The Colonel, The Schoolmaster, and the Writ of Mandamus
When a Seattle teacher enforced a strict attendance policy, a local parent sued to force the school to readmit his son. The Chief Justice’s ruling settled a tug-of-war over authority that echoes in modern classrooms.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
John Alexander, at one time a member of the Legislature of Washington territory, resides in School District No. 8, which takes in large portions of the White River valley. E. F. Allen is the teacher of the school in that district and is well liked by both parents and pupils. The aforesaid Alexander has a son who, in order that he might have a title from youth up, was named Colonel Alexander. Now it appears that the teacher had been greatly annoyed by the tardiness and irregular attendance of his pupils, so he gave them notice that thereafter any pupil being tardy would be required to bring a written excuse from parents or guardians, and that unexcused lateness would result in suspension from school. Shortly after this notice, the Colonel was tardy once more. Mr. Allen, the teacher, told him he must bring an excuse. The boy returned next day and said that his parents would not give him an excuse. The teacher then addressed a letter to the parents of the Colonel, stating that the boy could not longer remain a member of the school unless he brought an excuse for his tardiness. The parents still refused to furnish the same, and the boy was suspended. The directors met and ratified the action of the teacher. Mr. Alexander then came into town and sued out a writ of mandamus to compel the teacher to admit his boy into the school and to hear his recitations. Mr. Alexander employed Mr. Donnell to sue, and the directors employed Mr. Balch on behalf of the district and Mr. Allen. Chief Justice Greene heard the case and held that the rule made by the Board of Education was a reasonable one, and that the requirement that a pupil should furnish an excuse for tardiness was a reasonable requirement. The court further held that the teacher, under the circumstances, had a right to suspend the boy.
“The aforesaid Alexander has a son who, in order that he might have a title from youth up, was named Colonel Alexander.”
This 1885 dispute over parental rights vs. institutional discipline highlights a recurring tension in public education. While the 'Colonel's' case might be solved today with a digital login or an automated email, the fundamental friction between administrative policy and individual defiance remains a staple of the Seattle-area school board circuit.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.