The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-06-20
CITY INTEaLIGENCE
For Additional o,ty Int ,gcaoe see mt., Pace.


BOARD OF SCHOOL CoNTRoLLzRs.-T Tbe
Board OF School Controller met yesterday after.
noon TO consider the report OF the Special Com.
mittee appointed to investigate all the depart.
ments OF the Central High School
The report ol che Committee having been read
MI. Freeporn moved to strike out the folio wing:
THE Committee further recommend that no
gentleman at presenc connected with the school,
other than as provided Tor Dy the accompanying
resolutlo", nor principal of any OF the public
grammar schools ol this city, shall he eligible
ioT the position OF Principal."
Inc n motion to strike out was agreed TO-.
MT. treeborn then moved that the following
recommendation be referred to the Sectional
BOard IOr consideration
The Comm ttee also recommend that applica.
ton be made to the next Legislature Tor the
passage OF an act by which pupils may be ad-
mltted into the Central High School from ori-
vate as we'll as public gram mar schools of this
city Provided, That such applicants shall pass
satisfactory examination
The same gentleman novel that the first recon.
mendation of the Committee, TO wit, that the Ia.
Guilty OF the High School be entirely reorganized,
because OF want OF cordlality of feeling and
harmonious concert OF action, be approved, and
tnat the resolutions affixed 10 the report be
adopted. Tine resolutions are as folows:-
ResofUed, That the Secret'ry OF this Board be
ana nc is hereby instruc ed 10 notify the members
OF he Faculty of the Boys High School that theu
tenn OF service Will expire the 1st day OF Septem
Der next: Provided Ina nothing herein contained
shall | o construed to maze an member of the
pre- ent Faculty lheligibe Ior reelection by tins
Resoived, fhat the COMMITTEES on Boys High
SchoOl BE- and are hereby instructed 10 proc yed IN
heretofore mas been Their pra.ce in fn0 vacancies
Res0tUed, That this Committee be discharged from
further consideration OF the subject
The motion was not agreed to,
Mr. Duty then said, that the charge against
Professor Mcguire originated in Councils, and
an investigation, conducted secretly, was COM
menced. The pIofessed object was to investl-
gate the condition OF the High School, but that
that was not the real object was shown by
the fact that all the Pho essors we're called
before Professor Mcguire was; and it looked
as II the purpose was to squeeze all that
was possible out OF the other Professors and
then see whether Professor Maguire's testimony
agreed with theirs. The BoId of School Goa
trollers then took up the subject OF the Boys
High School. A committee was appointed to
investigate the various departments OF the
Boys High School, but did not do so. 1t was
not until the fourth meeting that anything was
said about any other of the departments of the
School than that of the principalship. The
chairman OF the committee then noticed that
the whole of the investigation had been directed
ae ealnst the Principal, and he complained of it.
Mir. Duffy then proceeded to a review of the tes-
hmony, and dwelt particularly upon that which
related to the charge OF Professor Mcguire
not reading the Bible, and TO the charge of in
tOXicatlon.
Dr. Nebinger reviewed the testimony at con-
siderable length. He first alluded to the man.
ner in which the investigation had been brought
about. Mr., Shippen, the President, said it was
member OF Councils had said one word against
the present condition OF the High School or its
Principal, the objection beng to the sy6tem as
too good or too high to be necessary.
In the questions put to the different professors
the speaker said all were AIMED at the Principal
otthe School. The charges against the Princt-
pal, which DR.. Nebinger assumed were not
proven, were specified as follows:-
1st. Habtual neglect of duty.
I'd. Does not exercise proper supervision of
the various departments.
Sd Throws part of the duties OF inquiring
into abs ences upon professor.
4th. reqlently negects to open school AMI
to read the Bible.
9th. Negects, in MANY cases, to obey the
directions OF the Committee.
9Th. Neglects to originate measures for the
Improvement of the school.
7th. Does not carry out measures adopted by
the Faculty.
sth. Six professors had no confidence in him.
With respect to the charge of habitual neg
lect, the speaker said there was no proof at
all On the contrary, the testimony Of Professor
Rhoads shows that 1t was not so. He says:-"l
have never noticed his absence from the building
more than would be reasonable" Professor
Kirk pafrick says he thinks the efficiency OF
the school greater than it was three or four
years ago.
With regard to the second charge, DR.. Nebin-
ger said the Principal supervised the department
enough to have discovered more than four years
ago the need OF changes of five professors,
which we're recommended by him. These we're
only not farther urged on the late and present
High School Committee because of want ol
confidence. This recommendation is now Off
cially reported by him as testimony in regard tC
four Professors-Rhoads, McClane Haverstick
and Howard.
With respect to the third charge, the Profes
sor who takes part OF the duty.ot Inquirlng intc
absences professor Kirkpatrick, the efficient
SecIel ary of the Faculty. states: 81 wish th(
Committee 10 understand / do not complain o
doing that" 1t was thus willing action alto
gether in him, and no sign OF neglect in th'
Principal
AS to the fourth CHARGE, Professor Mcguire hat
always either read the Bible at the opening O
school himself or has delegated the duty to Pro
fessor Rhoads, who, as senior Professor of th
Faculty, and teacher OF elocutlon, might be sup
posed to be suitable person. Mostly Pro 'esso
Mcguire haS done it himself. But when the II gl
School Committee met at the school, or visitor
requested to see toe Principal, he has a numOe
OF times delegated the duty 10 Professor Rhoads
knowing OF no rule (and there is none) whateYe
to fol bid it, This is not neglecting the duty a
all: the duty is always done.
AS to the fifth charge, Mr.. Freeborn assert
that the Principal did not carry out the instruc
tions of the Committee, and as an instance men
tions his anticipauons OF appropriations by eX
penditures Immediately required for the opera
tions OF departments of the school.
That Professor Mcguire should have as littl
communication with the present and late Con
mittees is well explained by the testimony G
Mr.. Moore, who at one time was member c
the High School Committee.
Mr.. Moore testified 10 the existence of 'mos
MALIGNANT opposition to undermine" the PriI
cipal.
Thomas Potter, Esq, also an ex-member G
the High School Commiuee, testified that h
could not say that Professor Mcguire did nc
carry out the views of the Committee, and cou
not recall any single instance where fault wa
found with him
Professor Mcguire has also rearrauged tn
roster OF studies (p. 20) 10 great general adyaI