What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
action addition adopted amount annual appointed attendance authority becomes Bible board of examiners branches cause certificate CHAPTER charge child College committed common schools Constitution contract corporal course decided decision direct director discipline district board dollars duty elected enforce established examiners exercise fact five fund give given grade grant held hold inspectors Institution instruction interests issued Judge keep lands legally matter means meeting ment Michigan months necessary notice object opinion parent performed period person practice principles proper provisions punishment pupils pursue qualified question reading reasonable received refused regard regulations respect rule scholar school board secretary secure statute studies Superintendent Supreme Court suspend taught teacher teaching term territory tion township University usually valid views vote
Page 146 - The line which separates moderate correction from immoderate punishment can only be ascertained by reference to general principles. The welfare of the child is the main purpose for which pain is permitted to be inflicted.
Page 149 - In one respect the tendency of the rod is so evidently evil that it might, perhaps, be arrested on the ground of public policy. The practice has an inherent proneness to abuse. The very act of whipping engenders passion, and very generally leads to excess. Where one or two stripes only were at first intended, several usually follow, each increasing in vigor as the act of striking inflames the passions. This is a matter of daily observation and experience.
Page 103 - These obligations are inherent in any proper school system, and constitute, so to speak, the common law of the school. Every pupil is presumed to know this law, and is subject to it, whether it has or has not been reenacted by the district board in the form of written rules and regulations.
Page 128 - Certain studies are required to be taught in the public schools by statute. The rights of one pupil must be so exercised, undoubtedly, as not to prejudice the equal rights of others; but the parent has the right to make a reasonable selection from the prescribed studies for his child to pursue, and this cannot possibly conflict with the equal rights of other pupils.
Page 126 - In our opinion there is a great and fatal error in this part of the charge — particularly when applied to the facts in this case — in asserting or assuming the law to be that upon an irreconcilable difference of views between the parent and teacher as to what studies the child shall pursue, the authority of the teacher is paramount and controlling; and that she had the right to enforce obedience to her commands by corporal punishment.
Page 127 - Whence, we again inquire, did the teacher derive this exclusive and paramount authority over the child, and the right to direct his studies contrary to the wish of the father? It seems to us it is idle to say the parent, by sending his child to school, impliedly clothes the teacher with that power in a case where the parent expressly reserves the right to himself, and refuses to submit to the judgment of the teacher the question as to what studies his boy should pursue.
Page 101 - Any rule of the school not subversive of the rights of the children or parents or in conflict with humanity and the precepts of divine law, which tends to advance the object of the law in establishing public schools, must be considered reasonable and proper.
Page 128 - And how it will result disastrously to the proper discipline, efficiency and well being of the common schools to concede this paramount right to the parent to make a reasonable choice from the studies in the prescribed course which his child shall pursue, is a proposition we cannot understand.
Page 137 - ... matter of education, at once and forever in subordination to the decrees and the teachings of any and all sects, when their members conscientiously believe such teachings. It at once surrenders the power of the state to a government not emanating from the people, nor recognized by the constitution. The case finds that the authorities of the sect of which the plaintiff is a member regard it sinful to read in the version directed by the defendants; but if a book is to be excluded for that cause...
Page 116 - Now, what are reasonable rules? In Thompson v. Beaver, 63 Ill., 353, the following conclusion was reached: "What are reasonable rules is a question of law, and we do not hesitate to declare that a rule that would bar the doors of the school house against little children who had come from so great a distance (one and one-half miles) in the cold winter, for no other reason than that they were a few minutes tardy, is unreasonable and therefore unlawful. In its practical operation it amounts to little...