The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-07-24

never been given her There was no conflict In
the evidence on this point He also says:
Certain facts warrant in the conclusion that
the chds feet were not injured that morning and
they were frosted at any time it is quite certain that
no one connected with the school was responsible.
There are no such facts, and he produced none
on the trial This conclusion of his does not agree
with the indisputable fact that information of
the chllds condition was telephoned to him a
few minutes after she got home nor with the
overwhelming weight Of evidence. In fact, there
was no evidence to controvert it.
lie next complains because mo physician was
called to doctor the case until five weeks after
the alleged injrTy." Well what of itl The evi-
dence showed that she was under treatment
from the moment she got home, and most of the
time under the advice of the family doctor. But
every sensible man, except Professor Fertich,
and every physician knows that you do not real
iZe the full effects of frost until some time after
and this was proven on the trial In the mean
time the person usually goes about his business
or his pleasures without trouble except when
the weather is changing, and then he suffers
fortunes. Wemust bear in mind that the rule
concerning the closing OF the doors against
pupils is the rule made by Professor Fertieh and
not by the school board. Again he says i'll self
praise:
rule of these schools which among others
shows the special care of the school officers is the
following: When pupils respectfully ask permission
to leave the room they must be permitted to do So
we are satisfied that the superintendent has
acted against either the letter spirit Of this rule.
1t is quite certain that he never advised directed or
permitted teacher to punish pupil in any way for
simply leaving the room to attend call of nature.
This rule is good enough if properly enforced.
1t is rule made by the school board at the
earnest solicitation of DR.. s. A. Kennedy, while
member of the board. DIR. Kennedy is
cellent physician and parent. and he knew the
vital Importance of prompt attention on the
part of a child to the calls of nature When
Professor Fertch came here, he was instructed
6ny the board to enforce that rule, and by DR..
Kennedy, president of the board, in
my presence at a time when I had been
complaining to both of them about its non
enforcement. Repeatedly before and after that
time, did | complain to Professor Fertich Of the
non enforcement of that rule and tell him of my
chlds condition, the last time but a few days
before my daughters feet were frozen. These
facts he admitted on the trial While this was
the rule of the board, yet 1T was shown on the
trial that it was rule Of the school that pupils,
II allowed to go out at all for such purpose should
be kept in after school was let out" This
was not denied by Professor Fertich.
1t is fact well known in this community that
the non enforcement of this rule made by the
board has resulted in disasters, not fit to men
ton here to scores of children since Professor
Fertich came here; and it is equally we'll known
that hundreds of children during the same time,
have been kept in for having gone out with the
teachers consent, to attend the calls Of nature.
Can you imagine greater outrage on inoffensve
children! Do you not indorse Judge Hord
unreasonable and vod?7 One Of the strongest
proofs that Professor Fertich knew and sane
toned what the teacher did is the fact that he
recommended her unemployment for the ensuing
year, and that she was reemployed. Do you
suppose she would have been recommended
by him if what she did say had not been satlstac-
tory to him? Not much. He boasts that he
only retains 'loyal' teachers.
Professor Fertich says with much JUNCTION
that the schools have gone on Sin the usual
way" fear it is true, for | hear complaints
from the patrons OF the school on every hand
He also says: THE organization for next year
is complete, and quite generally satisfactory
The latter clause does not state the truth. There
is quite general dissatisfaction here because
Professor Mowrer and Professor Bennett were
not employed Long before the trial came off
Professor Fertich told the teachers that none of
them would be re-employed until after the trial.
lie was as good as his word The teachers l
have just named were not employed because
they did not volunteer their services to profes-
sOr Fert ich' as they were afterwards told by
one of the trustees. At any rate their testimony
on the trial did not suit Professor Fertch, and
they are longer teachers in our school.
They not 'loyal.r | do not skuk behind
=. nor procure the signatures of other men,
but sign my name. L. Il. MICHENER.
.SHELBYVILLE July %