New-York tribune., 1896-09-02

own eyes. If ] am right in saying that the
GROWING feature Of our system is the local com
mittce II VIII be impracticabe to have a small
er Board than forty-fiye. because II will take at
least that number to look after all the schools"
Thls argument did not mollify M. Babbott.
who replied: This resolution puts us in a wrong
position. We would ne in a better light II our
committee should consult with the Commission
and see what they want and II their committee
ana ours cannot agree upon a plan We are
now presenting an ronclad proposition as to
the number Of members"
This committee" rctortrd James II. isoucn
is not charged with the ,iuty of con ring Wit.
the Commission ard then I"portine to us but tc
lay before the Commission what III ocklyn wants
II is cur duty. before the Commission has ,ormc-
lated any plan. to give hem the Board views;
that they may cmhody ihcm in what thev pro
pose to do"
PLEADING FOR DEIAI
Messrs. Weir. Schmidt and Chadwick rleadcd
for delay. and Mr.. Weir moved tc lay the mat
ter over until the next meeting. but Mr. Drcssci
insisted that the question would aimi, Of no de
lay. Mr.. Lows litter he said. grants us th.
conference we have ask 4. and Il Will b 81, ~
us before the next meeting Of the Board. We
can go to that subcommittee and tell them
that we have no views t. present as yet"
colonel Clark spoke n the same strait. ana
then Professor Franklin w. Hooper maze the
star specch of the day in support OF tho report.
The system that has been Introduced in
NeW-Yolk he began. is system On trial.
1t has not been tried successfully elsewhere;
ii is practically unknown throughout the coun-
Try, and ii is a serious question whether the
city of Brooklyn should he brought under such
Z a system We know something about human
nature. and | must confess that il would not
take very wise prophet To predict that there
will le condition Of things in NewYork CITY
f.u !, ic1, ifClN hon
per the progress Of the schools. believe that
these superintendents will he at ioegcrheads
with these inspectors. that the division Of au-
thority among the slpcrntendents. inspectors
and the Board Of EducatiOn viii he such that
there will be continual! friction. and that that
friction Will act Very disastrouslf. indeed upon
the efficiency Of the schools That system ~
on trial. and I. fo' one would not like 10 con-
slider the adoption of that system in Brooklyn.
THE people across the river DO not Know
what our Brooklyn schools are. They de not
know how high our teachers rank among the
TEACHERS Of the country. They d" not know
about cur hiGh schools and ou. Teachers
Training School. 1t SO happens that the quail
fications required for admission Of teachers ar"
very much superior in BROOKLYN to those re
quired in New-York Tho salarieG We pay eN-
coed the average salaries paid IN New ork,
/ believe our teachers are superior 10 those OF
New York We have schools wh'e" character
cannot he exceeded anywhere in TINS country :
schools that we should lac proud Of. and tina;
we should endeavor TO maintain IT their pres
ent standard. Brooklyn has been for many
a
schools We are a city Of education. which
New-York Is not. Until very recently ther'
has not been manifested in Ncw-lorK that
interest in public schools which Is worthy OF d
city Of the intelligence and wealth that New
York possesses ] think ii Is a serious queS-
tion whether in view Of these preliminary cor
siderations 70 which others viii he added as
we investigate the subjec. we WISE To in"rE"
our system Of education in that of New-l rH'
IN bring together IN a most wholesale ana II =,
regular and congiomerate MESS the elu'd nora
interests Of our city and those or New -io'N
7 also feel that II IS impossbe for any on"
Roard 10 look after The schools o, such terri
tory as is comprised in New YORK. broohH H.
Ouc.ns Richmond ard WestchesteT
After a few remarks hv other members 'n'
,.ota was taken on Nr. Weir's motion to post
rome Apparently NJ. Hooper had won '..r
some Of the opponents OF the reior'' 10y ~,
voIces in favor OF the motion were not 8" many
as those who had spoken in favor OF H. " was
defeated bv an overwhelming maiorty ana or
Coone, Clark's motions to adop: first thr report
and than the resolutions. the vote was Amos.
unanimous Henry W. Maxwell endeavoreI a.
tho last rnomen: TO strike ont the part o' thr
resolutions defining the number o. memncrS az
fortv-Aye. but his motion was laid on me 'a"'"
a,n,os, unanimously.