The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-09-04
INTEREST IN THE
!. SCHOOL DESKS
----- -----------
State Board Only Wishes Its
Rights Clearly and Finally
Set Out.
JUDGE cARDWELL's ORDER
= Restraints Local Board from Us
I.s ing Desks After They Are
lgs Put Iii.

There is no abatement Of interest II
the Norfolk city school desk squabble
and although 1T is now In the courts
this interest lis expected to continue
!, until 1t is finally adiudicatc'l.
qheA An erroneous impression seems t.
y have gotten abroad that somn persona
! feeling prevails between the Depart
genent of Education and the local board
II. IS known that this is far from true
and that personally those composing
the two are on friendly relations. The
attorneys in the case before Judge
Tanckel in Norfolk the other day re-
lGferred to the proceeding as a "friend.
s W. suit but each fought hard for Its
E Respective contentious for there are
3important constitutional questions in
iiyolved. which should be determined
Z once for all in the interest of the eX-
iesiitton OF the school Snsines CT the
State. 1t is known that the depart
ment wishes to give the Norfolk board
as little trouble as possible. and that
1t only wishes its rights defined for the
I. welfare of all.
sweeping Order.
- The injunction of Judge Cardwell
against the Norfolk board is more
sweeping in Its nature than some had
supposed II not only enioins against
the receipt of the desks. but their use
as we'll They were put in before the
paper was served. but now that they
are in, they cannot he used pending
further action by the Norfolk court.
The Injunction, after setting out the
style of the proceeding. reads:
aOn the motion of the plaintiffs,
who presented a copy of the pro-
ceedtngs In court and the original
pnpcrs in the cause. upon an ap-
piicntiou made I'm vacation TO the
Judge of the Corporation Court of
the city of Norfolk. and his re-
fusal to grant an Injunction on
August 30. 1907. an Injunction is
awarded In pursuance of the pray
er of the bill TO enjoin and re-
strain the defendants. the School
Board of the city of Norfolk. W..
md w. VI. Jones tchairmanb. l.. II.
Rooster fyIcc-chairman). o. f. BaN-
ter. w. b. DonEhcrty. r. E. Baird,
II. j. Williamson, II. Il. Bagnnll,
W. A. Ninter. r. :. Rufiin, n. b.
Grooms. G.. j. Hustler aud w. F. NJ.
burgess. members. and II c. Tny-
Tor, clerk, of said School Board uf
the city of Norfolk; r. 4. Dobie,
superintendent of schools for the
city of NorfoIks II. 5. Herman. the
Treasurer of said city; the 4. II.
Andrews James -. IT.
wing, agent for the a. Fl. Andrews
Company. from delivering, recciy-
ing or using the school desks and
other school furniture described in
said contract between the said City
school Board and the \. IL. An
drews Company and from carry
ing out or attempting to carry
out said contract in any particu-
lnr- or doing anything In exccu-
ton of the samf; and to enJoin and
restrain the said School Board OF
the city of Norfolk, VA, and w. NJ.
Jones (chairman), l.. II. Register
t,ice-chnirman). y. +. Baxter, w.
u. DouEhcrty, II. L. Baird, III. q.
Williamson. II. ID. Bagnnll, w. a.
NIinter. Il. s. Ruffin, n. Is. Grooms,
&. j. Hustler and w. +. NJ. Burgess,
members. and Il. c. Taylor, clerk,
of said School Board OF the city
Of Norfolk; Il. 4. Dobic, Superin-
tendent of schools for tue city of
Norfolk, and III. $. Herman, Treas
nrer of said city, from paying any
money under said contract with the
A. II. Andrews Company, or any
money for any furniture sold or de-
livercd by snid the A. II. Andrews
Company to the School Board of the
city of Norfolk, or to the schools
of said city. under said contract,
until the further order of the Court
of Law and Clinncery of the city OF
Norfolk.
'.As the Commonwealth and the
State Board:o Education, md the
members thereof, IRE the complains
ants. no bond is required"
Some Hot Shots.
The declaration filed by the attor
neys for the State takes some har,
shots at the A. II. Andrews Company
Here is some of the language used
which gives a pretty good idea of hoy
the performances of the Chicago con
Germ arc regarded by the State boar,
and Tie department:
Complninnnts further show your
honor that the A. II. Andrews COM
pany submitted proposals and sam
pie school desks To the State Board
OF Education, along with other
competing companies, upon pre-
cisely the same tcrms upon which
~ said Belvin submitted such pro-
posals and sample desks, and IL
the prices fixed by thea. IL. An
ttrews Company ns condition OF
the tender and of the selection of
their desks had not hecn decidedly
higher than the prices at which