The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1889-03-13
SUPERINTENDENT SMITH.
FREAKS OF HIS MEMORY WHICH
SURPRISE THE NATIVES.
Denying Statements Regarding Ladies'
as County Superintendents OF Public
Instruction Which Too Many Heard
Him Make.

State Superintendent of Public Instruc-
ton Prof. Frank M. Smith, is the subject
OF pointed comment by number OF good
and responsible people Of this city.
1t appears that the Professor, who stood
so near the Governor that he was able to
announce his own succession several
weeks in advance, has entirely forgotten
positive and oft repeated statements and
promises.
Prof Smith has established himself be-
fore the State as chronic kicker against
ladies holding the office Of County Super
intendent OF Public Instruction, all the
time insisting, however, that it was upon
his construction OF the law on the point,
and not because he had the slightest OBJ
lection to them in that capacity on any
other ground. Despite this conviction OF
the State Superintendent, promulgated so
frequently that he was suspected Of some
thing deeper than desire to see the law
strictly complied with, Shelby County was
given u lady superintendent, in the person
of capable Miss Nellie 0'Donnell, and
other counties followed suit
Early in February, in order that the
State Superintendent might not be SO
embarrassed and work himself into
fever Of anxiety rs to the commonwealth
safety, bill was introduced in the Legis-
lature establishing as legal the election by
any County Courts OF ladies rs County
Superintendent Of Public Instruction.
This was something Prof. Smith had not
anticipated when disclaiming any personal
opposition to ladies in the office, and it
knocked his pins from under him. II also
forced him TO the scratch and brought his
hand TO view. lie could not refrain from
talking, from the day on which tho
bill was introduced, and sovereigns who
deemed the bill strictly proper and began
giving 1t their hearty support, went
after the kicking demagogue. lie
invariably informed them that il. was
all a mistake, he was not opposing,
and did not intend 10 oppose
the bills passage; he had nothing
against IL, and emphasized his defense by
warmly eulogizing Mrs. lloTton's admin
istraiion in Shelby County. There are
nearly, II not quite, dozen gentlemen in
Memphis TO whom he made these state
mems, men whose veracity will not for
one moment be questioned, even though
a State Superintendent OF public In.
| structOn endeavors TO raise such doubt.
| From insidious, background opposition to
the bill, Prof. Smith has taken the open
field, as shown by the following private
letter handed The APPEAL yesterday:
NASHVILLE, Tenn March II. iss9.
| 81 have Just returned from the Senate,
where the Committee on Education made
is report. Our bill was defeated there. /
do not know how il will fare in the Senate.
Superintendent Smith made a very yigor-
Gus protest against its passage asserting
more than once that women are not iii TO
be superintendent and insisted that a
law be passed making them ineligible. lie
also denied having SAID that Mrs. Horton
made n good superintendent Senator'S
! Mcdowell and Crews and Judge Galloway
made eloquent and strong speeches in
favor Of the bill, and Superintendent
Smith replied 10 them IN harsher language
than | ever heard before. lie denied
having said that he was not opposing the
! bill. lie insulled the Shelby delegation
by saying that we were up there lobbying.
The bill will not come up again for some
| time"
Some OF the gentlemen TO whom Prof.
Smith made the positive statements which
he now makes bold 10 deny were shown
the foregoing letter, and denounced the
Superiniendents change OF base as UNI
worthy Of a man intrusted with the general
supervision OF the States county public
schools. Legislators will hear from them.