Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-02-02
CONTROL OF SCHOOLS
WHY IT SHOULD REST IN
THE COMMISSIONERS.
A Prophecy of 1905 That Came True
Bears Upon the Situation of
Today With Force.

To the Editor OF The Star:
l. In the hearings before the House COM
mfttee two years ago the writer main
tanned that the vital point the then
pending measure consisted in the pro-
posal to take away the appointing power
from the Commissioners of the District
of Columbia. That feature of the law
which transferred the ultimate control Of
local schools from the District govern
ment to some disinterested and uncon-
cerned federal agency. seemed then to be
serious legislative mistake. All the ar
guments then adduced against this propo-
stion have been keenly emphasized by
the two years intervening experience.
In purely administrative positions the
power of appointment carries with 1t the
power of removal. The power of appoint
ment and removal implies the obligation
on part of the appointing power to keep
constant oversight of the conduct of the
appointee. and to approve or reprove his
action according to the fidelity or derelic-
ton with which he performs his duty.
The judges of the Supreme Court of the
District of Columbia, the very nature and
function of whose office divorces them
from executive affairs. have declared that
their duty under the law ends with nam
ing the members of the board. As a
result, We have a board of education
winch Is responsible neither 10 the people
whom it serves, nor to the court from
which it derives its authority. The mem
bers are thus placed above official criti-
cism or direction by their superiors, If
they have any; and their tenure can be
affected only by Impeachment proceed
ingS or the adjustment of the Office. 1t
is doubtful whether there can be found
a like anomaly in any other administra-
tive Office under the government. This
anomaly is inevitable so long as the APP
ic LODI tn fol
Off ial who is detached from local in
terests and obligations.
The commissioner of education is no
more competent to exercise a watchful
control over the schools of the District
of Columbia than the judges of the SUI
preme Court. unless their complete man
agement and control be transferred to
him, in which case the scope and func-
ton of his bureau must be materially
modified. AS at present constituted the
bureau of education has no authority over
the schools of any state or city in the
continental portion of the United States.
1t merely collects and collates statistics
and outlines educational principles and
policies of which the states and NUM-
cipalities may avail themselves. But 1t
has more power of direction control
than the census office has over manufac-
turing in Massachusetts or the Depart
ment of Agriculture over farming In
Georgia. The. educational. needs of
Washington have no particular federal
feature The kind and degree of train
ing are in no sense influenced by the
presence of the seat OF government.
There is no more pedagogical demand
for the interference of a government
bureau in our local schools than there
is for like intervention in Bait more or
Boston Indeed; the school system is
the last feature of the local government
that should be taken out of the hands OF
the Commissioners We can easily i'm
agine the federal necessity for immediate
control over the hospitals. the streets and
police departments. but it Is almost I'M
possible to conceive of the emergency
which would justify the enforcement of
the public schools. which constitute the
largest and most important department
from the local machinery of the govern
ment If this policy were pursued TO Its
logical conclusion. the Comm ssioners
would be stripped of all municipal re-
sponsibilities and would be left to per-
form only ceremonial functions.
Under any workable scheme the ma
terra, and business side of schools must
be left in the hands Of the Commits
soners. The pedagogical and business
phases of school management are sup
Elementary factors whose harmonious CO.
operation is essential to the best results.