The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-02-12
Uniformity of School Textbooks.

Editor The Advertiser:
 l favor the adoption of a uniform series of school text books by the county. A State adoption would. in my opinion. be a great mistake, which I hope this Legis- lature will not make, because:
 First-Such adoptions have always been succeeded by most sensational frauds and scandals.
 Second-All teachers are "cranks" in their ideals of text books and a State adoption empowers five of these "cranks'' to force their whims on all other teach CTS.
 Third-In adopting a uniform series for five years, we practically give hostages against all progress in text books. which is being made every day in the year.
 Fourth-State adoptions have proven a disaI pointnent to teachers and patrons.
 Fifth-There is no necessity for a State adoption to save expense in school books.
 The adoption of a uniform series car ries but one plea-to save expense. It is not claimed that we shall get better books-an item much more important than the cost. But even if this one plea were well founded and Lould be remedied in no other way, it would not be a good reason. But such is not the case. It could be entirely cured without it-eVen with out county adoption. The school teacher is forever changing his field of labor; and, true to his cranky instinct, he wants to put into his new school his ideals of text books. Old books must be thrown over board and new ones bought. Here is where the DurQen ana VtNatlOn comes 10 the patron. But 1t Is known that every little piney woods school has it's Board of Trustees that direct the school. Have not the trustees the power to prevent any change of books in that school? Assur- edly. Have they done it in the past? No. Why? Because most of them lack the in- telllgence and backbone. They would pre- fer to raise a howl about the change after 1t is made. They are averse to facing the teacher on this question, and it Is, therefore, necessary to call in stronger power, the county, to correct this con- tinuous change of text books.
 l have noted that in all State adoptions, city schools have been exempted from the provisions of the law, and left Scot free" to select their own books. Why? Because you say they have intelligence and backbone, and are capable of rum ring their schools as they please. This is all good in comparison with the most comparison with the county. There is no county in this State that cannot find as competent a board to pass upon the merit of school text book as any city in this State. We happen to know something of the personnel of several City Councils, and know that few of them are educated men. Then why prescribe series of books for the counties and exempt the cities? There is neither reason nor jus tice in it.
 Again. a county adoption would give far greater satisfaction to the people, be- cause in this case they could feel that they had some voice in the measure. l am Democrat, and believe in local gov ernment and am as stoutly opposed to centraization at Montgomery as l am at Washington.
 And lastly a county adoption shuts off the possibilities of gigantic frauds and corruption to which State adoption offer such an inviting field. E. Y. NJ.