People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1899-02-17
From Bluff Township.

pr0Verb THAT a good man cannot be
downed," We wish tG say word
or two about that good man, nOtwith.
standing the word OF District No. 135
is not considered good in court.
It is indeed a remarkable case Of
downing the right and upholding the
wrong. If there had been no evidence
given On the defendants side, the
plaintiffs own evidence should have
rendered a verd ct against him. His
testimony shows that he violated his
contract 10 its main and essential
parts. The contract reads that A. D.
Mu in should teach and govern mind
you it says teach and govern, not stay
at home Or at Wellington and draw
his salary said school eight school
months for $50 per school month.
Now it says per school month, specify
ing the length of time as well as the
character OF the work. The law de-
fniag a school month to be four weeks
of five days each and six hours each
day. Now his own evidence shows
that he did not teach or govern said
school fopr weeks of five days each Of
six hours each day for the time that
he claims pay, 10 doing so, he openly
violated his contract. And according
to the contract the board could not
pay him for work he did not do. We
know they kept the goggles over the
jury'S eyes by making it appear that
no children came to school, and that
he stood ready and willing to teach.
By his own evidence he showed that
there was some one at school two
mornings and he told them to 20 home
there would be no school that day.
And we think he never came more
than three days until he abandoned
the school, say abandoned because
the board desired or requested him to
teach two weeks longer and he actually
went away with the keys of the school
house, the board having to get other
keys. Does that look like he stood
ready and willing to teach? The Jury
decides that he did. Why should a
teacher or any one else receive pay for
work not performed? A man be-
Titles himself by claiming something
for nothing; Would man be justified
In claiming full pay when he bad
agreed to work for the farmer for the
entire harvest but did not actually
work but two or three days? We
think not, but the jury says you must
pay him. If this verdict is just, it
should be just in similar cases, as for
instance the plaintiff owes to one in
the district for actual board of six or
seven weeks, now the jury has awarded
him verdict for work that he did
not do but was said to be willing TO
do, Then he should pay for his board
that he did not board but was willing
TO board. This amendment should be
attached to the jury, verdi;t, also
commanding him to pay for time
actually boarded to the amount of six
or seven weeks. 1t seems that the
attorney, Mr.. Ready, fitted the Jury
with goggles that showed up green
and blue according to the fancy of
said attorney. We do not blame the
attorney for it, but the wearer. The
jury seemed TO be strongly impressed
with the fact that the board did not
visit the school previous to the time
that they did visit it. Mr.. Ready
SAID In our presence that this fact was
the main reason Of the board losing
the case. What an idea, II the
teacher was incompetent, would the
TACT that the board did not visit the
school make him competent? Or if he
were immoral would the boards
neglect to visit make him moral?
There Can be but one honest answer
TO these questions, but it seems from
the verdict that it lifted him right
out OF the mire. If we look on page IS
section 81 of school laws of 1897, we
ind as duty of the board to visit the
school by one or two or all together at
least once during the term, to advise
and confer with the teacher. The
time Of such visit being left to the
discretion Of the board. This fact
was 10 itself evident no one would ex-
pect that any teacher would perform
any improper conduct In the presence
OF a member OF the board or any visit.
ing patron; such as putting his feet
In the childrens' laps at recitation.
As the old prOverb is, "he would put
his best foot forward" A teacher Of
the right sort should not have to be
told how to conduct himself before
his school, it belittIes him 10 his owl
eyes and in the eyes of his school anC
in the eyes ofalfother candid persons
No one expects the board TO give thu
teacher lessons in good conduct, it il