The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-06-16
A A OF AUTHORITY
SUPERINTENDENT GOss AND THE
SCHOOL BOARD LOCKED HORNS.
Action-Attorney's Opinion and
Goss's statement.

--H-
The first thing on the programme of the
School Board meeting. last night, was the
reading Of the opinion of Albert Baker. the
boards attorney. on the refusal of Superin-
tendent Goss to submit his appointment of
teachers TO the board. in secret session.
last Tuesday night. The attorney held that
the board could not compel the superin-
tendent to submit bis appointments at any
special meeting or on any certain day. but
could require a report after the appoint
ments had been made. In closing. the re-
port said: In brief. IT is my opinion the
statutes mean that the board may. by a
four-ifths vote or successive votes. over
ruling his discharges. equire the superin-
tendent to keep in service any employe
sought by him to be discharged until the
employees time expires: that the board
cannot, in any case, decide who shall be
appointed as teachers. ETC., but IL may. by
a four-ffths vote, prevent the consumma-
ton, by contract, of any particular per-
son appointed by the superintendent.
THE board has verbally asked me wheth-
er it can prevent the superintendent from
giving out for publication his appointments
before the board has passed upon them.
In answer. 1 beg to say that II is my opin-
ion you have no such power; you can. by
| injunction. prevent breaches OF the law.
| but not of any canons of taste"
/ The opinion held that the appointments
| submitted can be disapproved by the board
at once, but final action cannot be taken
in regard to teachers on trial until the
meeting OF July 6. He recommended that
the board take the appointments under adj
visement until the next regular meeting In
July, and II was concurred In. The list OF
teachers furnished by Mr.. Goss appears
in another column.
After the reading Of the opinion Superin-
tendent Goss gave the foliowins expisna,
his appointments TO the board at its for
mer meeting. His address read:
Mr.. GoSS's STATEMENT.
II nave repeatedly assured your board
and it's members that I did not wish TO ex-
ercise the appointing power in the annual
reorganization of the schools for the year
190o-1901. Both you and my successor. Mr..
Kendall. nave insisted that / should ap-
point the teachers for the succeeding year
because the regular and usual time for
such appointment falls within the term OF
my office and for the further reason that
a stranger could exercise no just dis
elimination. Upon this assurance / have
performed the arduous labor incident TO
the preparation OF these lists. / have been
surprised 10 receive from your board no
fewer than three separate instructions TO
submit the lists OF teachers to a secret ses-
sion of your board before 1 promulgated
them. / have steadily refused to submit
these lists to you, and l append my reasons
for such action.
1.-The law of 1899 passed for the better
government of the schools of indianapolis
aimed to reform the exercise of the ap-
pointing power by denying to the board or
any member OF il undue influence upon the
superintendent or appointing officer. That
this was the aim Of the Legislature Is evil
denced by the history of the movement
for the reform law and by the internal evil
dence of the law itself. Under the law
previous to JAN j. 1900. the superintendent
of schools was a paid expert whose advice
need not be followed further than II pleased
the Board of School Commissioners The
law of 1899 provides In its tenth section:
The superintendent of schools shall have
the sole power TO appoint and discharge
all assistants. principals. supervisors and
teachers authorized by the School Board
TO be employed. subject TO the limitations
I'm this act stated etc. and Section IL pro-
vides: All appointments or discharges OF
assistant superintendent. supervisors.
teachers or employees which may be made
by the superintendent, director or librarian
shall be reported in writing TO. the board
at its next regular meeting, tand) shall be
four-fifths vote of all its members not later
than the next succeeding regular meeting
of such board. The vote must be by yeas
and nays and must be spread in full upon
the record
How any one familiar with the pro-
visions of the laws by which American
States have recently sought to restrain
members of city school boards from abus-
ing the appointing power and overreaching
the superintendent Of schools, how any one
familiar with Sections 10 and II Of the act
guage could believe that 1 could surrender
a proposed list of teachers to a secret
caucus of your board is more than / can
understand.
Wherefore has your board so persistent
ly desired advance copies of these lists
after debate, voting 3 to 2 that l should
the rights of review and appeal granted
your board by the law can be exercised
after a publication of the lists by the SUI
perintendent as well as before. II your
contention is valid that you may at any
time call the superintendent into caucus
and force him 90 disclose proposed OF in
open the door to the old-time warning. adj
vice. caution. threat and intimidation OF
men who hold the power and exercise IL
clandestinely. then there is little or no re-
form in the law of 1899 so far as it affects
the appointment OF teachers
II was willing to forego the exercise OF
the appointing power in this annual reor-
ganization. You asked me to exercise IL.
l have exercised Ii In the spirit and letter
of the law. L am willing to stand for every
act in those lists and l am responsible for
them. The responsibility is on you from
this time to change or not to change them.
That responsibility has not rested on you
previous TO this hour"
ROUTINE MATTERS.
Little else was done during the evening.
The number of telephones TO be put in the
school buildings was carried over to the
next meeting.
The assault of Rolla Harris upon Paul
Grummann. teacher in the Manual Train
ing High School. who reprimanded Har-
ris's daughter. while he was acting as prin-
cipal. was discussed. The board took no
action as to what form of prosecution may
be employed
Il The salary of the business director for
the six months, beginning July 1. was voted
to be at the rate OF 81. 400 a year.
The board then considered some changes
in the rules and adjourned at a late hour.