The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-10-02


satisfactory arrangements could be made
with A. s. Barnes & Co, and because the Wat
son readers on inspection we're found to be In
all respects fully equal, and in some respects
superior TO, the McGuffey series. Ii there are
as the Times claims, any members Of the State
board who express dissatisfaction with Mr.
| Lusher's action or who are astonshed
at his usurpaton of authority, let the
Times mention the names Of those
| gentlemen ard the question Of vera
| city can then be Immediately settled.
Mr.. Lushef has stated in the columns Of the
| Times itself that in what he did he acted under
| the authority of the board. That is square
statement The Times insinuates that GER
| tain members Of the board share its curiosity
| to know why and under what authority the
| Superintendent acted. It further afflrms
| that his action is "the genuine matter at
stake" Now if the Times Is willing to pass
from vague and damaging insnuations to
| open and manly charges, let it mention those
gentlemen Of the board who condemn the
| action 81 the Superintendent as arbitrary and
| unauthorized. This as we have said, would
Immediately bring the whole question Of
veracty to q head.
And now let us show the real atimus of the
Times in this fierce and disreputable attack
| upon the State Board and the Superintendent
of Education. 1t has very ingeniously, in its
late issues, attempted to create the impress
sion that the issue is between the Watson
readers selected by the Superintendent for
graded schools and the McGuffey readers
still retained for the ungraded and originally
Professionally selected for all the schools.
This is O miserable and palpable feint. The
Times has no interest in the McGuffey
readers, and it is doing the pub
fishers of those very excellent publ
cations a very gross and damaging in
justice In attempting to antagonize them
with the school authorities of this State.
The Times says 1t has said nothing about
the Harper Brothers books and that the
practical effect Of its expostulations would
have been to restore the MeGuffey books.
Patriotic and DISTINGUISHED Timesl Such
cheek has never before adorned the journals
tic profession. The dear disnterested Times
sweet, innocent soul! twas only wishing to
restore the McGuffey readers to the children
and supply them with cheap books. Unhap-
PLY the facts do not sustain these professions
of disinterestedness i'm this business.
If the public will observe, the chief
complaint Of the Times all through this |
controversy has been that the original
list Of books chosen by the State Board of
Education has not been adhered to. That Sc
lection we have time and again shown
was provisional The Times, however |
ignores this statement made by u.s. |
made by Mr.. Lusher, and by the Board
1t does not deny it, it simply ignores
1t, and insists that the original selection was
final and irrevocable. And why? Because
by the change the McGufrey readers were
adopted for ungraded, and the Watson sub
stituted for the graded schools This is the
issue under which the Times seeks 10 cloak its
pertinacious attack upon the school authori-
lies But is Is not the true one
We find that In the original and provisional
list of books adopted that "Swinton's Lam
guage Lessons, "pubhshedJy Harper Brothers.
was in it. The Harper Brothers, however, re-
fused to make any reduction in prices or to
make any contribution for the INDECENT chill
1ren, and their grammar series were rejected
Tor Buffers grammars, published by John 2.
Morton q Co., Of Louisville who entered into
! liberal and satisfactory arrangement with
he State. = -z-ys-s>s
This explains the motive Of the Times
light. II pretends.to desire That the original !
md provisional list shall be restored SO that
he McGuffey readers may be replaced Dis
yusting Discrimination II Is the organ of the
Harper Brothers. and IL is fighting for the
restoration of the original list solely in the
nj srest of the Harper Brothers grammar
eries on the price of which the Harpers re-
used to make any reduction and of which
hey refused to make any contributions.
This unmasks the Times: this is its whole
ignt. In the interest of the Harper Brothers
t has attacked the State Board Of Education.
naligned the Superintendent of Education,
md made itself ridiculous and contemplate
,efore the whole community. The Times is,
hen. MS we have said the organ of the Har-
'er Brothers in this contest, and nothing
lse. What share 1t was to have had in the
poll or what fee in the event of failure we
now not, nor do we deem 1t of sufficient
Importance to recommend an Investigating
to find out.
The Times eompl aims bitterly that its ene-
lies have assailed ii with stink pots We
sar there may be some truth In this not
riginal complaint Indeed, we have always
Dund an almost irresistible disposition on
he part of the people to pelt frauds and hum
Jugs with rotten eggs dead cats and the
Ike. We are not surprised, therefore, to learn
nat o few "Chinese stink-pots" have been q
roken over the head of our contemporary. {
We never use such weapons ourselves, and
'ould restrain others from using them IL we l
Duld; but whatever we may think rs to the :,
ropriety of the use of "stink-pots," we ;
arm the Times that they will be used against !
by the less refined until it learns to prac- a
ce real, honest and disnterested journal @
i'm. d
THE TREASURY INVESTIGATION. t