Laws, 1865, ch. 1, sec. 17.) The power herein vested in boards of education carries with it the authority to prescribe a course of study for such schools, and the right to determine, or to authorize the teachers to determine, the studies to be pursued by each individual pupil. The general course of study to be pursued in each school should be prescribed by the board of education; but the studies to be pursued, and the lessons to be prepared by each pupil, should be left to the teachers, or the acting manager of schools, who should be empowered by the board to assign such studies and lessons to each pupil as the advancement of such pupil and the classification of the school will permit of and justify. When the parent or guardian refuses to permit his child or ward to comply with the direction of the school authorities, such disorderly pupil may be suspended from school. Such authority is frequently exercised in the management of our best graded schools, and, in many instances, of our township sub-district schools. The success of every school requires classification and system, which can not be secured if every parent may dictate the studies to be pursued in school by his children. The law wisely vests such power in the school authorities. In case the township board fail to prescribe the studies to be pursued, or to authorize teachers to classify pupils, and assign their respective studies and lessons, the local directors may exercise such authority, though not to the extent, perhaps, of excluding pupils from school for non-compliance with

their directions. In case neither the board nor the directors empower teachers to determine the studies of pupils, they may still exercise such authority, and refuse to instruct pupils in studies and classes which they have not assigned to them. Parents feeling aggrieved may appeal to the local directors or to the board of education. (Id. Dec. 57.)

There is no privity of contract between the parents of pupils and the teacher. His contract is with the town. He is responsible to the committee who represent the town. The general charge and superintendence of the schools, in the absence of express legal provisions, includes the power of determining what pupils shall be received and what rejected. If children are suffering from a contagious disease, or so impure in morals as to render association with them pernicious to others, the school committee may direct the teacher to exclude them temporarily or permanently. In such cases, neither parent nor pupil has a remedy against the teacher, nor against the committee, unless they have acted corruptly or maliciously in the proceeding. But the law will not presume that the committee, who are invested with the power of superintendence and management, will act arbitrarily and unjustly in a matter submitted to their judgment. Where schools are graded, the committee, under the general power of superintendence, will decide how the schools shall be organized, how many shall be kept, and what shall be the qualifications, as to age and attainments, for admission. The

same powers also exist in regard to district schools, as far as they may be applicable. The law vests a plenary authority in the committee to arrange, classify, and distribute pupils as they think best adapted to their general proficiency and welfare. In the absence of special legislation on the subject, the law has vested the power in the committee to regulate the system of distribution and classification; and when this power is reasonably exercised, without being abused or perverted by colorable pretenses, the decision of the committee will be deemed conclusive. (See 23 Pick. 224; 5 Cush. 198; 8 Cush. 160.)

SEC. 3. Parents have no remedy as against the teacher.—As a general thing, the only persons who have a legal right to give orders to the teacher are his employers, namely, the committee in some States, and in others the directors or trustees. If his conduct is approved by his employers, the parents have no remedy as against him or them; for the law will not presume that the committee, etc., who are invested with the powers of superintendence and management, will act arbitrarily and unjustly in a matter submitted to their judgment. (23 Pick. 227.) The following decision on this same point is later, and to the same effect. The board of trustees in the city of New-York are vested with the power to conduct and manage the schools in their respective wards; and in this conduct and management the discipline of the schools is exclusively under their control. To their direction, consequently and necessa

rily, is confided the power to decide questions relating to the violation of discipline, and their judgment is conclusive. (18 Abbotts' Pr. 165.) If a child of proper age and qualifications is rejected by the master, the proper course for the parent is to appeal to the committee, trustees, or directors, as the case may be. If, on their requisition, the master should refuse to accept the pupil, they would have ample means to enforce their authority by means of their contract with the master. But if they approve of and confirm the act of the master, we are to believe that there is good and sufficient cause for the rejection of the pupil. (23 Pick. 227.) The trustees may always expel a scholar when, in their judgment, the good order and proper government of the school require it. (14 Barb. 225; 38 Maine, 376; 8 Cush. 164.) And if they err in the discharge of their duty in good faith, they are not liable to an action therefor. (32 Vermont, 224.) Consequently the master ought to consult the trustees before he expels a pupil, (23 Pick. 227;) and if they give their consent, the parent has no remedy, and there is nothing to fear. In no case can a parent sustain an action for an injury to his child, unless some actual loss has accrued to him, or he has been subjected to the violation of some right, from which a possibility of damage to him may arise. (14 Barb. 225; 38 Maine, 376.) A parent of a child expelled from a public school can not maintain an action against the school committee by whose order it was done. (Ib.) Nor is the teacher of a town school

liable to an action by a parent for refusing to instruct his children. (23 Pick. 224.) The teacher has the right to direct how and when each pupil shall attend to his appropriate duties, and the manner in which pupils shall demean themselves, provided that nothing unreasonable is demanded. (27 Maine, 281.) A requirement by the teacher of a district school that the scholars in English grammar shall write compositions is a reasonable one, and refusal to comply therewith will justify the expulsion of the scholar from the school. (32 Vermont R. 224.) A rule requiring every scholar to read from the Protestant version of the Bible may be enforced by the trustees, or by the teacher, in accordance with the known wishes of the trustees, and the scholar refusing to comply with such rule may be expelled from the school. (38 Maine, 376.) A scholar may be expelled for truancy, or for misconduct in school, or for disobedience to its reasonable regulations. (8 Cush. R. 164.) Children unvaccinated may be excluded from school. (N. Y. Session Laws, 1860, 761, ch. 438.) Teachers are not required to hear the recitations of dilatory pupils or those who are not prepared at the regular time for recitation, unless it can be done without interrupting the regular school duty. Teachers are authorized to suspend pupils who are persistently disobedient or immoral in their conduct, but must promptly report the case with the charges to the commissioner for his action. (ByLaws of Md. Comrs. 1865.) Directors are authorized to suspend or expel pupils for disobedient, refractory,