64 N.J.L. 59 | N.J. | 1899
We think that this application is premature. The controversy arose under the School law of the state, to wit, under section 131. Gen. Stat., p. 3036. Section 28 of the School law provides that “in all controversies arising under the School law the opinion and advice of the county superintendent shall first be sought, and from him appeal may be made, if necessary, to the state superintendent of public instruction,” who, by the thirteenth. section, “shall decide subject to appeal to the state board of education, and without cost •to the parties, all controversies or disputes that may arise under the school laws of the state, * * * and his decision shall he binding until a different decision shall be given by the state board of education.”
The erection of this chain of tribunals indicates a legislative policy to place the redress of such grievances in the first instance in the hands of the higher school authorities. Buren v. Albertson, 25 Vroom 72 ; Thompson v. Board of Education, 28 Id. 628.
This administrative policy and. the obviously wise ground upon which it rests have weight with this court when called upon to exercise a sound judicial discretion such as is now
The relator’s rule to show cause is discharged, but without costs.