, 1865-08-25
SrMM1nttxtfuH
To the Editor of the St. CrOix Avis,
DEAR SIR,

TdClVe Oh Cne working OF our Rural Schools
under the present method of instruction,
that would astonish as we'll as amuse your
Readers; but time forbids. I therefore
pass on to the consideration of the Super
intendent's reply to the ". argument of
the Minority against the existing system
that, namely, which is derived from the
evidence of independent and unbiased
Teachers, who have had sufficient expert
ence, under both systems, in our Country
Schools, to enable them to give reliable
testimony as to their comparative merits.
This, bear in mind, was the Superinten-
dents own appeal, which was accepted by
the Minority as a very fair and conclusive
one; and having so accepted it, they pro-
ceeded to show, that, beyond any d,spuce,
the witnesses brought forward by the Su-
perlntendent were very far from meeting
his own twofold condition of independence
and experience, for that their evidence was
given after only one years experience, and
while they were still actually under the
sole, arbitrary control of him, on whose
hobby they were pronOuncing Judgment.
On the other hand, they produced an equal
number OF witnesses who answered the re-
CURED test in every respect, and who I'M
qualiiedly condemn the mongrel system
adopted in our Schools and that, not on
mere grounds OF pref udice or caprice, but
for sound, common-sense, practical reasons,
which they state, spite Of the Suporinten-
dents sneers, clearly and convincingIy;
and which agree, with singular accuracy,
with the objections urged against the sys-
tenn by DR.. Clark, whose letter was writ
ten many months after theirs, and hundreds
of miles aWay-of whose very existence
they were not aware-and with whom,
therefore, any collision was utterly impos-
gible. Now [ hardly think that there can
be a doubt as to which of these two class
es of witnesses will be regarded as most
reliable; particularly when | repeat, in the
very face OF the superintendent i%nsinua-
ton OF untruth, that | I'M prepared to
prove by letter from one of his witnesses,
of very recent date, that afterwards, when
he had gained a little more experience of
the system IN ats purity, he gave the prefer
ence to the old method and in the case
of another, on whose evidence he lays par
ticular stress, that when subsequently
emancipated from the power of the Su-
perintendent, by the severance of his con-
uoCGIOu Will GllG DClOOlS, he pIOhOuuCcu
the system 'a humbug''-a fact that am
also prepared to prove on personal evidence
which will satisfy any man-except the
Superintendent.
Unable to gainsay these manifest and
fatal objections to the qualifications of his
witnesses, the Superintendent resorts to
the expedient of endeavoring to throw dis
credit on the witnesses adduced by the
Minority. So we'll known are these Teach
ers to the Community, and so puerile are
the objections urged against them, that
there is scarcely any necessity for my speak
ing in their defence-yet for thoroughness
sake I must do so.
The first objection of the Superinten-
dent is-that no one can expect them to
speak against the system which they now
practise. But why not? They do not
pursue that system on compulsion-they
have no rod of terror over them-they in
cur no penalty whatever noW by the free