Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-10-13
Controller TracewelIs Ruling.

Controller Tracewell decides that the
school board probably cannot dismiss a
teacher without charges and a fair hearing
under section 10; but he also decides that
the compliments in the present controversy
are not teachers. and are not entitled as
such to the protection of the law. He holds
in effect that the provision for fair hearings
prior to dismissal means that there must
be hearings. but that the former teaching
force was not continued in Office by the
new law. and that teacher to become en-
titled to fair hearing before dismissal
must have been appointed or continued by
the new board. His opinion differs from
that of the attorney for the school board
both in respect to the continuance of last
years teaching force in office by operation
of law and concerning the boards arbitrary
powers of dismissal in respect to teachers
The controller, in substance, upholds the
original opinion of the school board that
Congress- If it intended to continue in Of
fee and to promote last years teaching
force bungled its work and stutified it
self: that instead of continuing in Office 1t
ousted every teacher: that while providing
automatic promotions it left in Office no.
body to promote; that while it directed
that mo teacher or principal shall in any
salary it utterly eliminated all present
teachers entitled to present" salaries; that
while it provided for automatic promotions
OF the present force based on longevity, It
In the same instant destroyed the CONT
nuity of every teachers official existence
and denied the necessary longevity; that, in
short. while processing to increase the pay
and to strengthen by safeguards the ten
ure of office of the existing force of teach
ers Congress in fact deprived them of all
pay and terminated their official lives
leaving the resurrection of the dead to tn,
arbitrary and unrestricted whim of the new
superintendent and board of education.
The ruling of the controller is surprise
and disappointment to the teachers in
view of the fact that In his decision in the
case of Secretary Conner he held that the
evident purpose of the act was identical
with the known intent of Congress to con-
tinue the school system it is. with GER
tam exceptions specified in the act itself
In the Conner ruling he said: The gen.
eral purpose of the act is evident-to con-
tlnue the school system as it is except
where it is otherwise provided. such as the
appointment of new board of education
secretary to said board and certain other
places created by the act and the appoint
ments to which are therein provided for
The controller now holds that Congress
stultitied itself in respect to the funda1,en-
tai purpose of the legislation and blows hot
where it intended to blow cold. The at
torney for the school board acuuits Con-
gress of this stultifca ton. but accuses it of
stultifying itself in another particular.
namely. in requiring fair hearings prior to
dismissal but failing to require any hear
ings at all. The community is not ready to
believe that Congress has stultified itself in
either particular. 1t agrees with MI. Nc
Namara in respect to the continuance of
the teachers in Office. and with the con-
troller in respect to the limitations upon the
power to dismiss teachers
Only the courts can say finally whose in
depreciation Of the law is correct and Con-
gress as soon as ii is in session. will doubt
less be curious to learn how it's will has
been construed and carried out and if con-
WINGED that ii has itself blundered into en-
acting the exact opposite of what it in
tended. it Will probably repeat its original
intent in words which will b. unmistakable