sessed in the town or ward in which the treasurer or other officer authorized to pay the last preceding dividend, resides." This provision, however, does not include the real estate of the company. For it is provided at the beginning of the section that "the real estate of all incorporated companies liable to taxation shall be assessed in the town or ward in which the same shall be, in the same manner as the real estate of individuals."

The affidavit of John C. Van Buskirk sets forth that "the treasurer of the" Cayuga Bridge "Company, authorized to pay the last dividend, resides at Seneca Falls in Seneca county." The personal property of the company therefore, and the amount of its capital, exclusive of its real estate lying in other towns, is taxable in the town of Seneca Falls, although the value of the bridge terminating in Aurelius be included in that amount.

However inequitable the operation of the rule in this instance may be, it is clearly a case within the provisions of the Revised Statutes above quoted. The property of the company, exclusive of its real estate in other towns, must be taxed in the town of Seneca Falls. It only remains then to be considered whether the company has any property in district No. 1, which comes within the definition of real estate. If it has nothing more than a house for the use of the toll gatherer, and a lot no more than sufficient for his accommodation, I am of opinion that they are to be considered, like the toll-house and gate of a turnpike company, as a necessary appendage to the franchise, almost equally indispensable to its enjoyment with the bridge itself. The affidavit of John C. Van Buskirk puts the value of the house and lot at $200 or $250, according to the ordinary standard of valuation adopted by the assessors of the town, an amount so small that it would be hardly reasonable to treat it as representing real estate distinct from the capital stock of the company. Upon a full view of the case, therefore, I think the property of the Cayuga Bridge Company is not liable to be taxed at all in the town of Aurelius.

As upon these points the whole case may be disposed of, it is unnecessary to take notice of the remaining objections to the proceedings of the two meetings from which the appeal under examination is brought.

It is accordingly ordered, that the proceedings of the two meetings in school district No. 1, Aurelius, held on the 7th and 9th October ult., excepting so far as they relate to the choice of district officers, be and they are hereby annulled; and it is further ordered, that all subsequent proceedings by virtue of the votes taken at said meetings for selecting a site for a school-house, for laying a tax for the purchase of said site, and for laying a tax for building a school-house, be, and they are hereby set aside.

And the trustees of said district are hereby required to call a special meeting of the inhabitants at an early day, for the purpose of announcing this decision, and of giving them the opportunity of taking such measures in the premises as upon reconsideration may appear to them to be due to the quietude and prosperity of the district.

The inhabitants of school district No. 14 in the town of Richland, against the Commissioners of Common Schools of said town.

School districts should not be so reduced in strength as to be unable to maintain respectable schools.

Dissensions in school districts cannot be allowed to be made a ground for altering or breaking them up.

This was an appeal to the Superintendent under circumstances which are fully stated in his decision.

By JOHN A. Dix, November 11, 1833. On the 31st day of August last, the commissioners of common schools of the town of Richland, Oswego county, formed a new district of a part of district No. 14 and other contiguous territory. From this proceeding, the inhabitants of the latter appeal to the Superintendent of Common Schools.

District No. 14, before it was divided by the commissioners, had 40 children between the ages of 5 and 16 years, and a taxable property amounting to $4,370. By the alteration referred to, the number of children is reduced to 29, and the taxable property to $3,250. The Superintendent is decidedly of the opinion that the district, with such a reduction of its wealth and of the children upon whom the public money is apportioned, would hardly be adequate to the support of such a school as is indispensable to the proper education of their children. It is the great evil of the common school system that the teachers are not always so well qualified as they should be. It is obvious that their qualifications will generally be in proportion to their compensation; and it is an object of the highest importance to secure to every district the ability of maintaining a respectable school, by employing a teacher of the requisite learning and ability. By preserving the district as it existed previous to the division made by the commissioners, some of the inhabitants may be compelled to send a greater distance to school, and they may even be unable to send at all during some days in winter by reason of the state of the roads. But admitting all this to be true, the evil will be far less than that of reducing the strength of district No. 14 so much as to disable it for maintaining a respectable school.

The Superintendent has no means of knowing the situ

ation of the inhabitants who were taken to form district No. 22, excepting those who were set off from district No. 14. But he cannot consistently with what he deems due to the latter, sanction the alteration made by the commissioners.

It is alleged that a personal difficulty has existed between some of the inhabitants of district No. 14, and that the district has thereby been kept in a perpetual ferment for sometime past. Although these dissensions are exceedingly to be regretted when they are allowed to influence the conduct of individuals in rela tion to the education of their children, it would be extremely dangerous to allow them to be made a ground for altering or breaking up school districts. It is far better to trust to the good sense and sober reflection of the parties concerned, and to believe that they will, ere long, in a matter so deeply affecting the character and interest of their children, come together under the guidance of more rational counsels, and sacrifice their private animosities to considerations of their own, as well as the common good. They cannot fail to see that without a spirit of moderation and forbearance the good order of society could not long be maintained, and that the benefits it is designed to secure could not be enjoyed in comfort or safety.

It is hereby, ordered, that the proceedings of the commissioners of common schools of Richland, in the formation of school district No. 22, be set aside, and that the said district be, and it is hereby, annulled.

The Trustees of school district No. 8 in the town of Cobleskill, ex parte.

Public moneys are to be equitably divided when a new district is formed.

The facts of this case are the same as stated in the Superintendent's opinion on the application of the trustees of school district No. 4 in the town of Cobleskill, page 125.

By JOHN A. DIx, November 12, 1833. By a rule heretofore established by the Superintendent of Common Schools, whenever a new school district is formed after the public moneys are distributed, the inhabitants who are taken to constitute it, are entitled to receive from the districts from which they are set off, their just proportion of the school moneys apportioned to said districts, according to the number of their children between 5 and 16 years of age. Although this division of the public moneys is not made obligatory by law, it is in accordance with the whole tenor of its provisions, and a different rule could not be set up without manifest injustice and an entire abandonment of the principle upon which the proceeds of the common school fund are distributed. The right to receive the school money as above

stated may be waived by the parties concerned, but it cannot be taken away without their consent. You will understand me as referring only to such portion of the public moneys in the hands of the trustees as is unexpended or unappropriated by vote of the inhabitants to a term preceding the division of the district.

The new district (No. 4,) will, therefore, be entitled to receive from you $4.34, unless some portion of the school money, which you received, was appropriated to the payment of a qualified teacher for his services after the first of January last, and before the division of your district.

The inhabitants of school district No.

town of Petersburgh, ex parte.

in the

School may be kept on Sunday for the benefit of persons who observe Saturday as holy time, and the teacher must be paid for that day by those who send to school.

A teacher may receive the public money if he dismisses his school on Saturday and keeps it open on Sunday.

This was an application to the Superintendent for his direction in a case in which a large majority of the inhabitants of the district observed Saturday as holy time, and the teacher being of the same religious sect, kept his school open on Sunday and dismissed it on Saturday.

By JOHN A. DIx, November 18, 1833. The laws of this state recognize Sunday as a day of public observance, by prohibiting the execution of civil process, pastimes, &c., and travelling, excepting for necessary or charitable purposes. Servile labor is also interdicted, excepting to those who uniformly keep the last day of the week (Saturday) as holy time. Such persons may undoubtedly have a school on Sunday, provided it is kept under such circumstances as not to disturb other persons in their observance of the first day of the week (Sunday) as holy time; but they cannot under the provisions of the law, compel the latter to contribute in any manner to its support. If a teacher keeps his school open on Sunday, those whose children attend pay him for that day; but if he teaches from Monday morning till Friday night, he ought not to be deprived of the public money because he teaches on Sunday also. This is altogether too unimportant a matter either for the interposition of the Superintendent, or for any contention among yourselves. The teacher would be entitled to the public money for five days in the week, and as the inhabitants pay towards the balance of his wages, after applying the public money, for so much time only as their children attend school, it seems to me that there is no hardship or injustice in the matter.

(ANONYMOUS.)

On certain holidays schools may be dismissed.

By JOHN A. Dix, November 21, 1833. The holidays on which a teacher may dismiss his school, are such as it is customary to observe throughout the country: as the fourth of July, Thanksgiving and New-Year. But these matters are not, it seems to me, of sufficient importance to give rise to any controversy between the trustees and teacher, by insisting on either side with too much tenacity upon any particular day beyon those above mentioned. If it were usual, for instance, in the neighborhood, to dismiss school to enable the children to attend some local celebration, a proper liberality should be exercised towards the teacher iu that respect.

The inhabitants of school district No. 1 in the town of Hunter, against the Trustees of said district.

Coloured persons ought not to be employed to teach white children.

This was an appeal by some of the inhabitants of school district No. 1 in the town of Hunter, from the proceedings of the trustees of said district, in employing a coloured man to teach the district school, which was attended almost exclusively by white children.

By JOHN A. Dix, November 25, 1833. The law is silent as to the description of persons to be employed as teachers, and it is, therefore, a matter wholly in the discretion of the trustees. At the same time I consider the employment of a coloured person to teach a school of white children as an unjustifiable exercise of authority, unless the parties concerned waive their objections to it. It is unnecessary to inquire whether public opinion, with regard to the admission of these persons to the enjoyment of all the social privileges of the whites, is well grounded or not. It is enough that a distinction exists; that they are disqualified by the laws of the United States for the performance of services in the militia, and by the constitution of this state for the exercise of the right of suffrage, without a qualification of property.

Under these circumstances the trustees of school districts, whose duty it is to cultivate a spirit of harmony and good feeling, by carrying into effect as far as is proper the wishes of the inhabitants, should abstain from employing them in the capacity of teachers. If the trustees persist however, notwithstanding the objections on the part of the inhabitants, I see no remedy for it, until the annual election of district officers occurs, when others may be elected in their place. They may pay the teacher the public money for his wages as far as it goes, and the residue must