The Portland daily press., 1870-02-11

towns, with graded schools, in session during
large part Of The year, will not be best Tor
the short, ungraded schools in the smaller
towns.
Thirdly. State-uhiformity has not been
adopted in the States most advanced in edu-
cational matters, and has not peen success
where it has been tried.
In Vermont, the only New England State
in which an attempt has been made to enforce
#. several of the towns and cities refused to
adont The books introduced by the State, in
functions were issued, and while these pro
ceejings were pending, the Legislature unan-
imously rejected proposition to affix a pen
atty to the violation OF the law, thus prac-
tically repeating it.
In California the teachers are dissatisfied
with the books used. At large conventions
they have repeatedly petitioned for change of
books. Two books have already been chang
ed. and further changes are urgently demand
ed.
Among the educational men of Minnesota.
there is great complaint in regard to the law
requiring State uniformity.
In Wisconsin it has been abolished,
In Maryland it was abolished while pro-
ceedings were pending to force the city of
Baltimore to use the books adopted by the
State.
In Nebraska the agitation of the project
the passage OF the law.
Ohio has refused to establish State uniform
ity.
State uniformity has been established in on
| ly six or seven States, and has already been
repealed in two, and practically in third
| Vermont.
Fourth. The proposed change is not favored
| By prominent educators.
Hon. E. E. White. Ex-Supt. Pub. Schools of
l Ohio xuhan II hoe boan nj J q l.
| ed rather than benefited the schools.
| Mr.. Wickersham, Supt. Pub. Schools of
Pennsylvania, condemns it, and says they
have tried county uniformity and failed in it.
He is satisfied with town (distrct) uniformity.
DR.. Barras Sears, the successor of Horace
Mann, and great benefactor to the schools of
Massachusetts,, condemns it wholly
Mr.. NJ. Wiser of Kansas, in recent Report
from that State, opposes it in the strongest
/ terms.
Mr.. Hobbs, State Supt. of Indiana, saws this
work cannot be done by any one man or set
of men for the entire State. 1t will require
prudence and Judgment for each locality.
The educational experience and capacity of
an Examiner or County Superint endent may
be consulted by trustees and teachers, and by
such counsel and cooperation changes can be
prudently, deliberately and wisely made.
| Mr.. Northrup, State Supt. of Connecticut,
1
books, says he has no desire to attempt lesis-
ation on State uniformity. In his Report for
| 1869, the Board of Education say: The act
of the Legislature establishing this Board,
| gives it power to direct what text books
should be used in the schools of the State; a
bill was introduced into the last Legislature
making the exercise of this power compulsory
on the Board. 1t Was wisely, as we believe,
| rejected. We do not now think
L advisable insist 10 q
series of textbooks alone, throughout the
State.
There is scarcely one prominent profession
al educator, thoroughly versed in educational
affairs and enjoying the confidence of the ed
ucafiOnal cOmuunltv, who recommends it
Some would like uniformity, but they would
never legislate for it.
Fifth. State uniformity is not desired by
the teachers of Maine. They very generally
oppose it. The cities and many of the pin.
cipal towns have demonstrated against it. A
resolution in favor of State uniformity was
presented to the State convention of teachers
in 1868, and was withdrawn by its friends
upon motion to lay it upon the table. No
movement in favor of State uniformity has
ever since been made in the educational con.
ventions of Maine, and for the reason that its
advocates did not dare to submit ito the de-
cision of the teachers of the State.
The proposed change, if adopted, will tend
to divide the educational men of the State
and in Maine we are already too weak in this
respect to be wi ling to divide our strength.
1t will, also, be found that the committees in
some OF the smaller towns who have petition
ed for State uniformity, will be equally we'll
satisfied with the enforcement of town uni
formty, because the evils of which they now
complain would thereby be removed. :.
| We think that, even ii State uniformity
/ UprQ ahetracflv doSi 70 hJo xr1;oy, ,ro do ~
for moment admit, it must be disastrous
failure it established in opposition to the
wishes of large majority of the leading
friends of education in the State, MANY OF
whom have expressed their disapprobation of
the proposed scheme by remonstrances ad
dressed to the Legislature. and by arguments
before the Committee on Educption.
We propose to conclude by quoting a few
sentences from lecture delivered by Rev. A.
ID. Quint, kefOre the American Institute of
Instruction, in Boston, Mass, in 1861 on the
Province of Legislation in regard to Public
Education" He says,
"lt seems to me that the Massachusetts
system is fright in giving to no central
officers, lOr central body, any cont, oil
whatever in the administration of the
prescrlbes that school-books shall be nnsaoia.
rlan, but it allows no central body to dictate
the choice OF hooks.
Legislation should not insist on mechanical
system Of details. There is no need of dead
uniformity; there is need of ella ticity.-
The very life OF our method is its spontaneity.
The State could erect vast, cumbrous ma.
chine. 1t does L OF want it.
l.. Legislative changes should be
sparing.
"The danger" says DR.. Sears, Secretary of
Board Ct Education, OF Massachusetts, "Iies
| more in over legislation than in little legisla-
| tion." x.
*Of the leadDgteachers and friends of education in
this State who protest against this measure we name
.. b Cheney, President OF Bates College, and his
associate instructors President Torsey and the other
instructors at Kents Hill College; Mr. Hanson of the
Wa,erviiie Classical Insttate A. P. Stone, OF the
schools OF Portland; the School Board of Portland.
q which Dr.. W. H. Smaller is chairman; the school
kockland, Damaliscotla Bath, Brunswick, Lewis
tom Saco, Biddetord, Gorham and many other cities