New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-05-21
DEFENDS CRAWFORD PROFESSOR.
Supporter Says Opposition Is Not Based
on His Ability as Principal.

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Without intending it. your article OF yester-
day entitled Crawford Up in Arms is calculated 10
leave a very unjust impression on the mind OF the
reader The unqualified statement OF TACT Is
sometimes the means of furthering faIsenood- -FOUR
article says: 1.-The dull fact which underlies THIS
rural quarrel is that the school trustees OF the
town have not only refused 10 re-eect the present
principal, Professor Wendell NJ Thomas, but last
Saturday chose his successor True. as legaI
fact: but utterly false the impression left on
the mind of the stranger. The stranger Woald
conclude that the trustees refused to re-elect the
present principal because of some reason fur-
nished by the present principal whereas the facts
that four Of the nine trustees voted against te
Swackhamer resolution TO discontinue the services
of Professor Thomas while five only voted for the
resolution and not of the five so voted De-
cause OF any fact relating to the conduct OF the
present principal. Three Of them. the newly elected
members voted for the resolution because they
were elected pledged to against the principal
entirely IRRESPECTIVE of his merits. They were the
mere tools of faction behind them Ot the re-
manning two members who so voted one 'oIeo oe
cause he the brother-in-laW Oh d woman W.
had made an unreasonable demand upon the Prlhci-
nal with regard to the treatment of her child the de-
mand being that a privilege should be accorueo 70
her child which could not, under the strict RUE OF
the board of trustees. be accorded 10 any o'liei
child under the same circumstances Tn1s oHeICe
was committed by Professor Thomas in November
1901: it was the basis Of a series Of charges pre-
ferred against the principal fully thrashea Out
before the school trustees a year ago, ana neon
tinently dismissed by the board without listening
to the principals defence. for the reason that the
charges were totally unsupported by the evidence
adduced to sustain them. The other member Oh
the board among the holdovers VINO voted au-
versely to the principal so voted, as he hiTnsei1
said because he thought II Mr.. Thomas were
dismissed this woman and her adherents wouIo De
quiet.
These are the simple facts which show that a
fact simply stated your article states IL may
carry a very false impression. The three trustees
recently elected not put forward as opponents
~ Mr. Thomas He has no opponents in CRAWFORD
whose opposition is based upon or has anytnlns
10 do with his qualifications as a school primer
nal On the contrary one of them was a candidate
also on the ticket of the Village Improvement AS
ISOLATION the avowed champions Of PROFESSOR
Thomas, being a body of representative "oln0i
about two hundred in number. OF the TWO remain
ing men. had been a member OF the Ooe 4
during Mr.. Thonas's first year IN Crawford anu
was known to be then and believed by everybody
TO be still supporter of the supervising principal,
The remaining one Of the three was wei siio
Tbis was the man who Immediately introduced the
Ing the services of the supervising principal as
would listen to no argqrenI ne and Insisted on
putting through this injurious resolution Wi III
again 6T the 5gSc even though he was admonshed
by the president Of the RoaFa Contract OF expired in
June anyway, and in order 10 dispense win nIs
the contract when the time came around; or IN
the time to employ some2oay else- ora very
few IN number and on an open fight would easily
he heafan two TO one ten TO one, II
merely the votes of people taking pride IN our
schools were considered The entire old Doard sup
1orIed Professor Thomas with practical unanimity
And the new board would have done the SANG iS
thing If the two old members had not peeH ieQ
by extraneous considerations TO cast IN tnen oS
with the new three members and mad competed
the newcomers to sit down and calm themselves
from the heat of battle and see how nnely our
schools were ffourishing under Professor IhoTnas
This letter is too long already, but one WoIu dS
TO the extracts in article from my tsceht !
I.ar and Mrs Benedicts letter OF some time ptch
BY merely grouping the impasstoned por I1
without any hint Of all the facts rected previously
10 show reason for high feeling, the eIect, Is
again to give a very false impression and 70 pc
little This not INTENDED: put your
reporter evidently fell into the hands OF fat f 6d
old PhiIistine Potter, who runs 'Ihe CLah1oIu
Chronicle and who has it IN for every IhoIlaS
man and calls him Carrie Nations undeIstu ~
and charges him with making good old CRAWFORD
out a Go1norrah or any old place with PAD name
Nevr-VorLt Nav Is 1903. r. a. BENEDICT