Griggs courier. (Cooperstown, Griggs Co., Dak. [N.D.]) 1885-1902, 1892-05-13
a Sensible Reply.
LEE, N. D., May sth. lss

LEE, N. u, MAY SIN. lSVS.
10 the Editor of the COURIER:
In the last number of the Courier
Rev t. H. Larson has an article re-
lating to our school trouble, that Is so
entirely misleading that ask for space
in your paper for an answer, that your
readers may see both sides OF the qucs-
ton at issue, and then intelligcntly
Judge for themselvesif if any great wrong
was committed against Ole Gronlid and
Ole f. Forelc..
Section 40 Of general school laws of
North Dakota reads as follows. Every
parent, guardian or other person hay
ing control of amy child between eight
and fourteen years of age, shall be re.
quired to send such child to public
school in the district, city, town or viii
lage in which he resides, ut least twelve
weeks in each school year; six weeks OF
which shall be consecutive.
PROVIDED, That such parent, guard
ian OF other person, having control of
any child shall be excused from such
duty, by the school board of the district
or the board of education of the city,
town or village, whenever it shall be
shown to their satisfaction that one of
the following reasons therefor exists,
to-wit:
!. First, That such Child is taught for
the same length of time, in \ private
school, approved by such board; but no
school shall be approved w such board
unless the branches usually taught in
the pubiic schools are taught in such
school.
Second. That such child has already
acquired the branches of learning
taught in the public schools.
1 Third. That such child is in such a
physical or mental condition (as de-
clared by a competent physician, if re-
|: quircd by the boarD as to render such
attendance inexpedient or impractica-
ble. If no school be taught the rcquis-
lite length of time within two and one
half miles of the residence of such child
by the nearest road, such attendance
shall not be enforced.
Section IA, Penalty] Any such
parent, guardian or other person fail
ing to comply with the requirements Of
the foregoing section, shall upon con-
viction thereof. be deemed guilty of a
misdemeanor, and shall be fined in q
sum not less than five (5), nor more
r than twenty (20) dollars fer the first Of
fense, nor less than ten 10) dollars nor
more than fifty (5O) dollars for the
second and every subsequent offense
with costs in each case.
Section 142, Neglect of duty prosecu.
ton for.] 1t shall be the duty of the
president of the board of education OF
any city, town and village, or the presi.
dent of the school board of any district
to inquire into all cases of neglect Of
the duty prescribed in this article. and
, ascertain from the person neglectlng to
perform such duty, the reason therefor,
if any, and shall forthwith proceed to
secure the prosecution of any offense
occurring under this article. and any
such president neglecting to secure
such prosecution for such offense with
i'll fifteen days after written notice has
+ been served by any taxpayer in said
city, town or village or district, uni. SIS
such person SO complained of shall be-
excused by the boad Of education or
school board for reasons hereinbefore
stated, shall be deemed::guilty of mis-
demeanor, aud liable to fine of not
less than five (O nor more than twenty
(2O dollars.
Now, Mr.. Editor, here is the plain
Jaw which governed Mrs. Rukke in this
: unpleasant duty of having Ole Gronlid
and Ole F. Forde brought before the
court at Cooperstown of which Mr..
Larson complains of.
Mr.. Larson states in his article that
"the case is singular, because those
people have in reality been prosecuted
by law and fined for doing their best
in giving their children christian edu-
cation" Now Mr.. Larson, is this so.
Can you, who claim to be christian, q
minister Of the gospel, deliberately
come down to downright falsehood: