown, attacked every
body in any way opposed to him in the
case. Those people who thought he was
wrong in his action as director were call
| ed street corner loafers; the counsel who
were employed against him were repeated
| ly maligned and misrepresented; Judge
Elwell was charged with having disposed
OF the case in chastity prepared opin.
| ion," with the intimation that his own
pleasure interfered with the public busi-
ness because of his haste TO depart for
Florida, when the truth was that his de-
parture for the south was delayed against
| his physicians advice, in order that he
might prepare what the Supreme Court
calls ian excellent opinion which fully in
| dicated the correctness Of his action"
Even the man who served the subpoenas
on witnesses was made the subject of at
| tempted ridicule. When the new school
board paid the counsel whom they had
authorized to go on with the case, both the
board and their attorneys were charged
with being parties to conspiracy to rob
the school treasury, in one of the most
malicious and libellous articles that ever
appeared In the press of this county. Sub
seQuently Mr. Brown endeavored to in
finence the town auditors to refuse to pass
the order issued by the board in payment
Of legal fees, but he failed in this as he did
in every previous and subsequent step in
the case.
| In one article he said "The public have
recorded their vindication, and all that is
still left is for The Supreme Court TO record theirs. "
The Supreme Court has recorded its vim
dication, and more scathing rebuke than
it has administered to the appellants, it
would be difficult to express in language.
All the legal technicalities upon which they
hoped to win their case are unnotIced by
the Supreme Court, and the case is decided
purely upon the merits in the following
opinion by Justice Green:
OPINION.
In this case certain citizens and tax pay.
ers OF the Bloom School District COMPLAIN,
inter AHA that the school directors of the
district have neglected and refused to ap
point sufficient number of teachers to
keep the schools in operation. Answers
were filed by the six directors in sections
OF three each. In both the answers 1t is
stated that fifteen Of the teachers were ap
pointed at the regular meeting for that pur
pose On Gath June, and that this was all
that were to be appointed except the Prin.
cipal. 1t appears by the evidence that six
teen was the number that were annually
appointed for several years Immediately
previous and there is no doubt, under the
pleadings and evidence, that this was thu
number intended to be appointed for the
year in question, 1887. AS the necessit.
for more than fifteen is alleged in the peti'
tion and is not denied in either OF th'
answers, but on the contrary both the
answers and the recorded proceedings o.
the directors at their meetings, conclusive
ly prove that another was to be appointed
but was not, it must be taken that tht
learned court below was right in holding
that there was necessity for another teach
er to be appointed. The evidence taken by
the Commissioner also fully justified thu
court in finding as fact that there wa,
such a necessity. This being so, it is un
doubtedly correct that the board of direct
ors, when they failed to appoint an addi
tional teacher, failed to perform an imperatiu
duty.
The proceedings of the board show al
unseemly, indeed an absurd, contest ovel
the amount Of the salary to be paid to the
additional teacher. Three of the directors
insisted that $500 should be paid, and the
other three insisted that the amount SHOULD
be $1,000. They refused to make any con
cessions to each other, and actually allow
ed the appointment of q teacher to go by
default because they were unwilling Il
agree upon the amount of the salary.
| PERSONS WHO HAVE MORE PRIDE
OF OPINION THAN REGARD FOR THE
PUBLIC INTERESTS COMMITTED TC
THEIR CARE ARE NOT SUITABLE
FOR THE EXERCISE OF PUBLIC
FUNCTI ONS. THE BEST, IN FACT THE oNL'
COURSE TO ADOPT WITH THEM IS TO RRLIRyl
THsN FROM THR DIFFICULTIES OF THEIR POSI-
TIoY AND PUT OTHERS IN THEIR PLACE. TIL
Is WHAT THR LEARNED COURT BELOW DID, AM
IN AN RYuRLLENT OPINION FULLY INDICATED
THE CORRECTNESS OF rrs ACTION.
Proceedings Affirmed.