The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1910-09-22
DECISION Of THE STATE
BOARD OF EDUCATION
In the Case Appealed by Mr.. Palmer
From the Local Board.

Sentlal facts are few and simple.
The appellant, Mr.. U. G. Palmer, on
the 18th day of June, 1903, was duly
appointed as principal of the Oakland
Public Schools, then composed of the
usual high school and elementary
grades, and claims that he is still the
principal of said schools.
On the oath Of June last, however,
the board of county school commission
er passed the following order:
The Board decided to separate the High
School and the Grammar school, and to put
the High School in the Old Court House with
H. a. Loraditch, principal"
The appellant contends that the eff
feet of this order. if sustained, will dis
place him as principal of the schools,
and put another in charge of the work
which he was employed to perform.
Mr.. Palmer denies that the board of
county school commissioners has author
ity to remove him from office in such
manner, and brings this appeal in order
to have that question determined.
The board of county school commits
sioners, on the other hand contends
that it had authority under the school
law, as amended by Chapter 1856 of the
Acts of 1910, and that such action was
necessary in order to enable the board
to establish high school under said
Act.
The Act referred to reads as follows:
The board of county school commission
ers Of any county shall have the authority
to establish high schools, subject to the ap-
proval OF the State Board of Education. in
their respective counties, when, in their
judgment, it is advisable to do so. All high
schools so established and those now in
operation shall be under the direct control
of the several boards of the the county
school commissioners, subject to the pro-
visions OF this Article, provided that when
instruction below that Of the high school
grades is given in the same building, or on
the same premises such grade work may
also be under the direct control of the board
of county school commissioners, and the
principal of the high sbhool shall also be
principal Of the elementary department.
The manifest design of this change in
the law was to provide new scheme
for the establishment of high schools
for the counties, and to place all high
schools under the direct control of
the board of county school commission
ers in each county, Subject to the pro-
visions of" Article II of the Code. The
effect of giving such 3tyscf control, in
the case of high schools, was to take
certain powers out of the hands of dis
trict school trustees and confer them
upon the boards of county school COM
missioners, and to require such boards
to perform the new duties so committed
to them as district Sch00l trustees
were required to perform them under
the law as it existed before the passage
of the Act of 1910, Chapter 1856. In
other words, the commissioners were to
take direct control, but were required
to exercise such control subject to eX-
listing provisions of the school law.
Now, Section 80 of the said Article
provides that principal teachers shall
be appointed by the board of district
school trustees, subject to confirmation
by the board of county school commits
sioners; and said teachers may be re-
moved at any time said board of dis
trlct school trustees may think proper,
after thirty days notice in writing;
PROVIDED, further, that said board of
district school trustees shall furnish, in
writing, when required by the teacher
so notified, the reasons for dismissal, ;"
ami makes provision for an appeal so
that the sufficiency of such reasons may
be determined As this Section was
not repealed by the Act of 1910, it is
still in force, as one of the provisions
Of this Article" and, when commission
/ erS assume their new duties as trustees
of high schools, they must observe the
/ provisions Of law governing trustees of
! other schools, to the extent that such
/ provisions can be made to apply.
/ The rights and privileges secured to
( principal teachers by Section 3 are too
/ valuable, both to the teachers and to
/ public school interests generally, to be
! construed away and destroyed upon the
mere assumption that the Legislature
/ by giving direct control in such cases.
meant to give absolute control. and bV
implication, repeal a provision of law
so vitally important. In the absence of
/ some clear and unequivocal declaration
to be found in the Act itself, we do not
+ feel justified IN assuming that it was
/ the intention Of the Legislature to
/ sanction return to the conditions, us
ages and abuses as they existed before
! the passage OF the law embodied in said
/ Section 50, the effect of which was to
/ establish stable and permanent tenure
/ Of Office, dependent solely upon merit
and efficiency, to create feeling Of Sc
/ curiJy in the minds Of teachers them
/ selves and to add immensely TO the
dignity and iltluence of their positions
BY offering to those who aspired to be-
/ come professionally trained teachers a
/ strong incentive to educate themselves
for teaching as their life work, and not
/ to resort to teaching in the public
schools as a temporary employment to
! be abandoned whenever the opportunity
to secure work in other fields presented
itself, this provision Of our school law
has elevated and improved the charac-
ter of the work done in all of the public
schools, and given to the teacher him
self standing and influence in the COM
munity in which he lives that furnish
the best reasons for the conclusion that
it was not the intention of the Legisla-
ture to deprive high school principals of
any of the rights thereby secured to all
other principals in the public school
service of the State. No reason for
such distinction has been assigned.
and. it is believed, none can be assigned.
The necessary effect of the order of
June Gath, if enforced, will be to remove
| the appellant as principal of the high
school department. This being so, it
must be regarded as a formal proceed
ing to dismiss him, and as no notice
was given until the 10th of August,
! such notice came after, and not before,