Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1873-11-05
The Board Of Education.

/ sweeping tnaI nODe VINO nave spoken vi e"c
official acts of its authors in terms other than
of praise, can remain silent without passing
under condemnation.
The FREEMAN has during the past year
spoken of the Board and has mentioned the
SUI ject of a change in text books. Not
wholly approving the action of the forme
and not knowing that the latter was sub
jet forbidden, we spoke our mind. In So
doing we are not aware of having used other
than respectful language, or of having gone
outside the limit of temperate and cand
discussion. Whatever has been said in these
columns has been said editorially with the
exception of one article which will be no.
ticed farther on.
The Board issue their address for the
purpose of 6 indicating themselves against
anonymous and irresponsible charges" They
say of themselves justly that they g are men
well known to the public" and that they
have g identified themselves, both by sympa-
thy and practical cooperation, with the ed
ucationaI system of the State We wert
aware of this, but are glad to hear it from
them for praise from that source IL
praise indeed.
The address strongly implies, if it does not
directly assert, that all unfavorable criticism
of the Boards action has been instigated by
the publishers OF Greenleal's Arithmetic. Il
says that " the Board knew very we'll that
their choice would not satisfy those who had
mercenary reasons for being dissatisfied and
then charges that these publishers il stigated
the investigation last fall. They proceed
to say:
Fooled in this maneuvre, the agitators
return to the attack through the press. Now
an article appears in one newspaper signed
ny fictitious name, then another article III
another paper calls attention to it, then
third from distant part of the State catches
up the echo. and it is perfectly evident all
the while that all these articles have emanat-
ed from one and the same source, one IN
variable conclusion being reached in every
instance, ,mely the superiority OF Green
leafs Arlthmetics."
II that charge is intended to apply to this
paper it is untrue. Only our advertising
columns have been open to parties interested
IN the ore arithmetic or the other.
The Board give as one reason for choosing
French's Arithmetic that 80 five out of the six
teachers consulted, advised their ad option
The FREEMAN once stated 60 that the opinion
Of those teachers was not asked up.n th,
merits of Greenleat's. the book now in use,
IS compared with Eaton, " alton and French
nor was their opinion as to a change from
GreenIeaf asked In their address the
| ,otrd say
:. 1t has been said that Greenlea's were
xcluded from the Arithmetlcs on which tie
teachers consulted were asked to give then
| PM N. On that point the following testI-
! nony is submitted
| The undersigned, IN giving to the Board
| }, Education their views the subject
| ArlthmetIcs, intend d to express thor pr f.
srence Tor French's over all thuse understood
. be competitors, including Green!eat's,
aOw IN USE
Signed by all but one OF those who recon-
nended French's \ rthmetic."
Iuc CldGS u jdtU va I41ACdIiOH ib PltOo OhS
more what we think they will never dare to
,ssert. They know very well that the evl-
ience they submit is not the proper evldenc
N the case TIE question is on what books
the teachers were asked to give their opin-
lon." We Say again that Greenleaf was not
among item. The Board can doubtless geI
copy of the letters Secretary French sent
when the books were submitted Those let.
lers will tell whether the Board or the
FRtEM,N is correct. If the Board does mol
wish to produce the proper evidence we vii
do so and willingly abide the verdict.
One question here. The Board say
: When the publishers of the competing
books declined to send copies for examination
70 the teachers consulted, the Secretary, a
his own expense. purchased and forwarded
The necessary copies" Did he so forwarC
any except the three competing books?
We deplore the fact that the Board ha
issued an address showing so much irritation
and that they have not discussed tn
question more fairly. The Free Press re
, Joices that they have stated the facts in f
- clear aud authoritative a manner. The
are indeed as 90 authoritative as correct i
their assertions. In closing they call thei
address IAN expose of the situation w
, wish to call their attention to a little matte
that, it they were dealing fairly with tn
S people they were engaged in enlightening
t th' y might properly have mentioned.
q Five weeks ago we published commun
h :ation on the subject of French's Commo
D School Arithmetic; this being the only thin
not editorial that has appeared on that mat
ter in the FREEMAN. That article containe
specific charges against the book Wei
these charges, gentlemen of the Board, III
s ounded? If they were not true they WEI
{ grave enough to demand refutaton at you
d hands. 1t they were true full "expose
e the situation would have admitted the
IS truth.
J. How was it that the Secretary was in NJ
? Stockn's Office in Boston, October 10th, ar
>, that there was a consultation over TIL
q article there? What was the reason :h
n alter that consultation seventeen hundr,
lie copies of that g authorized" book we
ordered back from Vermont to New York |
the Harpers'? What was the matter wi
the g best Arithmetics for Vermont?" II,
the Secretary informed the Board of this Ii
episode when the address was issued?
l. 50, why didn't it appear as part of Il
1" expose?"
h. We are hardly called upon to defend Oh
editorial brethren of the State who have n
al worshiped the wisdom Of the Board or t
T. iisinterestedness of its secretary, from
hr.adlu Cd