The Washington times., 1906-12-25

where 4 board is itaaiS required TO be
trial board 10 determine only "issuabIe
facts Neither do 1 find any prOVi-
sion in the act Of 1895 20 this effect.
But before reaching a conclusion such
rs this, IL would seem that the court
should have determined three other
questions, apparently omitted. OF these
the first is whether or not the same
kind and amount OF investigation that
leads to an appointment is sufficient
for a dismissal. The investigation pre-
cedinS appointment IS made by the SUI.
perintendent and his assistants, sup
plemented by such information as may
readily be obtained by members of the
board Il is by no means such an in
Vestigation as leads 10 the acquittal or
CONVICTION OF person accused in
criminal court.
Apparently this decision is 10 the ef-
feet that no one can be removed by this
board save for the commission Of some
overt act of evil. properly established by
the rules of evidence. In other words.
by this singular decision this board is
10 sit as both Judge and jury, the SUI
perintendent is To prosecute ami the
lawyer OF the defendant is TO defend
Was Not a Prosecutor.
In making my report as to the acts
OF this supervising principal against his
superior and my subordinate, the as
sistant superintendent Of coIored
schools, I gave a finding because had
sions. ! was not advocating anything
in my own interest. / was in no sense
prosecutor. 1 was simply the general
superintendent, empowered by act of
Congress to make recommendations in
all such matters-recommend [
repeat, not charges. This subject the
judge seems TO have passed over with
Out considering H., and ruled practically
thdt a school position is a life annu-
ity. terminabie only by the same kind
of act that leads 10 Incarceration in a
pubic prison. If II really is that this
BOARD has greater powers over the
Treasury OF the United States than for
merly appeared The board of exam
lners and the board OF education must
be eSceed!ngly. careful in the future in
making appointments. 1t seems 10 me
that the whole notion prevalent here
that not business principles, but the
criminal law should control dismissaIs
Is entirely unWaTranted
a second question seemingly ignored
IN the decision relates To the interests
or the public in proper school conditions
IN MS anxiety TO make it clear that
TINS supervising principal was not a
duly and legally convicted offender
against definite law, he shut out from
his mind the entire question of the nuh-
nc welfare not merely in relation to
the person involved. but to the whole
school situation. Prior to the dismissal
or this person, / had received over one
hundred anonymous letters regarding
Tic tpiOItu DuDilc SCnOOlS. IL Is a
nif1cant fact that 10 this date l have
received Just one regarding the white
schools
Conspiracies Of Calumny.
These anonymous letters revealed an
astonishingly faulty condition in the
colored schools. Faulty is the mildest
word that still suggests the real situa-
ton. If I had believed one-tenth of the
WfCkRnnRGE I
eating now the closing of all those
schools. But what did discover as the
truth were far-spread eonspiraeies of
calumny. faction at war with faction.
and hatreds, If not universal. at least
extensive and bitter. All these letter
writing consDiracies and most of these
hatreds Immediately disappeared below
the surface as soon as this supervising
principal. who controlled nearly one
fourth OF the system. was dismissed
am far from alleging or believing that
he was the sole cause OF this unseemly
warfare, or the writer OF many OF these
anonymous letters, but ii is a certainty
in my mind that he was the prime
mover in the prevalent anarchy and the
writer of at least one of these letters
Now the relation of this decision to
the disturbance OF the colored school
system is obvious; IL requires us to re-
we must open up all this bitterness. II
is unpleasant for me to accept the
proposition that It is a proper function
OF any court TO urge technicalities at
the cost of the welfare of tens of
thousands of parents, teachers. and
pupils.
Law Does Not Order Trial.
In the third instance. the court seems
not to have considered the fact fully
that the law does not specifically order
a trial. 1t simply says that when a
trial is held, the teacher shall have
counsel He fnds that no proper trial
was held, 1t may. perhaps. be that r
I. Cardozo can be dismissed for the
good of the service without a trial Per
haps any comment by the judge upon
this point may have seemed to him an
obiter dictum; but 10 others it appears
distinctly pertinent. There are at least