Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1919-06-24
NO BASIS REVEALED
IN BRUCE CHARGES
Corporation Counsel Clears
Assistant School Head in
Report.
PARENTS LEAGUE FAILS

/ SChOoisy ny tIiu -
of the Parents League were held to-
/ day by Conrad Syme, corporation
/ counsel for the District of Columbia.
20 present no basis for legal action or
] other procedure on the part of the
corporation counsers office.
| Summing up the findings in the
case, Mr.. Syme says in part:
! 'All of the charges were referred
! to me by the board of education. for
! such legal action as may be appro-
pirate in the premises. and these
charges are all I have before me for
consideration. l know nothing about
| the merits or demerits of the con-
troversy over Bruce, as 1 nave not
I consulted with either the board of
education or any of the parties to the
controversy or their counsel. l have
indicated that none of the charges
presented justify any legal action Or
other procedure on the part of the
corporation counsers Office.
"Should Abide by Decision
IF, however, the board of educa-
ton is in doubt as to Bruce's qualifi-
cations it has the legal authority. in
it's own way and method. unhampered
such doubt II, in the judgment of the
board. Mr.. Bruce is qualified for this
position, then his qualifications have
been passed upon by that authority
upon which the law has placed the
serious responsibility of the admin
istration of the public school system
Its decision is and should be fnal; all
good citizens should abide by 1t and
in the interest of the public school
system, this controversy should termi-
nate"
lows:
ITO the Board of Education:
II have carefully considered your
communication Of June 5, 1919, trans
hitting to me. through the Commits
sioners, certain so-calied charges
against Roscoe C. Bruce. assistant SUI
perintendent in charge OF color ;a
schools of the District of Columbia.
alleging moral. pedagogic and ad.
ministrative unfltness' on the part OF
Bruce. These charges were supmltteo
to me for such legal action as might
be appropriate
publicity which has been given to
this matter. that 1 should go into 1t
perhaps more fully than the charges
themselves intrinsically deserve.
1.-THE first series Of CHARGES: dated
mittee COMPOSED Of George c. Smith.
chairman, and F. r. killingsworth
and CISCO ]. Cooper. members OF the
Central Northwest. Citizens' Associa-
ton. These charges al1ege that Mr..
Bruce was morally UNIT in that he
committed perjury in the trial OF the
case of Evans VS. the board of edu-
cation, tried. before Mr.. Justice Stat
ford in December; 1915. and January,
1916.
"The alleged perjury. according to
the Evans case that the program or
schedule of the school of which Evans
was in charge was not submitted I'M
til the 2Sth of September. 1912. when
it was shown later that such sched-
ule was submitted on the 10th of Sep
tember. 1912. and also on the Goth;
and 1t was further charged that Bruce
misrepresented facts as to the return
ing of vouchers by Evans, who was
principal of the Armstrong School.
"Fails to Sustain Charge"
Il have taken the trouble to read
the testimony in the Evans case and
it absolutely fails to sustain the above
charge. Eruce. in testifying as to this
matter, which had occurred over three
years before the trial. did not pretend
to be at all certain about the dates
when he received the schedules from
Evans. and it was apparent that he
was speaking Of a completed sch ed
ule,' when he was testifying as to
the time it should have been submitted
! by Evans and not as to uncompleted
schedules that may have been thereto
fore sent in. The record in the case
disclosed not only that no perjury was
committed by Bruce. but that not even
serious inaccuracy existed in his
testimony. Bruce was tetifying to
occurrences happening over three years
before the trial. and he was no more
inaccurate than a witness ordinarily
is under such circumstances.
'In a subsequent communication to
the board Of education. dated May
man of this committee. filing these
charges, practically withdraws this
charge Of perjury and says perhaps
'misstatements' would be the better
term. II by this he means 'misstate-
ments intended to mislead the court
he has. even with this modification.
used a much stronger expression than
the record justifies.
THE record in the case further dis
closes that the charge that Bruce mis-
represented facts as to the return of
vouchers by Evans as principal Of the
Armstrong School is equally without
foundation.
Bruce had recommended the dis
missal Of Evans. which recommenda-
ton the board of education had fol-
lowed. ami it's action was sustained
| by the court after a full hearing. AS
the record Of this case discloses that
neither perjury was committed by
Bruce nor any misstatement made by
/ him which was intended to mislead
| the court, I am of opinion that the
foregoing charges should be ignored.
Other Charges Made.
THE other charges filed by tho COM
mittee of which Smith is chairman
state that Bruce Is dasogically I'M
| ft' and enthusiastically unfit and
set forth the reasons upon which the
charges are supposed to be based. the
reasons being substantially that he
lacked educational qualifications and
| experience as q teacher and that as
an administrative officer he has had
no constructive policy; that he al
| teriorate; that he recommended UNIT
| and inexperienced persons for prin-
| cipals: that he allowed the Business
High School to depreciate: that he
| failed to unity educational work and
| wasted public money.
NO specific facts are stated in sub
| sanitation Of the above charges. All
| of the things mentioned may well be
| the subject of a serious difference Of
opinion among pscple Of the best in
these vague and uncertain allegations
constitute no basis for trial of
Bruce by the board Of education. The
| Court Of Appeals of the District of
Columbia in the case of United States
ex rel. Nalle vs.. Hoover (31 Appeals
d. c.. pages 3l1-320). held distinctly
that the board OF education had COM
plete jurisdiction and power in its
discretion to dismiss a teacher because
of the lack OF professional qualifica-
lions and that 1t might do so legally
without any trial whatsoever, and
that section 10 of the act of Congress