Peninsula enterprise. [volume] (Accomac, Va.) 1881-1965, 1898-05-07
le,,cr From County Superintendent
Of Schools.

Of Schools.
Mr.. EDIToR:-In response to DR.
Brodwater's article of last week,
desire, after reiterating what / have
said in d previous letter, to refer tc
but one paragraph, namely, that
concerning incidental expenses
and crave your indulgence for space
to do this, simply in Difference to the
former superintendent of schools for
this county, Mr.. Weaver, from whom
a letter of explanation also appeared
in your last issue. | assure that
gentleman, for whom l have ever Ell
tertained very high respect, that in
referring to him in my letter of recent
date, I had not the slightest inten-
ton of misrepresenting him or OF
placing him in false attitude, and
that the reference was made upon
information received from the cen
trail Office at Richmond. Under date
of August 5th, 1897, signed by the
then official Secretary. OF the Board
of Education, / have letter from
which quote verbatim: I'm reply
to your inquiries have to say, upon
examination of the annual report OF
the county superintendent of Acco-
mac for the session 1SS5-'8G, l find
that the county superintendent was
allowed for the year $S4.3S for his
incidental expenses. This item does
not show in the printed report for
the reason that it was reported in
Table under the head of other con-
tingent expenses"
session 1885 -'S6 was alone selected
from Mr.. Weaver's term Of III years
because it was his last year in office. ]
Manifestly, there is a mistake some
where but not of my making, nor one
for which 1 am responsible. After
Mr.. Weaver's explanation, | feel sure
that, under the pressure Of his ardu-
Gus duties, the Secretary OF the
Board, whom otherwise l have found
to be the most accurate of Ulcers,
inadvertently made this error. But
admitting that Mr.. Weaver was not
Reimbursed for money actually paid
out by him in the discharge of ofii-
cial duties does not prove or go to
show that such thing is either I'M
usual or unjust. Our State Superin-
tendent of Public Instruction is al
lowed $500 to defray his incidental
expenses, and county superintend-
ents have said expenses in the ratio
of respective salaries and largely in
excess of the proportion of county to
State, and the boards in many coun.
ties, recognizing this ia ct, grant same'
the amount of which is annually re-
ported to the Board of Education.
receiving the sanction of SAID body.
Quoting again from the letter above
referred to: There is 10 uniformity
about paying the expenses OF the
counties it is done, each district pay
ing its proportion. In such cases, l
think the agreement is made by the
county boards to allow the superin.
tendent his incidental expenses,-by
the county board simply because all
the districts are supposed to be rep
sented there, and uniform action by
the boards can then be taken.n The
exceptions are the towns and small
counties, in which, for obvious rea-
IONS, the cost incurred is inconsider-
able.
Having made the above statement,
1 deem it needless to discuss the
equity of the matter, which has al
ready been done through your
columns.
If it is illegal, unjust, and without
any precedent, as DR.. Brodwater
would have the public believe, why
has be not opposed it beforeY In the
light of his own Unsuccessful candi
dacy for the superintendency and his
subsequent bitter opposition to and
chagrin at my re appointment, the
question suggests it's own answer.
Finally, let me repeat that in voting
for DIR. Brodwaters's successor, from
which this correspondence originated,
I exercised all official right, for which
l have no apology to make, nor shall
again deem it necessary to notice
or reply to his captions illusions.
j. E. MAPP.