The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-04-13
THE SCHOOL DIRECTORS.
Supt. Kennedy's New Hardness
Rule is Discussed.
The Principals object to Iss Pro-
visisps and II IL Kesefnded
by Cloes vste-

Al last nights raeezznx Of the schcol
nszyd . petition sas read from w. c. Hi
and many oxher residents oi the southern
portion ef Seattle. asking that the sonfh
scnool, How in coarse OF construction. t<
improved in it's erchEtesxs-al appearances
On motion, AFehitee. williAxa z Boone
YES instructed 10 add toxer 20 tie build
ing.
Miss Julia z Kennedy. the szp<rinfend-
eut- recently made rule TO the eject thai
ali pm pits who we're net prssent N the
senooi-room az , oc1ock O. Il should be
marked tzsay- Two constructions had
teen placed On this r1zIe- One wxs by
superintendent Kennedy, 20 the efzecs ths,
toe only exceptions % this rule woali be
Of those who were absent OF sehoo. bfxs-
ness. that Is. II pupils we're seat home by
tho teacher 20 have ei0sk1nx repaired, OF
70 have hair cora5ee o. l&ces washed, they
lenbecx and o. : Jones, principals OF the
Central and DENIM schools respectively.
x6o were In attendance, h9d placed a
different construction On sAe rule They
held that ii q pEpl appeared before the
teacher II 30, or al at any tine up 20 2.
the time Of the opening Of the schools.
aud asked Tor permission 10 absent
themselves on written request from q
pareDr Ia order 20 go for medicine for q
sick parent. o. 20 run on any other errkffd,
and the permission xas granted, the child
was eonstrusfiyelv present, provided the
absence did not Extend for too long Z
period. Under such circumstances IL was
held by the principals that pupil should
NOS De marked - sazdy. Superintendent
Kennedy held exactly TO the eousrAry.
In order TO determine which OF the two
interpretations OF the order was the cor
rect one. the matter was brought 10 the al
tenfion OF The board. IN order that q de-
cis1on might be reached.
The principals give their side Of the
question clearly and fairly .centending that
u was only after great labor that the mana
Der Of eases OF hardness had been reduced
N the schools of the city. The best pupils
desired to be placed en- the roll OF honor
and they did not consider II fair 70 take
them on when they appeared and asked
permission 70 absent themselves for q
short time.
superintendent Kennedy said il was a
matter OF conscience with her. She could
nos conscientsoEsiy report pupils present
when they were actually absent, except
where the absence was occasiored by
school business. she held that II the view
taken by the priscipsl was adopted ii
would be liable TO be abused.
The directors took up the discussion aud
continued il. pro and con, for quite long
time.
Director George II. Heiibron moved that
while the board fully recognized the au-
thorify of Superintendent Kennedy to
issue the order, they considered IL for the
best interests OF the school that the con-
struction placed on it be adopted That is
TO say, q pupil shall not be marked as
tardy who appears before the principal
previous 10 O'clock and ssks permission
to go an errand and Is allowed 10 depart ON
said mission; provided, the absence shall
not constitute one-quarter of the entire
school session.
Director ]. NJ Frink moved. as 6 substi-
tute for Mr.. Heilbron's motion, that the
construction OF the superintendent be the
one recognized by the board.
The ensuing vote stood a tie, two 70 two,
and the chair voted in the negative and
Mr. Frink's amendment was lost
Miss Kennedy made heroic eight for
the position she had assumed, urging that
il would be impossible for her to make out
true reports and she would not write one
that was not truthful
The board assured Miss Kennedy of
their highest consideration, stating that
while they recognized her right to make
rules, they we're responsible for the govern
ment Of the schools and had right TO
amend or suspend them. There was no
intention TO unduly interfere with the
authority of the superintendent. IL was
simply question OF what was best for the
schools.
Mr.. Heilhron's motion sustaining the
view Of the rule taken By the principals
was then put To vote There were two
ayes and two nays, and the chairman
voted aye and thus the question Yves car
rfef