Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-01-24
DISTRICT. LEGISLATION
Continued from First page.)

vious power by requiring the concurrence
of the superintendent. When this concur
renee Is had, the power to dismiss under
section 2 would become complete. And to
this extent the construction of the power
to dismiss is plain enough.
Under Section 10.
But in section 10 it is provided that when
teacher Is on trial or being investigated
he or she shall have the right to be at
tended by counsel and by at least one
friend Of his or her selection. The language
of this section is ambiguous and plainly
not imperative in anything save as to the
right to counsel and friend when a teacher
should be on trial or under investigation
If charges should be preferred against
teacher and he should be put upon trial for
same, unquestionably this section will APP
ply. If teacher were being investigated
by the board there could be no doubt that
this section should apply. But there Is not
in the section nor elsewhere In the act
requirement that trial or investigation
shall be had. 1t does not guarantee to the
teacher trial as matter of right. After
one is ordered or being had 1t does not
guarantee them legal and social protection
In its present shape section 10 could De
construed to go no further than to relate
to the rights of teachers and the procedure
during the tendency of the trial. 1t does
not go so far as to require that trial must
vestigation for the purpose OF sitting
charges preferred against teacher,
whether from outside or within the school,
or to discipline teachers Is undoubtedly
inherent In the board. 1t was inherent In
the old board and under its regime certain
trials and Investigations were held. There
was no law requiring the old board to give
trials, but trials were ordered by the old
board sua sponte.
Intent Of Congress.
The present board obviously could also
order a trial or investigation, and when
Cont
be had, whether ordered or not, then Sec
ton 10 would apply. A part from this
effect it would appear that section 10 does
not go further and, ex vi termini, curtail
the power to dismiss granted in section
q The intent of Congress would appear
that where charges are preferred against
a teacher, or where a teacher is being in
vestigated by reason Of some accusation,
that a trial was intended to be had, but
different construction Is presented where
no charges are placed against a teacher,
but where a teacher is not rendering serv-
ice efficiently or has become incompetent
In other jurisdictions the board of educa-
ton contracts with the teachers for
definite time, usually scholastic year. The
contracts are renewed If deemed advisable
in the interests of the schools. Under this
act the teachers are appointed, and being
quasi government employees, are merely In
state of being employed. The old method
to determine that employment Is manner
of dismissal provided for in section 2. The
teacher remains until he is removed by the
power by which he is appointed. 1t is plain
the board may have reason to desire remov-
Ing teacher, but for the converse of the
reasons that prompted the board to ap-
point him. These reasons might not in
any sense be predicated upon any charges
of immortality or violation of the rules.
They might be based upon the teachers
inability to improve or even maintain the
standard nf efficiency Of the teaching ranks.
In such a case the right of the initiative
and power itself of the beard to discontinue
by dismissal the service of those whom 1t
has appointed would not seem to be cur
tailed from the measure granted In section
nor to be affected by section 10. 1t might
be very rare that the board would con-
struction is possible and dismissal made
hereunder would, 1 think, be valid. If it
be the intent Of Congress that no teacher
should be separated from his position with
have, accordingly, tenure of office SUI
perior to the civil service-section 10 should
be amended by appropriate language Suf-
ficient to accomplish this end
l am further requested to state whether
in my opinion the bill introduced by Mr..
Greene, with amendments proposed by the
subcommittee, copies of which you have
forwarded to me, will rectify the errors
which are said to have been made and the
Inconsistencies said to appear in the pres
ent law.
The general purpose of the bill would
seem to vest persons employed in the
public schools with tenure of Office
which they have not previously enjoyed
and which is far superior to the security
civil service. If this be the intent of
Congress the bill Is well directed. De-
scendng from the general purpose of the
bill to the particular feature, the following
considerations present themselves. Section
/ of the bill is plainly defective. and ]
therefore consider the amendment proposed
by the subcommittee to this section one.
So much of the section as relates to pres
ent declaration of Congress that its intent
expressed in public act number 254, ap-
proved June 20, 1906, was that the teach
ers, school officers and other employees in
the service of the schools at the time of
the passage of said act. should be and are
continued in office will be proper and help
full to remedy the shortcomings and uncer-
tainties of the present law. l presume 1t
was not intended that this amendment shall
refer to or include the executive officers
who were legislated out of Office by section
of the present law. Should 1t be other
wise the proposed amendment Will not
reach them. Apart from this purpose, which
is expressed in the amendment to section
in the first ten lines, the rest of the amend
ment is nugatory and accomplishes moth
ing. At line 10 it provides that all such
persons who have continued competent to
perform the duties of their service ETC.,
and who have been removed without their
consent or without compliance with the pro-
in their service or employment, etc. This
does not in any wise change the present
status 81 the teachers who have been dis
missed. 1t leaves open for determination
the question whether they have been dis
missed without compliance with the provi-
sions of the act. If they have been thus
illegally dismissed they have adequate rem
edies in the courts and will be restored by
due process The latter part of the amend
ment, therefore, is without effect, and there
would seem to be no reason for it's enact
ment. If the Congress intends that they
shall be restored by the bill itself, ex pro-
prio vigore, the proposed amendment is In
sufficient.
The purpose Of the rest of the bill would
seem to be to amend section 10 Of the pres
ent law and provide that trial or inves-
tigation must precede dismissal, where, at
present, the provision Is not mandatory,
but only conditional. 1t would seem that
sections and accomplish this purpose
and little more. The provisions of these
sections would include not only the off,
GERS and teaching force. but the clerical
force of the board Of education, the jani-
tors and messengers Persons employed in
these latter positions, and even the store
keeper or one employed to do laiboring
work, could not be removed except after
trial with counsel and friend. The pro-
vision of section 2, that no person shall be
discontinued. would forbid the 9uSDensiOn of