The Hebron schools closed with an educational day display and program. Prof. M. E. Dinsmoore is superintendent of the Hebron schools.

Dr. Logan Esarey delivered the commencement address to the senior class of the Chrisney high school. Dr. Esarey was at one time superintendent of the Perry county schools.

Harrison county has had nine high schools in operation this past year. A few years ago there was only one high school in the county and that was located in Corydon. The other points having high schools are Mauckport, DePauw, New Amsterdam, Laconia, Elizabeth, Lanesville, Salisbury and New Middleton. County Superintend

ent A. O. Deweese has been most energetic in pushing the high school phase of his work.

The Bloomington high school senior girls have decided on simple and inexpensive costumes for their com

mencement.

The Vevay schools have been offered the opportunity to establish an agriculture department for the coming year. Prof. Z. M. Smith, Director of Agricultural Education for Indiana,

has made the recommendation that a course in agriculture be established.

The new teachers' examination law in Indiana provides for monthly examinations every month in the year excepting February, September, November and December. The law forbids special examinations and gives

the teacher the privilege of writing on an examination on two separate days.

In a dual debate betwen the East Chicago and Whiting high schools, East Chicago won a double victory.

Gov. S. M. Ralston has appointed

County Superintendent S. L. Scott, of Clark county, on the State Board of Education, to succeed Prof. George H. Tapy, of Wabash College. Superintendent Scott began his term as member of the board on May 1st.

The Brazil high school commencement exercises were held on Wednes

day and Thursday, May 26th and 27th. There were 61 members of the senior class. The Class Day exercises were held on Wednesday and the commencement exercises proper on Thursday.

The Eighth District Teachers' Association held its first annual meeting on Saturday, May 8th. There were two sessions, one in the forenoon and the other in the afternoon. Besides the business of the meeting there were as follows: papers and discussions "Writing Grades by the Ayres Scale Reduced to a Scale Applicable to the Home Report," by J. W. Rhoads, supervisor of writing and drawing in the Muncie schools; "The Hillegas Composition Scale as Used by Muncie Teachers," by F. D. Lewis, principal McKinley school, Muncie; "The Courtis Tests in Arithmetic," by Supt. A. L. Trester, Alexandria.

The officers for the first meeting were: Supt. A. L. Trester, Alexandria, president; Supt. W. A. Denny, Ander

DECISIONS OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL RICHARD M. MILBURN RENDERED MAY 7, 1915, ON THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

Has a township trustee legal authority to contract with a legally qualified teacher to teach in a school building and require pupils to attend school in such school building when said building has been condemned for school purposes by the State Board of Health?

Does a township trustee lay himself liable in any way by contracting with a legally qualified teacher to teach in a school building which has been condemned by the State Board of Health?

to close school buildings, and the exercise of authority by the State Board of Health, being under the police power of the state, takes precedence over all conflicting laws not of like character. It is, therefore, unlawful to hold school in a building which has been condemned by the State Board of Health if said State Board of Health declares the holding of school therein would be causative of disease, or necessary to prevent an epidemic or necessary for the prevention or suppression of disease generally. A contract to do a thing unlawful is a void contract. Therefore, a contract between the township trustee with a legally qualified teacher to teach in a school building, under the circumstances above stated, would be a nullity, and no pupil could be required to attend such school.

The teacher must be presumed to know the law, as well as the township trustee. The liability of a township trustee would probably not extend further than liability to punishment by fine for his violation of the law of the board of health. In the absence of a statement of facts, it is impossible for me to say more in answer to your fourth question.

"On page 35 Acts of 1915 you will find the law which amends the law providing for the settlement of tuition when pupils have been trasferred from one school corporation to another. This law amends the law approved March 11, 1901, which was amended and approved March 6, 1909. Shall transfer settlements for the present year be made under the act of March 6, 1909, Acts of 1909, page 331, or shall the settlements be made according to

the provisions as found in the act on page 35 Acts of, 1915? I desire to add that I take it for granted that these certificates of transfer were issued prior to the time the 1915 law became effective."

Please be advised: The transfers of pupils authorized by the Act of March 11, 1901, as amended and approved March 6, 1909, does not create any obligation arising out of contract, but purely out of the statute, by which it is requisite for the school trustee, board of school trustees, or commissioners of the school corporations in which the child transferred resides, to pay out of the special school fund, or out of the township fund, or out of the tuition fund, at his discretion, to the school trustee, board of school trustees, or commissioners of the school corporation, to which such child is transferred, certain amounts as tuition for such child.

No rights accrue in favor of the school corporation to which a child is transferred which was of a vested character, by which the school corporation to which such child is transferred can claim any remuneration or compensation, except as expressly granted by statute, and any rights of one school corporation as against another may be taken away at any time by statute. The common schools of this state as a whole are a state institution a system co-extensive with the state, embracing within it every citizen, every foot of territory, and all the taxable property in the state. (State ex rel. v. Ogan, 159 Ind. 119.) And the schools are matters of state and not of local jurisdiction.

"In such matters the state is a unit

and the Legislature the source of power. The authority over schools and school affairs is not necessarily a distributive one, to be exercised by local instrumentalities; but, on the contrary, it is a central power residing in the legislature of the state." State ex rel Clark v. Haworth, etc., 122 Ind. 462.

The conclusions of the Haworth case are all to the effect that the legislature has plenary power over the subjects of the public schools, and as further said in that case:

"As the power over schools is a legislative one, it is not exhausted by exercise. The legislature having tried one plan is not precluded from trying another. It has a choice of methods and may change its plans as often as it seems necessary or expedient, and for mistakes or abuses it is answerable to the people but not to the courts."

In the matter of control of school funds, the reasoning of Clark v. Haworth, supra, is to the effect that the power to levy taxes for school purposes rests wholly in the legislature; that, therefore, as a logical conclusion, the legislature has authority to control the use and disposition of school funds within the constitutional limitation as to the principal.

One school corporation, therefore, can not demand as a matter of right, any compensation from another school corporation for receiving a pupil on transfer in the absence of statutory

authority, for the legislature might require such transfer to be made without compensation. So long as the burden of taxation is uniformly borne, and equal privileges for the use of schools and they are equally open to all who would use them, no one could be heard to complain.

It is, therefore, my opinion that transfers of pupils from one school corporation to another, at any time. previous to 3 o'clock April 26, 1915, when the Acts of 1915 became the law, are governed by the former law, and until that time, that all services rendered by one school corporation to a pupil from another school corporation, are to be computed according to the previous law. On the other hand, all services rendered after the time at which the 1915 act went into effect are to be computed according to the 1915 act. If the legislature has intended otherwise, there was nothing to prevent the 1915 amendment from being put into effect at the beginning of the fall term, 1915, or at any specific date which the legislature might suggest. In the absence of any statement in the act postponing the time when it should take effect, it became effective upon proclamation by the governor, and school corporations, being incapable of independent contract where the statute is mandatory in the matter of obligations, must be governed wholly by the statutory requirements.