Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1872-02-17
encounter, rhieh in time Vim b orercom..I


during the session of the Legislature, for con-
sultation. 1t was not his purpose to be sire A.
uous in regard to the system. If after ven
tilation it was thought proper to repeal the
law, Notwithstanding the good that has grown
out of it, let it be so but if it tends to elevate
our common schools, let us retain it.
Mr.. HOLDEN confessed that in the western
part of the State the people were not satisfied
that the present system for the advancement
of education is the best one. There is no
doubt but that all the money that is expended
ought to be expended, and more too if neces-
sary, but is this the system? His idea in re-
gard to the repeal of the act was that some
thing better could be put in its place. He
complimented the county supervisor of Cum
berland county for his endeavors in behalf of
education, but he had work enough for four
men.
lie hoped TO see the day when the normal
schools should take the place of everything
OF this kind, for he regarded them as the true
means fer the advancement of education. The
education of teachers is what is most needed.
While we are waiting for this result we must
have a substitute, and he regarded the sys-
tenn of county supervisors as the substitute
for the last three years. But he did not think
that should remain longer because it does
not give general satisfaction. lie was
friend TO education, and only opposed the
present system for the sake of getting some
thing better.
Mr.. CARLETON spoke in favor of his motion
lie regarded the system as failure, as did
his constituents. A bill was passed by the
House last winter repeating the act, but the
other branch in their wisdom, having more
white hsndkerchiefed gentlemen. stopped it,.
| Again the people demand the repeal of the
law, and he hoped this amendment would be
adopted for the very perpose of amending so
| as TO submit the matter to the people.
| In his county they had sixteen hundred
| days of schooling. Could one man visit all
| these schools with any benefit to anybody !?
| He thought not. His district had in the last
| three years three hundred days Of school, and
| the county supervisor had visited il twice
| spending two hours each time. \ ct we have
| paid him sixy-eight dollars for four hours
| service in our village district school. If that
! money was expended in our primary school it
would be of some benefit to us, for some of
oar best teachers could be hired two months
for that amount. Mr.. Carleton continued at
| some length in opposition to the present sys-
| TEN of education.
| Mr.. PHILLIPS was not disposed to urge the
| retention OF county sapervisorship, Every
| member viii give it csrefel consideration,
and il it seems best that this system should be
| taken away, let it be taken away in sorrow,
| because ii has not accomplished all that its
| friends desired. and not in ridicule. Let it be
| taken away with the hearty determination that
some nobler structure shall rise from its ashes.
For the want of a better system by which to
advance the condition of common schools, he
was for the continuance of county supervis-
ors but il the gentleman or opponent to this
system shall utter the first sound of a better
and more efficient way OF accomplishing this
most difficult object, he would 60 heart and
hand for it; but until such way can be pre-
scented, he would hold to what he had, lest he
| might fail of getting as good.
| He knew that much that had been said
| against the present system was lamentably
| true. He felt that in many directions it had
| failed, and he was sorry for it, but, neverthe-
less, he chung to the principle. He was sorry
II it had failed, for he believed it to be right.
One thing that has led to this failure has
| been the unfortunate appointments in county
| supervisors. Because teacher who is en-
| ployed to keep school fails in accomplishing
that for which he was employed, does that
| break down the school system? Because
| three county supervisors fail in carrying out
| the wishes of the Superintendent of this
measure, is it because the principle is wrong?
Is it because there is a loophole that cannot
be stopped? He did not think SO. 1t is
new system. These men were put in
for the first time, and upon trial. They felt
its responsibility as we'll as the friends Of the
measure, and he hoped they would receive
the concentrations Of the people for their
endeavors. Another reason why, in the
minds of the people, this is failure, is on
account of the expense. 1t is asserted that
the expense of county supervisors is $780,
| 900. He did not see it so. The expense is
| $4,000 and the county institutes $4,000,
which makes $4,000 If we had not county
supervisors, county institutes would no doubt
be established for they were in vogue years
ago and continued many years. That ought
not to be added to the expense of county
| supervisors.
Taking this $4,000, what is the expense to
the people! 1t is simply seven cents on a
State valuation of one thousand dollars. Was
this burdensome Proportioning it to the
population,i and it is about l2 cents to
every person in the State, or about Z 1-2
cents to every scholar, and is only fourteen
cents to each taxable poll. Is not the good &C.
complished by this system worth all it costs?
| He thought it was. What is the expense of
| $4,000 year if but single child is saved
from the infamy ofwaywardness and dissolu-
ton! We are all aiming in one direction
for the education of our youth, but the only
| question is, which is the better way?
Mr.. LEBRoKE closed the debate in favor of
the present system. He regarded the system
as temporary expedient, until a sufficient
number of teachers shall be educated at our
| Normal schools to meet the demands. He
| approved of continuing the system in force,
| and as an evidence of its worth stated that
twenty-four States of our Union have adopted
| it, and not one has gone back upon it. The
| expense is $4,000. When some pet scheme
calls for ten or twenty thousand dsllars, the
| Legislature votes it almost unthinkingly. He
hoped the Legislature would take no retro
| grade steps in the matter, until something
better was devised.
Mr.. CARLETON withdrew his motion to
amend. The question being on the accept
ance of the report, the yeas and nays were
ordered, and being taken, the House rejected
the report, as follows
| YEAs.-Messrs. Allen, Anderson, Atwell. Bailey
Barker, Bragdon, Burlegh, Coombs, Deering
Farrar Farwell, Fessenden, Fields, Folsom, Foss
Godng, Holbrook OF Freeport, Howard, Humph
rey, Jordan keegan, Remission, King, Knight
Lambert Lebroke, Lord of Bluehill Lord of De.
troit, McAlIister, Mliken, Nash, Palmer, Perkins
OF Poland, Perkins Of Auburn, Perry of Oxford
Phillips, Pike, Prince, Randall, Ray, Richardson
smith OF Saco, Snow, Sprague, Springer, Stevens
Talbot, Iitcomb Trefethen Turner, Wordsworth
| webb, Wells, WhitcOmb, Whitmore, Wood-56.
| NAfS.-Messrs Bachelor, Baker Rss Rripps