The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1869-02-24

the schools got along just as well with
ont him as with him.
Mr.. FOREMAN, of the committee, in
quired whether, if the Superintendent
> were efficient the office would be desira
BILE. Mr.. WHEAT replied that whil
they had Principals for the schools, tn
Superintendency was unnecessary. 1
those offices were dispensed with, a Su
perintendent might be made useful il
discharging some of the duties now in
cumbent upon them.
Mr.. BISHOP said the Superintendent
,, , was, for some reason, not responsible tt
the Board. 1t sometimes happened tina
such bodies were not as Independent a.
they might be. When this matter wa,
first talked of, law had been passed tt
divide the city into three School Dis
tricts.e When the law was published il
was found that the word "mayn had
been substituted for the werd "shall,"
thus leaving it at the discretion Of the
Board to retain the present plan. AL.
though official certificates showed that
the change had been made the Board
had adhered to the law, as printed and
not as passed. Under the old system
the cost of schools was much less than
at present, and he believed the Super.
intendent could be dispensed with
while they had good Principals.
Mr.. COLLIER had been o teacher in
Wheeling both under the old and the
new systems, and was familiar with the
working of both. He preferred the old.
He observed remonstrance from the
Principals against abolishing the Office
of City Superintendent. When he was
teaching, two of the gentlemen whose
names were there signed lad united with
him in an effort to get rid of the Super
intendency.
During his last year, the Superinten-
dent had visited his school three times
Instead of examining the classes, he
bad told the teacher to proceed as if he
was not present" After class had re,
cited he called the school to order, made
a remark or two, took from his (Col
lier's) book the attendance report and
then left.
1t was to the Superintendency they
were indebted for certain laws relating
to excuses and absentees which were a
source of constant tro uble. In reply to
a question, Mr.. COLLIER stated that
many parents visited his school much
oftener than the Superintendent, and
manifested a deep interest therein.
Mr. CRAWFORD heartily endorsed
what had been said.
Mr.. HoRNBRoOK gave statement
which he had received from the present
Chairman of the Board of Education in
relation to the uselessness of the office
of City Superintendent. The Chairman
had told him that the Clerk of the
Board, with small addition to his pres
ept salary, could discharge the duties of
the Superintendent. The Chairman had
declined to come before this committee
and he mfr. HoRNBRooKl had told him
he would make his statement for him.
Mr.. BISHOP thought the Legislature
the proper authority from which to get
relief without denying that the Board
of Education might hold the Superin-
tendent responsible, he could say that
body had not done so.
Mr.. GEORGE ROBINSON alluded to the
rumor that the Superintendent and Mr..
BOYD, one of the Principals, had can
vassed for signatures to the remon
STRANGE. (Mr. BOYD admitted having
done some canvassing, but doubted
whether the Superintendent had.)
Mr.. ROBINSON continued by stating
that he had been o scheol trustee before
the Superintendency was established.
They had made fine progress without
that Office. Now there was continued
trouble. One objection was that the
office was useless, sort of fifth wheel.
Another objection was that the Super
intendent had brought into use certain
laws about excuses and absences which
had caused much wrangling and cos
troversy.
The controversy had been carried into
the newspapers, being conducted by
Messrs. FUTILE, BOYD and McMECHEN
for the Principals, against certain citi-
zens of the place.
The speaker illustrated the working
of this excuse law as connected with
the Superintendency, aud argued that
it was source of constant vexation for
which the Office of Superintendent was
responsible. He thought the salary
paid the Superintendent was entirely
too much, and the way to satisfy the
people was to get rid of it. He took
this ground, not as an enemy, but as
, friend of public schools.
The city districts comprised about a
square mile in territory, and the Super
intendent received $1,000. The district
of the County Superintendent was very
large, covering many square miles, and
that officer could receive but $500. 1t
had been said that the city Board could
likewise reduce the salary of the CITY
officer. They had failed to do so, and
the people came to the Legislature for
redress.
The school fund of this city was enor-
nous, and through it the officers might
WELD an enormous and improper intlu-
ence. He made no charges but merely
desired to guard against possible dan.
gers. To explain his meaning he showed
that an erder or resolution had been
drawn up discharging an architect
whose blunders had cost the city large
b l.