The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1901-01-08

Andrew B. Duvall, the Attorney for the
District, yesterday submitted to the Com
missioners his opinion upon the cOmmuni-
cation received by them some days ago
from the Board of Children's Guardians.
The letter to the Commissioners asked
that the opinion of the Attorney should
be obtained upon the question of the au-
thority of the Board of Guardians to di-
vest itself of certain of it's wards. Mr..
Duvall submits the following statement
OF the facts in the case:
1T appears that several years ago the
Police Court, under the act of Congress
approved July %, 1892, establishing the
Board of Guardians, committed to 1t the
guardianship of three children. Recently
the board, being satisfied that it would
be for the welfare of the children to trans
fer them to the care of other parties,
made application to the Police Court to
have the commitment set aside. In eply
the board is informed that the Police
Court holds that it is without power to
set aside the commitment after the term
of court at which the same was made"
The Attorney states his opinion that
the application of the board could not
have been presented to the Police Court
as fully as it might have been. While
II may be true he says, that the court
has no power to alter its judgments after
the expiration of the term, yet the act
of the court in committing these children
to the Board of Children's Guardians was
not a criminal proceeding in any sense
of the term, nor was the order of the
court in the premises a judgment in the
sense in which it enters judgment in
criminal cases.
Here we have the state represented in
this jurisdiction b.. Congress as parens
patriae, exercising those paternal powers
necessary to the public welfare in re-
spect to the right and duty of caring for
destitute and abandoned children. This
plainly is a mere administrative function,
which, for purposes of convenience, Con-
gress has entrusted to the Police Court
and the Criminal Court.
Suppose, for instance, that child
abandoned and destitute should become en-
titled by bequest to a large fortune, and
thus be enabled to secure the largest
endowment of education, so as to fit it
for the position in life, it would be en-
titled to occupy by reason of its wealth.
Can it be possible that under such circum-
stances the guardianship of the child must
continue with tle restricted advantages
incident TO its commitment to the Board
of Guardians? Or, suppose that after the
order of commitment to the board, 1t Is
ascertained that the child is not abandon
ed or destitute. Can it be possible that
the order of commitment must stand, and
the child be deprived of parental care. be-
cause the term of the court has expired?
In the very nature of its subject mat
ter, the duty which the state is seeking
to perform, through the instrumentality
OF the court, is a continuing one, and the
power OF the court. as a consequence, is
not exhausted when its authority is first
exercised.
81 am of the opinion that upon a salts
factory showing to lie, the Police Court has
power and authority to vacate its order
committing child to the Board of Chill
drehs Guardians, regardless of the fact
thst the term of the court may have pass
ed, and after having SO vacated its order,
the court may make such other order in the
premises as the case may require, within
the provisions of the law or the court
may make no further order in respect to
tho child. The effect of simply vacating
the order of commitment. in my opinion
would be to leave the control of the child
as il was be ore the board interviewed in
its behalf.
Answering, therefore. the specific
questions contained in the communication
have the honor to say, in my opinion,
that:
THE board has a right to release It's
wards from its guardianship before the
expiration OF the term for which they
were committed to it, only by obtaining
from the Police Court or the Criminal
Court, as the case may be, an order va
eating the order OF commitment made by
the court.
THE board may not wholly transfer its
authority over its wards TO other parties
because the act of Congress, of July &c.
1892. contemplates that the board shall
continuously exercise visitorial and su-
peryising powers over such children"
John F. Donohoe, of 30S East Capitol
Street. has again appealed to the Com
missioners to be released from the pay
ment for curbing on Second and K Streets
southeast. Mr.. Donohoe's request is
based upon the claim that protests were
made against the laying of the curb by
property owners and that it was done
without the consent of the required num-
Der of property owners.
In reporting upon the matter, C. B.
Hunt, the Computing Engineer, states
to the Commissioners that his former
statement that no objections were re-
ceived at the public hearing in connec-
tion with this assessment work was an
error and that objections were received