The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1907-01-25
school Law Opinions.

general law for the regulation Of pro-
eepdings in the condemnation OF land for
streets.
school Law Opinions.
Representative Morren laid before the
committee the correspondence he had with
United States District Attorney Daniel ".
Baker in regard to matters involved in
the school question. Cen Morrel asked
Mr.. Baker to explain how the existing law
was construed so that certain teachers
were retained and others dismissed, and
also for his opinion on the dismissal of
teachers without trial. He also submitted
to him for his opiaIon the pending Greene
bill
Mr.. Baker. in his reply. takes the po-
sition that the new school law legislated
all the executive officers under the old
board. such as the superintendent. the
assistant superintendent, &c. out Of
office said Mr.. Baker.
When the board was cauvasSing proper
persons for appointment TO the executive
offices provided for ia section It was
free to appoint the old executive officers
as all others from the class OF available
candidates. but appointments would have
service They were clearly divorced from
the system by the legislation of the new
act This removal from the service Of
the public schools by the enactment Of
the present law. as TO the great host Of
school officers, teachers. and employees
appears not TO have been the intent Of
the act. and does not necessarily result
from the Interpretation of the same As
to them. the act can be construed re-
tanning them in the service. It was uu-
dOubtedly not the intent Of Congress that
the reorganization Of the school system
should invade the teaching rank
Looking at the act in broader light
the intent of Congress would seem that
the employment of the infinite TO be con-
tinued- indicated Il continuance Of the
then status Of the teachers. The utter
ances Of the act elsewhere confirm the
intent A fair construction of the act
as to these school officers and teachers
would hold that they We're not legislated
out of Office, and were not affected like
the executive offices. referred 20 in sec
ton . The intent, at least, seems 90 be
certain If the bin is 10 BE- amended, f.
would be we'll To declare specifically by
an amendment that they We're continued,
and that such was the intent Of the act
Dismissal without Trial.
In regard to the dismissal of teachers
without trial, Mr. Baker said
The intent Of Congress would appear
that where charges are preferred against
a teacher or where a teacher is being
investigated by reason of some aceusa-
ton. that q trial was intended 70 be had.
but a different construction Is presented
where no charges are placed against a
teacher, but where a teacher is not rem
dering service efficiently or has become
incompetent Under this act the teachers
are appointed and being quasi govern
ment employees. are merely in a state Of
being employed 1t is plain the board
may have reason TO desire removing d
teacher, but for the converse of the rea-
sons that prompted the board to appoint
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 in
ability 10 improve or even maintain the
standard Of efficiency of the teaching
ranks In such a case the right OF the
initiative and power itself Of the board
10 discontinue by dismissal the service Of
those whom il has appointed would not
seem TO be cuTtaiied. It might be very
rare that the board would construe the
act in this way. but such construction is
possible and dismissal made hereunder
would, l think. be valid II II be the in
tent of Congress that no teacher should
be separated from his position without a
trial for any reason whatever-should
have, accordingly, a tenure Of Office su-
peTior to the civil service-section 10
should be amended by appropriate Ian
guage sufficient to accomplish this end p"
Discussing the Greene bill, Mr.. Baker
said. "The general purpose of the bill
would seem 10 vest persons employed in
the public schools with a tenure of office
which they have not previously enjoyed.
and which is far superior 10 the security
enjoyed by persons employed in the civil
service. If this be the intent Of Congress
the bill is well directed.
Speaking Of the section applicable to
the dismissed teachers, y says: IF they
have been Illegally dismissed. they have
adequate remedies in the courts, and viii
be restored by due process. The latter
part Of the amendment. therefore, Is with
out effect and there would seem to be no
reason for its enactment. If the Congress
intends that they shall be restored by
the bill itself. eX propri0 vigore. the pro-
posed amendment Is insufficient
The purpose OF the rest Of the bill
would seem TO be to amend section 10 of
the present law and provide that a trial