|
|
|
| |
| Back |
Document A: "Findings of Fact and Order" Adolpho Romo v. William E. Laird, et al. No. 21617, Maricopa County Superior Court (1925)Reprinted from the OAH Magazine of History
|
|
| THE COURT: This is an action brought by the plaintiff Adolpho Romo against the Board of Trustees and Superintendent of School District No. 3 of Maricopa County, comprising the town of Tempe wherein he prays for a writ of mandamus requiring the defendants to admit his four children to the public schools of said district upon equal terms with all other children of school age residing within said school district. The plaintiff in his complaint says that he and his children are of "Spanish-Mexican" descent; that the defendants Trustees of School District No. 3 have entered into an agreement with the Board of Education of Tempe Normal School of the State of Arizona, whereby one of the two school buildings of School District No. 3, known as the "Eighth Street School" has been set apart, designated and declared to be a "Normal Training School" and its use...restricted to "Spanish-American" or "Mexican-American" children; that the children required to attend said Eighth Street School...are taught exclusively by "student teachers"; that the plaintiff presented his four children to the defendant Superintendent of School District No. 3 on September 14th, 1925, and requested their admission to the public schools of School District No. 3, but that said defendant...refused and still refuses to admit said children to the public schools...but required and directed them to report to the authorities of the said Normal Training School...; that by reason of the said acts of defendants the children of plaintiff, as well as all other Spanish-American and Mexican-American children entitled to be admitted to the public schools of School District No. 3, are, on account of their race or descent, and without regard to their age, advancement or convenience, segregated, excluded and compelled to attend the Eighth Street School taught exclusively by student teachers of the Normal Training School of The Tempe State Teachers' College. An alternative writ was issued and the defendants filed their...answer to plaintiff's complaint, admitting that plaintiff's children are entitled to admission to the public schools of School District No. 3, if they reside with him in said district, but deny said children have been refused admission to said schools, alleging that for purposes of convenience and advantage to the children of Spanish-American and Mexican-American extraction and descent, all such children, including the children of plaintiff,...were located in what is commonly called the Eighth Street School and taught by teachers able to speak and understand the Spanish language; that the course of education in said Eighth Street School is the same in every respect and the same character of surroundings, advantages and equipment prevail therein, as...in any other school in said district, and that teachers of the same...ability are employed in said Eighth Street School as are employed in said Tenth Street School. A full hearing was had before the Court upon the allegations of the complaint and answer, and from the evidence adduced thereat the Court now makes the following findings of fact; (1) That the children of the plaintiff . . . did reside with their father, the plaintiff, within said School District No. 3. (2) That on to-wit, September 14th, 1925, plaintiff's said children...presented themselves to the defendant School Superintendent...and demanded to be admitted to the public schools of School District No. 3. (3) That said children were all of school age and had theretofore been advanced to grades between the first and sixth grades.... (4) That upon so presenting themselves and demanding admission to said schools, they were by said defendant School Superintendent [sic] denied and refused admission to the said Tenth Street School, but were by him assigned and admitted to the said Eighth Street School. (5) That said Eighth Street School...had theretofore been and was at the time...set apart, designated and declared to be a normal training school under the provisions of...Civil Code. (6) That...the use of said Eighth Street School was and is...restricted and limited to the accommodation of Spanish-American or Mexican-American children.... (7) That the course of study in said Eighth Street School is in all respects the same as that taught in all other schools in said School District No. 3. (8) That the staff of teachers provided by defendants Trustees of School District No. 3 consists of undergraduate students of said Tempe Normal School or State Teachers' College, supervised and directed in their work by four "critic" teachers regularly employed by the Board of Education of said Normal School or Teachers' College. (9) That the teachers...in other public schools of said School District are regular graduate teachers holding certificates entitling them to teach in the public schools of the State. (10) That the teachers...in the said Eighth Street School are inferior in attainments and qualification and ability to teach as compared with the teachers...in the other schools of said District No. 3, in that they have not completed their education and course of training in the work of teaching.... It is clear from the foregoing facts that the defendants have failed in their duty to the plaintiff in not providing teachers of as high a standard of ability and qualifications to teach the children of plaintiff in the said Eighth Street School as possessed by the teachers provided by them to teach in the Tenth Street School. The language employed by our Supreme Court in Dameron vs. Bayless...is equally applicable to the situation presented here: "The law ...will and does require that after children arrive at the school building it be as good a building and as well equipped and furnished and presided over by as efficient a corps of teachers as the schools provided for the children of other races." That the Trustees of The School District have the right in the exercise of their sound discretion to make the segregation of the Mexican-American and Spanish-American children from the other children of the district as they have done, appears from Paragraph 2750 R. S. Ariz. 1913 (Civil Code) which reads: "Provided, that the Board of Trustees of any district may make such segregation of groups of pupils as they may deem advisable." But that in so doing they must provide for the teaching of the segregated group or groups "as efficient a corps of teachers" as is provided for the teaching of the other children seems clear to me. To compel them to attend schools taught by so-called student teachers is not so to do. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the alternative writ of mandamus [be] amended to read, instead of "children of the white race", "children of other nationalities." Joseph S. Jenckes, Judge. |
||