Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-02-05
SCHOOL BOOKS.
A Uniformity of Textbooks Long.
Felt Necessity.
An Answer 10 the Arguments Of the
Professors to the Contrary.
McaREG n, TEx.. Feb. /, lSs5

McGREG r. TEN.. Feb. !, 1885
To the Editor of the Gazette.
have read the article in the Daily
GAZETTE Of last Saturday, wherein
the teachers of your city express OBJ
jections to the bill now before our leg.
islature TO provide for uniformity of
textbooks in the public schools
throughout the state.
am not surprised at this, for |
have in two different states witnessed
the effort on the part Of the teachers
to retain the power and authority to
compel the use OF the favOrite books
OF each in their schools, and the differ
ence Of opinion regarding the merits
Of our school books is quite Ss great
among teachers as among other people.
win you kindly allow me space to
reply on 40 important a subject?
| In the first place, uniformity Of
| textbooks is an absolute necessity,
known and felt by every parent and
| guardian In the land who has children
to school, and the only reason why
| teachers oppose uniformity of text
| books Ia the best reason why this law
| should be passed, TOR in the absence OF
the law each teacher can aud does re-
quire pupils to use his the teacher's)
own choice of books.
Prof, HOgg says II am opposed to
the bill because, In the first place, men
/ who are not teachers will select the
books
Now, pray tell us how Prof Hogg
knows That will be the cast? A wise
and discreet legislature should, and
doubtless would appoint COM
mission of the ablest and
most successful educators in the state
TO pass upon so important question,
and / would move that Prof. Hogg be
one of that commission.
Again this gentleman says 1.-THE
state adoption means monopoly to that
DO Ik-house which can Ufier the great
est inducemeuts.n
Nov, right the reverse of this is, or
should be, the case, for the book con-
Germ that secures the contract can well
afford to offer their books at 5 per
cent. or 10 per cent. lees than the
present prices, on account of the large
contract secured. / have predicAIed
the above remarks upon the hypoth-
esis that the commission above re-
ferred to would appoint a
time and place TO meet
for the purpose Of making
the selection, that they would give no.
tice to the agents of all the principal
school-book publishers of this meeting,
requesting them to be present. 10 pre-
sent each the merit of his book and TO
make figures at which they would FUR
nish the state in case their book Is Sc
lected These books should be used
without change for not less than five
years.
But Prof. Hogg again says; ut Is far
from being cheaper TO use certain
book for u number OF years, and it Is
really less expensive TO have frequent
adoptions."
Now there stands the bare statement
with not one word 10 support II.
Again the professor remarks, this
time not in the capacity of teacher,
but as = lawyer al do not believe the
legislature should say what book the
various school districts should u.s.. IL
would be Just as proper for Senator
johnson OF Collin county 70 say all
farms In Texas should use one pillow"
/ think the professor is considerably
off his base in the above remark
Farming does not go by schools, classes
and teachers, however. All the plows
on gang pillow are alike, and If farm
ing was taught In schools and classes
and Professor HOgg was the teacher,
aver that he would want all the plo~t
alike. Flows till the soil, books the
Intellect. Agriculture is an non
oraUle ayOcatlon and 80 II
teaching and 1t is universally
conceded that education Is "a subject q
legislation, for all must be educated
whether they follow farming or teach
ing. His idea that to define the text
books In Texas for tenn of five year
would have a tendency 10 preven
others from becoming authors, ID al
twaddle.
In answer to Prof. w. Il. Gerard
!. regarding the monopoly In Missouri
there should have been provision
made for competition before adoption
as | have hi, ntloned above, SO th
book-hOuse would not get their hand
so easily into thestate's pockets. TeXA
!. can profit by Missouris errors, III sh
will, This answers all Of Prof. Ger
rard's objections not previously replied
10. ] especially agree with the pro
(, ssoT's 81 ising remarks.
Prof. r.. p. Vikings argument !
weak, but the spirit Ia willing. All o
his objections have been prevlousl,
noticed, but he says: ~ think th
schools of city or county should US
the same bOOks.p
Very well, that Is what we az k.
one kind Is good throughout on
county Il Is throughout another, an
that Il what we ask the legislature
do-to define what books shall be use
In all the counties
But the professor again comes at u
and snys: but IL should b. left to tn
teachers to decide" All! THAT
what told you
Miss Q. H. Burnham doubts the prt
priety of Legislative action in the usl
ter, but thinks the law should regu
late it by counties or districts an
allow the teachers to say what the