The Evening statesman. [volume] (Walla Walla, Wash.) 1903-1910, 1903-08-03
SCHOOL BOOK CONTRACT
BY ROGERS BOARD
Violated by the Law Passed by Reoub-
lican Legislature Allowing Use
Of Other Cooks.

ClynIpia.--I . supreme court has
d4recttl tle superior court g. King
county tC issue a Injunction restrain
Ing Cour,y uperinte.[c1t I-a.c,. anft
from directing the use Of Rand, Nc
Nally & Co.'s school books in higher
grades than the state contract speci-
fies, and thereby lessening the sale of
the books. The decision is Of great
importance to the entire state, as well
as King county, as it means the literal
enforcement of school book contracts,
regardless of their merits.
'The duty of courts to guard the
sacredness of contracts is TOO we'll
established and understood to require
comment here" the opinion sums up.
1T is not for us to exercise our iudg-
ment and say that a wiser contract
might have been made; but it is our
duty to enforce valid contracts as
made by those lawfully authorized to
make them"
Cause of Suit.
This case arose from the fact that
the King county board of education
withdrew entirely from use in the first
year of the schools of King county
Lights to LITERATURE Book l., using
it in the second year. The second
year book was ordered used in the
third year and SO on up to the sew
enth year. This was deemed absolute
ly necessary, as the books were all
too deep" for the grade intended. AS
the greatest number Of pupils are en-
rolled in the first year, decreasing
cOrrespondingly with the advancement
of the grades. the loss Of the sale Of
books was considerable. amounting,
the court finds, to about 20 per cent
At the time of the beginning Of the
action there were 1929 pupils enrolled
in the first six grades, and from the
second to the seventh there were but
6,331. The court holds all evidence as
10 the necessity for using the books.
other than as by contract is immaJer
ial
The legislature first lodged the
power in the state board of education
to determine what books should be
used. and to enter into contract in
behalf of the state with publishers to
furnish them.
Believed Them Competent.
LII oUtu power " the
state board Of education the legisla-
ture undoubtedly intended that the
members CT The board should be &C
complished educators and learned in
the modern methods Of teaching. The
courts cannot say that they were not
such and that their judgment was in
ferior, when contractual rights are in
vOlved, and where it is merely a ques-
ton of difference of opinion between
educators as to the wisdom Of their
selection of textbooks. If the selec-
ton and adoption of books by the
board involved actual fraud on the
part of the parties to contract, and
if fraud were an issue, then perhaps
the court might consider the character
of the books adopted as far as it
might tend to show gross neglect of
duty and a failure to exercise the or
binary judgment common to reason
able men. Such an issue is not before
US"
The case was before the supreme
court on former appeal, but was re-
manded wit instructions to allow the
book companv to make a showing, If
it so desired, as to the actual loss sus-
tanned, as the court declined to issue
the injunctiCI if the damages sustain
ed were inC0DseGucntial
The contract with the Rand, Nc
Nally company was made along with
others, by the state board of educa-
ton. in 1900. to run for a period Of
five years.