Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-12-11
.CAROOzO CASE CLOSES
Hearing of Arguments Yester-
day Before Justice Anderson
FOR DEPOSED PRINCIPAL
Mr.. Davis Declares He Was Dismissed
Without Trial.
MR.. M'NAMARA MAKES REPLY
Court Adjourns Without an Indication
of When the Decision May
Be Expected.

Final arguments IN the Cardozo Schooi
case were made by counsel yesterday after
noon in Circuit Court No. l before Justice
Anderson. Each attorney spoke for about
an hour. Before the hearing closed tAe
court room was crowded with persons In
terested in the schools and attorneys who
wished to hear the arguments. Mrs Ellen
Spencer Mussey. Prof. Barton w. Ever
mann, Mr. James F. Oyster and DR.. o. T.
Atwood, members of the board of educa-
ton, were present.
Attorney Henry E. Davis, for Mr.. r. l..
Cardozo, the supervising principal who sued
the board of education for a writ of manda-
mus to secure his reinstatement In the
thirteenth division of the local schools. cited
numerous cases involving boards Of edu-
cation in the effort to show that there is
necessarily a judicial character to every
dismissal of a teacher or officer where
there is a limited power given to the poaro
That the courts have held principaI
to be teacher in the meaning OF tne law
was indicated by other citations.
Mr. Davis then took up a general discus
sion of the case in hand He regarded the
members of the local board of education
with great respect as to character and In,
tentions, he said, but was sorry he could
not admire their judgment.
Alleges Inconsistency.
"They have come here he DECLARED,
Claiming that they did not have to give
this principal trial, and In the next breath
declaring that they have given him trial.
The courts have held that there must be
a trial in cases of this kind, and not by the
most tortuous perversion Of language can
it be shown that a trial was held
- The organic school law was next taken up
by Mr.. Davis The provision with refer
ence to hearing for teachers under inves-
tigation was quoted.
''The fact that a teachers dismissal Is
recommended certainly implies that fnvest!-
cation is or has been in progress" he said
''This Is an elementary idea and II is an
insult to intelligence to hold otherwise.
Describing the action of Superintendent
Chancellor, Mr.. Davis said that official had
"erected himself into a court'-and small
wonder" he continued, "since he has al
ready announced himself a branch of the
local government coordinate with the Com
missioners."
The attorney then said that DR.. Chan
cellor-"ths coordinate branch"-reported
to the board that he had found this man
guilty." in counsePs words.
The final action of the board was taken
on a new recommendation after this man
and his counsel had withdrawn, said Attor-
ney Davis. .
THAT this was or was not trial is
question that 1 do not propose to lower my
intellect to discuss he continued.
1T venture to say that if the board of edu-
cation wanted to dismiss the present super
intendent of schools he would demand a
trial Just like the one I am demanding for
nv client The board may have need OF ac-
curate knowledge on this question within
the next twelve months"
This last sally caused much laughter and
the crier raped for order.
Mr.. Mcnamara Responds.
United States Attorney Stuart Mcnamara,
counsel for the board, attempted to offset
the authorities cited by the other side on
the question Of law and quoted at length
from the organic school law to show that
there were repeated obstructive" refer
ences to teachers" and supervising prin-
cipaIs" He held that by Cardozo's admis-
sion on the stand his duties were those of
an officer.
In an elaborate argument he then declared
that the law meant to guarantee trial to
the teachers only and not to officers, and
that therefore Cardozo was not illegally dis
missed.
but for the sake of argument" he said,
'Iet us suppose trial was necessary. Then
say he had one within the meaning of the
law His counsel was present. I distinctly
recall that he has admitted talking for
nearly an hour them.
The statement made by CardoZo to the
board October II, Mr.. Mcnamara held, was
in the nature of an admission and the board
could act judicially upon that basis with
out hearing any testimony.
Mr. Davis made a few concluding re-
marks, saying among other things that the
other attorney had not addressed himself
to the real point at issue.
At the conclusion of the argument court
adjourned without indicating at what time