Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-08-07
A DENTON CARD.
The Principal Of Our Public Schools
Alive and Progressive NAN
Wanted.
To the Editor Of the Gazette.

Whnteu.
To the Editor Of the Gazette.
DENTON. Aug. 4. 1881.
In last Saturdays Monitor the editor,
Mr.. Geers, says some Denton CORE
spondent of THE GAZETTE, under date
OF July 10, writes lot of twaddle
about his tGeers) having opposed
Pro-. Looney for principal Of our school
last March and previous to his appoint
ment. Mr.. Geers seeks to break the
force of the correspondents
argument by accusing him
of writing twaddle. III
that was twaddle then this cor
respondent would advise Mr.. Geers TO
ill his paper with twaddle, for ,he
position was well taken, defended and
proven to he true. The people like
such twaddle, and would appreciate
the Monitor more ii the editor would
give them more twaddle Of the kind
mentioned. Mr.. Geers says he never
has written a line In opposition to
Prof Looney, aud asks this corre-
spondent to examine the files Of the
Monitor in proof. He may have never
written line, but Mr.. Geers will not
deny having talked line, and sew
eral lines too, in opposition TO
Prof. Looney. II hei docs he
is kindly referred to his riends, of
whom this correspondent Is one, with
whom he conversed on this subject
during February, March and April up
to the time an article appeared In the
Monitor over the nom de plume o.
"Academus.n After this time no
more is heard of the Monitor or its
editor opposing PROT Looney.
Mr.. Geers says he opposed the tax to
build the school-house and run the
school. So far that IL good. He says
afterward he yielded, and then he
wanted fine teacher for the fine
building. This is little peculiar
when IL is compared with that private
opinion, wherein he hopes to see the
tax suspended, and which he believes
will be done in case of Prof. Looney's
reappointment.
Does this not appear like Mr.. Geers
had not yielded altogether, and that he
would use Prof. Looney as catspaw
to pull his own chestnuts out of the
fire?
Mr.. Geers says he signed petition
favoring contract system, paying
each teacher stipulated salary. Bat
he forgets that this identical petition
was very severe also upon the contract
with Prof. Looney at that time and
that the signers were anxious to have
the contract nulliiied. Mr.. Geers says,
too, he never published line
against Prof. Looney. But he did
publish this petition, every line
Of il, even TO the last signature. Mr..
Geers will not deny allthis or any part
of II, and although it Is very hard
matter To locate friend Geers at almost
any time, this correspondent believes
that the above facts locate Mr.. Geers
on the side of the opposition to Prof.
Looney at the time these facts occur
red. Then the caption over the article
in the Monitor Is eminently correct, for
Mr.. Geers has it IAN error" and the
article Ia an error nearly all the way
through.
That there is still opposition to Prof.
Looney's reappointment. and that the
opposition is as great as ever there can
be no reasonable doubt Recently a
member of the board of trustees took a
tour of the city to ascertain the views
of the citizens in regard to this ques-
ton, and he reported that fully 30 per
cent. of them were opposed to Prof.
L0oney for any reappointment.
This being the case can the trustees
go ahead and employ him? Will they
thwart the will of a ninety per cent.
majority and do so anyhow? This
! correspondent is not willing TO think
so, for the present at least.
Our citizens are progressive and
have great appreciation of school in
terests and they desire our school to
be established ON basis that will be
conducive to the greatest interest of
our city and the surrounding commu-
nifty. Anything promising less will
not be hailed with any degree of
pleasure. We want = live, enegetic
and prog ressive man for principal of
the school