Page images
PDF
EPUB

6. If the facts proved in support of a petition for mandamus to compel a mayor and common council to admit colored children to the public schools show a clear discrimination against such children, it is no defense that the respondents did not declare their unlawful intention or make a record of their illegal acts. People v. Mayor of Alton, 209-461.

7. The free schools of the State are public institutions, and in their management and control the law contemplates that they should be so managed that all children within the district, between the ages of six and 21 years, regardless of race or color, shall have equal and the same right to participate in the benefits to be derived therefrom. While the directors, very properly, have large and discretionary powers in regard to the management and control of schools, in order to increase their usefulness, they have no power to make class distinctions, neither can they discriminate between scholars on account of their color, race or social position. Chase v. Stephenson, 71-383; People v. Board of Education, 127-613.

§ 5. Any person who shall, by threats, menace or intimidation, prevent any child entitled to attend a public school in this State from attending such school shall, upon conviction, be fined in any sum not exceeding twenty-five (25) dollars.

§ 6. It shall be the duty of the county treasurers, county superintendents of schools, township collectors, and all other persons paying money into the hands of township school treasurers for school purposes, on or before the 30th day of September of each year, to notify in writing the presidents of boards or school trustees and the clerks of the boards of school directors of the amount paid into the township treasurer's hands and the date of payment.

§ 7. This act shall not be so construed as to repeal or change, in any respect, any special acts in relation to schools in cities having less than 100,000 inhabitants, or incorporated towns, townships or districts except that in every such city, town, township or district the limit of taxation for educational and building purposes shall be the same as that fixed in section one, article eight, of this act; and except that it shall be the duty of the several boards of education or other officers of any city or incorporated town, township or district, having in charge schools under the provision of any of said special acts, or of any ordinance of any city or incorporated town, on or before the 15th day of July preceding each session of the General Assembly of this State, or annually, if required so to do by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, to make out and render a statement of all such statistics and other information in regard to schools and the enumeration of persons as required to be communicated by township boards of trustees or directors, under the provisions of this act, or so much thereof as may be applicable to said city or incorporated town, to the county superintendent of the county where such city or incorporated town is situated, or of the county in which the larger part of such city or incorporated town is situated; nor shall it be lawful for the county superintendent, or any other officer or person to pay over any portion of the common school fund to any local treasurer, school agent, clerk, board of education, or other officer or person of any township, city or incorporated town, unless a report of the number of persons and other statistics relative to schools, and a statement of such other information as is required by the board of trustees or of directors, as aforesaid, and of other school officers and

teachers under the provisions of this act, shall have been filed at the time or times aforesaid, specified in this section, with the superintendent of the proper county, as aforesaid. (As amended by act approved and in force March 31, 1891.)

1. Under section 7, article 16 of the general school law, the only change effected in the public school provisions of special charters of the cities and villages is to make the limit of taxation for educational and building purposes the same as under the general school law. Cleveland, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Company v. Randle, 183-364.

2. The adoption of the general law for the incorporation of cities and villages does not abrogate provisions of special charters not inconsistent with provisions of the general law relating to the support and management of public schools.

Ibid.

3. The adoption by a city of the general law for the incorporation of cities and villages, which has no relation to schools, does not abrogate provisions in such city's former special charter for the establishment and management of a system of free schools, such provisions not being inconsistent with anything in the general law. Smith v. The People, 154–58.

4. Where a special charter gives the board of education the power to make certain contracts, and gives it exclusive control of the funds out of which the payment must be made, an action should be brought against the board of education and not against the city. A general judgment against the city could not be properly rendered for a demand payable out of a particular fund, over which its municipal officers have no control. Crane v. City of Urbana, 2A-559.

5. All laws, whether in city charters or elsewhere, designed to effect free schools, may be regarded simply as school laws. And although they may require the boundary lines of cities to be adopted as lines for the formation of school districts, and that city officers shall perform the duties of school officers, yet this is for convenience only, and the districts thus to be formed, and the officers thus required to perform duties, are to be regarded simply as agencies selected by the State to provide a system of free schools. Although the limits and officers of the two corporations are the same, their purposes and objects are different, and they are, in fact, separate and distinct corporations. The one has its existence and is limited in the powers it may exercise by its charter, proper; the other by the school law. Speight v. The People, 87-595.

§ 8. It shall be the duty of the president, principal, or other proper officer of every organized university, college, seminary, academy or other literary institution, heretofore incorporated, or hereafter to be incorporated in this State, to make out, or cause to be made out and forwarded to the office of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, on or before the first day of August in each year, a report setting forth the amount and estimated value of real estate owned by the corporation, the amount of other funds and endowments, and the yearly income from all sources, the number of instructors, the number of students in the different classes, the studies pursued and the books used, the course of instruction, the terms of tuition, and such other matters as may be specially requested by said superintendent, or as may be deemed proper by the president or principal of such institution to enable the Superintendent of Public Instruction to lay before the Legislature a fair and full exhibit of the affairs and conditions of said institutions, and of the educational resources of the State.

§ 9. If judgment shall be obtained against any township board of trustees or school directors, the party entitled to the benefit of

such judgment may have execution therefor, as follows, to-wit: It shall be lawful for the court in which such judgment shall be obtained, or to which such judgment may be removed by transcript or appeal from a justice of the peace, or other court, to issue thence a writ commanding the directors, trustees and treasurer of such township to cause the amount thereof, with interest and costs to be paid to the party entitled to the benefit of such judgment, out of any moneys unappropriated of said township or district, or if there be no such moneys, out of the first moneys applicable to the payment of the kind of services or indebtedness for which such judgment shall be obtained, which shall be received for the use of such township or district, and to enforce obedience to such writ by attachment, or by mandamus, requiring such board to levy a tax for the payment of such judgment; and all legal processes as well as writs to enforce payment, shall be served either on the president or the clerk of the board.

1. The supreme court has repeatedly held that this is the only mode of enforcing a judgment against a school district. Botkin v. Osborne, 39-101; Watts v. McLean, 28A-537; Rogers v. The People, 68-154.

2. In a proceeding for a mandamus to compel the school trustees to form a new district, and the writ is awarded, judgment for costs should not be rendered against the trustees personally, but as trustees of schools of the township. Boone v. The People, 4A-231.

3. This section provides a complete remedy for the enforcement of all just claims against such bodies. A party has but to obtain his judgment, and, if there be money in the treasury, to obtain an order on the treasurer for its payment, and if there is no money applicable to its payment, then to obtain a writ of mandamus to compel the levy and collection of a tax for its payment. Board of Education Neidenberger, 78-58.

4. The treasurer is not authorized to pay out money in his hands until an order drawn as required by the statute is presented, or until a court of competent jurisdiction shall have made an order for that purpose. Unless one of these things has been done, the treasurer is justified in declining to pay upon the demand made by the judgment creditor, and as it is not his duty to comply with the demand in such cases, he cannot be subjected to the cost and vexation of a proceeding by mandamus. Watts v. McLean, 28A-537. 5. The statute very clearly directs in what manner judgments against a board of trustees or school directors shall be paid. It is provided, that if judgment shall be obtained against any township board of trustees or school directors, the party entitled to the benefit of such judgment may have execution therefor, but the statute must be followed. This is the only mode provided by law for enforcing judgments in such cases. The order for a general execution is therefore erroneous. Watson v. Abry, 9A-280.

6. A board of education in a city organized under the provisions of a special charter, sustains the same relation, substantially, to the public schools of the corporation, that the board of directors sustains to the public schools in an ordinary school district. The powers and duties are substantially alike, except that the board of education possesses more power. But the board of education is not the owner of the property upon which the school houses are erected. It has no title nor estate in the property whatever. Its members are merely public officers in the discharge of a public trust. Thomas v. Urbana School District, 71-283.

7. A school district has to rely mainly upon taxation to raise money to pay its indebtedness. This is its only recourse to obtain revenue with which to discharge the claims against it. If, however, a judgement could be rendered against the directors, an execution issued and the property of the

district sold, as against an individual, in many cases it would be gone beyond the reach of the district before the necessary money could be raised by taxation and a redemption effected. Ibid.

8. By the enactment of this section, the Legislature provided the mode by which a party having a claim against a board of directors could enforce its collection. If one has a claim against a board of education, he must proceed according to the statute. He has no right to file a petition and enforce a specific lien by obtaining a decree of sale under the mechanic's lien law of the State. Ibid; Quinn v. Allen, 85–39.

9. Under section 24 of the lien law of 1895 a sub-contractor's lien for labor or materials furnished for a public improvement is created by performing such labor or furnishing such material, and becomes perfect as to all funds not paid over or warrants not delivered, upon such service of the notice on the officials. Spaulding Lumber Company v. Brown, 171-487.

10. An order on a school board, given by a contractor, while his claim was but a chose in action, to a sub-contractor for the amount due the latter for labor or material furnished for a school building, cannot be paid in full as against other sub-contractors who have served notices of their claims on such board, as required by section 24 of the mechanic's lien law of 1895, but only pro rata with the other claims. Ibid.

11. Sureties on a contractor's bond, given by a school board to secure a full performance of a contract to erect a school building and as protection against liens thereon are not liable to sub-contractors for the amount of their unpaid claims against the contractor, where there is no breach of the bond as to the school board and the bond does not protect sub-contractors. Ibid.

§ 10. Trustees of schools, school directors, members of boards of education, or other school officers performing like duties, shall receive no pecuniary compensation, but they shall be exempt from road labor and military duty during their term of office.

1. This language cannot be forced to bear a construction that the property of a school director shall be exempt from the burden of a road tax. The language is, that he shall be exempt from road labor. No construction or interpretation can be given to the words road labor to make them mean road tax. McDonald v. County of Madison, 43-22.

§ 11. All school officers elected in pursuance of any general law now in force shall hold their respective offices until their successors are elected and qualified under the provisions of this act.

§ 12. "An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools," approved April 1, 1872; "An act to protect colored children in their rights to attend public schools," approved March 24, 1874; "An act to amend section fifty (50) of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, approved March 30, 1874;" "An act to amend sections 24 and 33 of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, approved May 23, 1877;" "An act to ameud section 47 of 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, approved May 11, 1877;" "An act regulating the renting and sale of school lands," approved May 25, 1877; "An act to amend section 33 of an act entitled, 'An act to amend sections 24 and 33 of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, approved May 23, 1877, in force July 1, 1877, approved May 31, 1879;" "An act to amend an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, and section forty

seven (47) of said act as amended by an act approved May 11, 1877, approved June 3, 1879;" "An act to amend sections eleven (11), twenty-seven (27), thirty-three (33), thirty-four (34), forty-eight (48), fifty-three (53), fifty-four (54), fifty-seven (57) of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, and in force July 1, 1872, and amended by an act approved June 3, 1879, and in force July 1, 1879, approved May 31, 1881;" "An act to amend section fifty-one (51) of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, in force July 1, 1872, and amended by an act approved June 3, 1879, in force July 1, 1879, approved June 23, 1883;" "An act regulating the loan of school funds," approved and in force March 20, 1883; "An act to amend sections thirteen (13), twenty (20) and seventy-one (71) of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, and in force July 1, 1872, and amended by act approved June 3, 1879, approved June 26, 1885;" "An act to amend sections fifty-seven (57) and fifty-eight (58) of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, and amended by an act approved April 1, 1872, and amended by an act approved June 3, 1879, and in force July 1, 1879, and further amended by an act approved May 31, 1881, and in force July 1, 1881, approved June 30, 1885;" "An act to amend section (1) of an act entitled, 'An act regulating the renting and sale of school lands, approved May 25, 1877, in force July 1, 1877, approved June 29, 1885;" "An act to amend section thirty-three (33) of an act entitled, 'An act to establish and maintain a system of free schools,' approved April 1, 1872, in force July 1, 1872, as amended by act approved May 23, 1877, in force July 1, 1877, as amended by an act approved June 3, 1879, in force July 1, 1879, as amended by an act approved May 31, 1881, in force July 1, 1881,' approved June 4, 1887;" "An act to provide for the election of presidents of boards of education in school districts," approved June 17, 1887;" "An act to empower trustees of schools to lay out and dedicate common school lands for street and highway purposes," approved June 3, 1887; "An act to regulate the attendance of teachers upon teachers' institutes," approved June 14, 1878; "An act to empower township trustees to sell and convey right of way and depot grounds for the use of railroads crossing school lands," approved April 13, 1875;" "An act to regulate the payment of moneys into the hands of township school treasurers," approved May 30, 1881; and all other acts and parts of acts inconsistent with this act, and all general school laws in this State are hereby repealed.

1. The act of 1887 providing that in school districts acting under special charters elections might be held at the time provided by the general school law for elections of school directors, and at such places in the district as the board of education might designate, was repealed by the act approved May 21, 1889, revising the school law, and an election had thereafter under said act of 1887 gives no title to office. Smith v. The People, 154-58.

« PreviousContinue »