The daily gazette., 1882-09-15
The Mlxea sehoel Qusatlon.

En@ MAA@N ncAv@t X4SsA~Mf
We publish to-day Communication from
II. c. Conrad, Esq., IN which he claims TO
have been incorrectly reported with refer
ence to his speech at the Opera House on
Tuesday. He says that he did not advocate
mixed schools and that he did mot make use
of the words contained in the
GAZETTE report Of Wednesday. We
regret that we cannot agree with Mr.. Con-
rad in this matter. The GAZETTE reporter
who took his words down as he spoke them
is quite positive that he used the identical
words attributed to him, and several gentle
men who heard the speech agree in declar-
ing that to the best of their recol-
lection MIR. Conrad was reported
with absolute exactness. But suppose we
take Mr.. Conrad at what he now says he
said, and still we think 1t will be generally
admitted that an advocacy of mixed schools
is not only fair inference, but the only
reasonable one that can be had from
his remarks. He says he is will
ling to stand by his speech as
taken by by Mr.. Humphry of Essry Eye-
ming. All right. Through the courtesy of
Mr.. Humphry, we are enabled to give that
part, and the only part, of Mr.. Courad's
speech which was taken by him verbatim.
Mr.. Conrad then admits that he said
There shall be schools pheTe every child, be
its skin black or 'shite, shall learn the rwdi-
me1sts Of ava Esglish education. The time
has gone past Uhen any class in this COM
nsat1litU shall be set apart by MemsetVeS,
and taxed by themselves to support schools,
and yet in this nineteenth century Demo
cratic, legislation has set apart the poorest
class of people in this country and said tc
them "'You will pay for your own schools
cor be without khem,' and say this Is an
| outrage.
Now If Mr.. CShrad did not mean to advo.
cate mixed schools what did he mean when
he said "There shall be schools where
every child, be its skin black or ohite, shall
"learn the rudiments Of an English
education" And again, "The time has
'gone past when any class in this COM
immunity shall be set apart by Themselves
1t was an after thought, and one
that does not in the least affect the
meaning of first clause of the sentence,
to add, "and taxed by themselves" and
Mr.. Conrad cannot logically claim that the
taxing separately" was all that he meant.
1t is contrary to all rules of composition al
well as of common sense, to hold that sec
ondary and subordinate clause of sentence
should determine its whole meaning ex.
elusive of what has gone before. The
part Of Mr.. Conrad's speech, then,
which he admits TO have been reported cor
rectly, is not inconsistent with the part
which the GAZETTE reported on Wednesday
and which we must insist, with
all respect to Mr.. Conrad, wai
given with absolute correctness. 1t wal
spoken shortly after the paragraph above
quoted and was an almost exact repetition
Of what he had just said which is not unusua
even with as polished an orator as Mr.. Con
rad, and which will probably account fo
the fact that Mr.. Humphry did not take l
down, as he already had 1t in substance, ant
only reported verbatim the few sentence
above given. But the GAZETTE representa-
| tive did take both portions Of the speech
but as our space is limited he incorporated
In his report only that part which seemed tc
more clearly and startlingly set forth the
speakers ideas on the subject, the Language
of which was as follows ''Just u
"think that in the year 1882, in thi
nineteenth century, we should see on
"set of schools for one set OF mem
children and another set of schools TO
"another set of mems children. 1t is dis
"grace-a crowning disgrace that such
thing should be-"
Mr.. Conrad may be opposed TO mike,
schools, but If he is his words do not do hir
justice. Even in the milder form to whicl
he now subscribes they can bear no othe
construction than that of an advocacy c
one set of schools for every child, be It
skin white or black.