The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1902-03-13

the grounds for the dismissal of DR.. Tar
bell, the action OF the school committee
was unwarranted and unjust, and Is like
ly 10 prove detrimental to the interests or
our public schools"
The first speaker was Rev James q.
vose, who said in substance that the ac-
ton regarding DR.. Tarbell came 10 him
as a great surprise. DIR. Vose said: II had
an opportunity 10 meet the superintend-
ent the teachers and the school commit
tee, TO talk with experts and receive re-
ports from other places. and never
heard n lisp OF dissatisfaction with the
present superintendent. His labors SEEM
ed most successful and were impressed
on my mind.
"The hackneyed phrase is used that he
was not i'm touch 1t is very convenient
phrase. because IL may mean very little.
He has been In constant attendance on
the school committee, always listened 10
the discussions, always presented his re-
ports.
mo one can say he Is not I'm touch
with the teachers. He has been I'm SYM
pathy with them as fully as possible.
Since he came here the schools have
greatly increased in extent and a
great variety OF interests have come be-
fore him. | have never heard that he
has not been in full sympathy with the
teachers. l have yet TO hear any COM
plants on any score"
Mr.. EDWARDS REMARKS.
Stephen o. Edwards. Esq, spoke warm
ly I'm behalf OF DR.. Tarbel and his SER
vices as superintendent of schools. He
said that he wished TO commend the re-
port which he considered was very calm,
whereas there was, in his opinion, some
. provocation TO be more emphatic.
Mr.. Edwards referred TO the alleged
agreement that DIR. Tarbell, when re-
elected for a term OF three years, agreed
10 resign at the end OF two years He
doubted the statement that there was
any general opposition 10 DIR. Tarbell at
that time and said: Either the superin-
tendent was then incompetent and should
have been dismissed or else he was COM
petent and the president OF the committee
had no right to make such a deal which
was against the interests of the schools" F"
K. ID. Bassett. Esq. asked
Who are these that claim DR. Tarbell
Is not proper person to be I'm charge
OF the schools? Many OF them / reckon
among my friends. but when the school
COMMITTEES has I'm It's membership men
who are active I'm politics and occupying
positions that call for good deal OF pa
ronage. the question arises why these
| things exist. Why do these men control
| the school committee by methods known
| only to politicians2
We all deplore the absence of positive
| testimony. but IL seems TO me the case
stands thus: Here's man respected and
looked up TO by all of us and against
whom no charge can be formulated.
| When the public respectfully asks why,
! IL receives "A fiippant answer"
Charles II. Stark. former member Of
| the school committee. said that very
| much of the credit for the development
| or the schools was due TO capable su-
| perintendent Or. Tarbell was pro-
| gressive man and the school system had
| grown I'm the estimation of the people and
| in the estimation OF the country. 1T is
| a calamity" he said, Ito remove DR.. Tar,
| bell at this time"
THE REPORT ADOPTED.
Short speeches were also made by Anna
| Garlin Spencer, Prof. Dealey. Prof Davis
and Miss Sarah T.. Doyle all of whom
| SPOKE kindly OF DR. Tarbell and praised
his work as superintendent of schools.
motion that the report OF the special
committee be adopted, was amended so
4 as to make the report the expression of
the sentiment OF the NEE ting and the mo-
! tion, as amended. was unanimously
adopted.
| Upon motion of Alfred Stone. Il was
| voted that a copy of the report be sent
| TO the school committee before It's next
| meeting.