The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1900-11-16

Judge II. NJ. Edwards yesterday
handed down an opinion containing :,
decision in the Carbondale High scnool
case. He dsmsses the preliminary in
junction and DEGREES that the plaintiff.
having n remedy at law. has no stand
ing in equity court. The opinion tol-
lows:
FACTS.
l. Aug. %. 1890. plaintiff was employed by the
School Board of the Scl.Dol District OF the CITY
OF Carbondale as princirM' OF the high schoo'
Tor the term OF one school scar beginning Oct.
2, lsVo, ut a salary Of sl.a6u contract was
entered into between the parlcN e,nhod!ing the
terms Of the employment and the plaintiil per.
formed his duties rs principal to Ihc apparent
satisfaction of the school board
.. Before the expiration Of the school year ana
the organization OF the incoming board, 10 VII.
on May 81. 1900, the board passed u resolution,
the material part Of which is as follows:
"Whereas, on the second day of October, A..
d., 1879. the School District Of Carbondalc IitS
entered into an agreement in writing WIN pr"'
fessor W. D. Dryden, employ ing the said brsucn
principal of the Carbontalr High school LOT
the school term beginning OIL the second dRy "I
October, a. D.. 1900, at a salary OF $1,000 per
school term; and ~ =,
Whereas. 1t now seems after fair trial oi
said Professor W. p. Dryden in the p1
stion named that il would be eSpedient
ana for the best interests Of the school OF Gar
boBdalc TO continue him in the cipaclt! oi prii'
cipal for n longer period than AT hist aSreeu
upon; now. be it
"Resolvcd That the terms of said agreement Of
the second d.y OF October. 1889. be changed IN
so far as they relate to the period over when
such contract extends and that the SAID contract
with said Dryden he extended to cover ana IN
cludc the next ensuing school term ending III
or about June, 1901
ton was adopted by four affirmative votes atier
a roll call. the names OF the directors voting
for and against being duly recorded. In phr-
suancc to this action OF the board supplement
AIRY agreement was made with the plaintiff ca
tending the time OF lis employment ior ahothef
year.
B. On July l6, 1900. the new school board reg
ularly adopted IL resolution, which is in part
Il, follows:
"Rcsolved. That the resolution Of the board
OF school directors OF Carbondale City OF May
Fl, 1900, resolving as follows be ana
the same is hereby repealed and rescindcd, ana
accordingly the so-cacd supplementary contract
between said hoard and ". ID. Dryden, extending
his contract so as to employ him for the schoc
pal OF the high school of Carbondalc be and
the same is hereby nullied and abrogatcd. NO
tice OF such revocation of contract TO he at once
given To said W. ID. Dryden"
|. On Sept. l. 1900. G.. NJ. Leshcr was appoint
cd by the school board acting principal OF the
hirl, school. and A. W. Gcary was appointed to
assist him until such time as permanent prih'
cipal should be elected.
5. At the opening of the high school Sept. I.
1000. the plaintiff, Mr.. Lesher and some OF the
directors were present. The piaintiif was tner' ,
prepared to perform the duties of principal
The directors prevented him There was much
confusion. terminating in the arrest OF the plain
titf OH trial and uniounded charge
The plaintiff has complete and adequate
remedy at law and The bill in this case should
therefore be dismissed
DISCUSSION
Whether or no the extension of a CONTRACT
from one year to two. when the original election
OF the principal was for one year, is substan'
ital compliance with the Act OF June %, iss2,
giving school boards the right to elect principals
nj high schools for two successive school terms
is an inquiry that We must necessarily leave
an open question ut present. 1t Is enough tGr
II; to say now that the plaintiff has an ample
remedy at law. The contention between tli'
plaintiff and the school district involves moth
ing more than contract relation. If this con:
and has no cause of complaint; ii his contract
is for two years, he must resort to an action
at las.
II is claimed the part OF the p!aintiif that
pose Of protecting the best interests Of the high
school and its pupils We may conceive OF
case where the conditions are such as TO
Justify interference ny iniuncton., hat Tie
unusual. They do not exist in this case. 1t
is true, rs the evidence shows, that the PLAN.
tilf is an exceptionally capable principal, ana
that the appointmel: of temporary principal,
who is assisted by another teacher to do the
work formerly dcne by the plaintiff alone. is
unsatisfactory TO a number of the patrons OF the
high school; but this is - responsibility cast by
law upon the school directors.
The position OF a teacher in the public school
is not an office, and ior the breach oi valid
contract employing him there is remedy by
action This case arose on mandamus ut
the instance of one teacher to oust another each
claiming an election from the school board
Mandamrs and Injunction proceedings are alike
in one thing: they are both extraordinary rem.
cdies, and can only he invoked in clear cases
Rice, L. j., says: "ror il as the relator con
tends. Il teacher in the public schools. may have
right to the place. as distinguished from a
right OF action for his salary or for breach OF
contract. an uns'smly conflict, highly detri.
mental to the welfare Of the school, might arise
il the respondents were to undertake to oust
the incumbent without an adjudication Of his
right in a proceeding in which he had an op.
portunity to be beard
All the cases in the hooks, as lar as we have
been able to learn, agree that an injunction VIII
[ContimIcd OH Page a.