# Board of Education v. Board of County Commissioners

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · November 7, 1917 · 174 N.C. 469

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809141

## Case

- **Full name:** Board of Education v. Board of County Commissioners of Granville County.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** November 7, 1917
- **Citations:** 174 N.C. 469; 93 S.E. 1001; 1917 N.C. LEXIS 123
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by BrowN
- **Judges:** Hoke, Brown
- **Cited by:** 17 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809141

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that the term “uniform” qualifies the word “system” and requires only that provision be made “for establishment of schools of like kind throughout all sections of the State and available to all of the school population of the territories contributing to their support” (…

## Opinion text

BrowN, J.,
concurring: While I concur in the opinion of the Court that the so-called high schools mentioned in the opinion are a part of the common-school system, and as such come within the purview of the Collie case, I by no means concede that the Legislature or the board of education can establish, in their discretion, any kind of expensive educational institution in a county, and, by calling it a part of the general educational system of the State, cause it to be supported by general *476 taxation as the recognized common schools of the State are maintained, nor do I understand the Court to so bold.
There is nothing in this record that leads me to the conclusion that these four schools are of such an unusual and expensive character that they may not be with propriety classified as among the common schools of the county of Granville.
As I understand this case, when it is heard again in the Superior Court the presiding judge will pass on the controversy between the plaintiffs and defendants.
In my opinion, the presumption should be in favor of the correctness of the estimates of the county commissioners, and that they took into consideration the maintenance for four months of all the common schools of the county, including the four schools mentioned. When those estimates are attacked, the burden of proof-is necessarily on the plaintiffs who attack them.
Much weight should be attached to the judgment of the county commissioners, as they are the direct and immediate representatives elected by the people. They bear the approval of the people and are selected, presumably, because of their character and discretion., There are usually five of these representatives of the people, and they are generally selected from different sections of the county, and are, therefore, peculiarly well informed as to the county needs and interests. The commissioners constitute the local legislature, and it must be assumed that they will faithfully care for the interests of their * constituents and will not needlessly cripple any county institutions. The County Board of Education is usually composed of only three persons and are generally not directly responsible to the people.
One of the reasons urged in recent Legislatures for requiring members of the Board of Education to be elected by the people is to make them more directly responsible to those who pay the taxes as well as cast the votes. The experience of a century has shown that those who expend the public money are rendered much more careful and economical when they are elected directly by the voters than when appointed to office.
In this case it appears that the increased valuation of property in Granville County has yielded over $1,500 additional school taxes, and for this reason it is urged the estimates of the commissioners are sufficiently high. Whether they took into consideration the expense of the four so-called high schools, the judge below will of course ascertain. It is presumed that they did.
We have had two controversies like this before this Court, and both were referred back to find the facts upon evidence. In both cases it was ascertained that the county commissioners had supplied - ample funds to *477 support tbe schools of tbe county, and tbat tbe gomplaint of tbe boards of education were without real foundation.
For these reasons, I think tbe courts should be extremely careful and guarded in interfering with tbe estimates and budgets which the representatives of the people have deemed sufficient for the support of schools or any other county expense.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809141. Public record. Not legal advice.