The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1897-11-16
BOARD OF CONTROL
ATTACKED In COURT
John Jermyn Brings a Suit TO Dust the
Board OF Twenty.one.
PRESENT MAKEUP Is NOT LEGAL
IL Is Claimed by the Relator That the
Act Under Which the Present Con-
troilers Presume to Direct the
School Districts Affairs Are Uncon-
stitutional--This Contention Was
Held to BE Correct in a Similar
Case in Luzrrne County.

The quo warranto proceedings
against the school board, which The
Tribune told about at length in a re-
cent issue, were yesterday duly insti-
tuted in Prothonotary Pryor's office by
Attorney |. H. Burns.
District Attorney John r. Jones is
made plaintiff in the name of the COM
monwealth and John Jermyn appears
in the capacity of rclator. The petition
reads as follows:
And now, to wit, Nov. Is, 1897, comes
John r. Jones, district attorney of the
county of LaCkawannd, and llles this his
suggestion, and gives the court TO UNDER
stand that he is Informed:
"First-That the city of Scranton is
city of the third class and on the 10th
day of March, A. d. 1877, by the ordin-
ance of the city council accepts the act
of the general assembly of May, the 23rd,
1874, entitled, An Act dividing the cities
into three classes etc.
''Second-The said act does inter ALA,
provide that all of said cities of the third
class shall constitute one school district
and all the property shall be the COM
mon property of said district, and the
members of the board of school directors
shall have the power to levy the school
taxes and the same rights and powers IN
relation to real and personal property,
as is now by law conferred on the school
directors of the several districts of this
commonwealth, and they shall govern and
manage the public schools, in the manner
now provided by law, for the maintenance
of the system of education, by common
schools. 1t is also further provided that
each ward of the city shall elect one
school controller.
MANNER OF ELECTION.
"Third-In pursuance of the said act
and it's supplements, school controllers
were elected in the city of Scranton in
the year 1873, to wit, one from each of the
twenty-one wards of the city of Scranton
and their successors have since that time
down to the present assumed to be a
board of school controllers, and they
levied taxes and managed the schools of
the said city of Scranton, and have in
all respects assumed to perform the func-
tions of a regularly and legally constitute
ed board of sci COL directors.
"Fourth--That the defendants i'm the
above entitled case are now claiming to
hold the office of school controller of
each of the several wards of the city of
Scranton, and as a body are levyng taxes
upon the property taxable within the city
of Scranton, and are contracting debts
and eXpending the money Of the school
district, as your rclator believes, with
out any warrant of law.
'tltth-Ihat your relatOr AYERS that
neither the said act Of May %, 1874, or
any other statute before or since said
date authorizes the election of a school
controller from each of the several wards
of the city of Scranton or allows, or au-
thorizes a board of school controllers
composed of one controller from each
ward to perform any of the duties per-
tanning to the public schools of the city
of Scranton, either in the levying of
TO- n in Ip.
care and action of said controllers is null
and void and without warrant of law for
the reason that the said acts of assembly
purporting to authorize such school con-
trollers, and the acts performed by them
are wholly void and of no effect and that
the said controllers in the pretended eX-
crcise of the duties performed by them
are usurping upon the commonwealth
without authority or warrant of law and
are not entitled to hold such office of
school controller or to perform any du-
ties in relation to the care of the schools.