The Washington herald., 1915-05-30
BOARD. yields IN
rule 45 BATTLE
Defensive Tactics Dwindle
Down to Request that Court
Define Its Powers.
REGULATION GETS JOLT
Provision Against Wives Who Teach
Mercilessly Anal yzed by
Judge:

Rule 81 of the Board of Education
code, which automatically dismisses
from service women teachers who
marry. was picked to pieces by Jus
tice Gould. in the District Supreme
Court in hearing arguments yesterday
on the petition of Mrs. Gladys Strong
Hellman for reinstatement as teach
er in the District schools.
The Board of Education practically
surrendered in its tight in behalf of the
rule when Corporation Counsel Steph-
ems, in summing up, told the court tina t
the nbos nd desired to know just what
its bowers we're. Mrs. Hellnnan's coun-
sci siled a rule several weeks ago de
manding the Board of Education to
shoG cause why she should not be re-
instxted 4 demurrer to the board :
ans&sr later was filed. Justice Gould
tooK, the case under Amusement.
why should a woman be dismissed
merely because she marries when it
has, been found that she is competent
and efficient as> a teacher" was the
query; put to Corporation CounseLi
stephens.iby the court.
DefenaaIRuIe Is.
MI: s,e phen. asserted that thur law lis a
wise and ,necesssrsz for physiological
reasDns r He based his defense on the
fact shat ih:-other cages the power of
the Board TO make rules regarding the
cenetaI Itpliry-of the school system had
heen upheld by, the Appellate Court.
In the first place" said Justice Gould,
the rule, is Contrary to the policy of the
board. as they have married teachers.
10th men nd women. in the service
Mr. Stevens replied that women who
after marriage are thrown: upon their
own resources MAY. take examination and
nc reinststed
In: summing up, Attorney Paul Lesh
for Mrs HelInan, declared the rule to
he merely means of setting aside the
older teachers when they marry to
make room for the excess of Normal
School graduates. for whom there Is
not room as teachers III the schools
He said: Z
In the first case. a teacher who mar
ries is entitled to the same considera-
ton as the Normal girl. and in the
second case, the Board of Educat ton
cannot afford to lose professional en-
thusiasts: 1t is unnecessary to argue
the rule uHres sonAble and unjust. 1
hold therefore. that il is Inconsistent
with the announced policy of the board,
because they do employ married women
teachers" 49,.
ATTORNEY Iesh based his contentious
on the organic act of Congress. which
gives the board the right to dismiss
teachers only upon the written recon-
mendatioh OF the superintendent or
schools
says Letter Is Resignation.
The defense contendcd that. in addi-
ton to being resignation. Mrs. Heli-
mans letter to the board was in effect
an application for re-appontment and
that the report of the committee on rules
OF the board constituted rejection of
the application.
Justice Gould made il clear that he
believed il should he the object of the
Boa I'd of Education to maintain efficiency
in the Schools reGa rdless OF whether the
teacher he 4 man or woman. married
or single. He admitted that after mar
Iiace teacher might become inefficient.
hut expressed the opinion that the board
should not TAX" this for granted before
hand
Henry + Blair. president of the Board
Of Education. sat with the corporation
counsel during the hearing.