State ex rel. Roberts v. Sch. Directors of Springfield

• Decision Date: 31 October 1881
• Citation: 74 Mo. 21
• Parties: THE STATE ex rel. ROBERTS et al., Appellants, v. THE SCHOOL DIRECTORS OF SPRINGFIELD.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

74 Mo. 21

THE STATE ex rel. ROBERTS et al., Appellants,

v.THE SCHOOL DIRECTORS OF SPRINGFIELD.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1881.

Appeal from Greene Circuit Court.--HON. W. F. GEIGER, Judge.

REVERSED.

Goode & Cravens for appellants.

The fact that the statutes say the books shall be made to conform to the adoption “as speedily as practicable” does not leave it to the mere whim of the directors whether they shall be made to conform or not, and thus empower them to nullify the law. The duty is not a discretionary one in the sense that mandamus will not lie to compel its performance. The duty is imperative. The only question that could be raised was whether it was practicable, and evidence should have been admitted to show that it was and had been practicable for a long time. High on Ex. Remedies, § 332; Gilman v. Bassett, 33 Conn. 298; Noursev. Merriam, 8 Cush. 11; Hall v. People, 57 Ill. 307; Metcalf v. Garesche, 65 Mo. 489; 34 Pa. St. 496.

Massey & McAfee for respondents.

HOUGH, J.

This was a proceeding by mandamus to compel the directors of the school district of the city of Springfield to cause to be used in the public schools of said city certain books which, it is recited in the alternative writ, were, at a regular meeting of the presidents of the various school districts of Greene county, legally selected and adopted on the first Tuesday in January, 1880, for the five years next thereafter ensuing, which books, so adopted, said directors have failed and refused to cause to be used in said schools, although it was, at the time said books were so adopted, has ever since been, and now is practicable to cause the same to be used. The defendants filed a demurrer, on which final judgment was rendered in their favor, and the case comes here by appeal.

The defendants claim by their demurrer, that the power conferred upon them by law to compel the use, in the public schools, of books selected by the presidents of the various school districts, is to be exercised by them only at their own discretion, and that such books, so selected, “are to be used as text-books in said schools only when in the proper judgment and discretion of said board their use is deemed practicable.” The defendants contend, in other words, that they were not bound at all events to introduce the text-books adopted by the presidents of the several school boards in the county, and that their opinion as to the practicability of introducing such books, is final and conclusive, and...