The Paducah sun. [volume] (Paducah, Ky.) 1898-1906, 1904-01-05
Not Believed Those PROPOSED
Will be Popular.
The Parents do Not Desire IndiSrimi-
nate Chastisement Of their Chlf-
rem, Says One Man.
SCHOOL


change the law regulating corptal
punishment in the public schools,
and IL rumors are TO be taken aan
indication of the sense OF the peole
or the desire Of the teachers, tey
will decide not TO make any charges
in the present law. In many of he
foremost schools Of the land the Id
theory OF "spsring the rod and srl-
ing the child" has been disoardedss
a relic OF bsrbarism. IL has becue
obsolete along with the whipping pit,
pillories and stocks. the duoking spl.
branding and other such antiqued
forms Of punishment, but that i is
still in vogue in many places csiot
be denied.
Still, parents, IL is safe to asrt,
are not in favor OF comforting onhe
teacher the power TO chastise at vi.
Al present the principal Of the sool
may inifot the punishment, but ily
after 1t has been fully decidedlat
the infraotion justifies it. Oneti
zen said today; 81 Am willing fcny
children to be whipped when thete-
serve it. bat prefer TO do 1t melf,
and believe / can do it about agell
as sny teacher. OF course, hover,
when the principal of the soho in
sists on IL, and it is clear thithe
offense and the rules Of the iool
have made IL necessary, there not
usually any complaint. But re-
habilitate the old method OF alfing
or requiring the teachers to the
road whenever they want to, VI be
going back ten or fifteen years the
progress OF our schools. do be-
lieve the teachers desire such wer,
either. Many Of them have ppers
like ordinary mortals, sn6 they
would likely. with such a Hiiege
sometimes,use their prerogatipn the
spur Of the moment to the great
regret. when the facts did ] fully
Justify il, and would As req be In
,yonbIe with the parents. der the
nresent arrangement there always
nleptv NJ time for the schoduthori-
ties 20 investigate. There time Tor
soher second though. insterof angry
passion TO sway the teer, and |
think all will agree, wherey think
thu matter over, that it is best way.
Ny experience induces 10 believe
that parents DO not want teachers
to whip the children. aule teachers
do n OF desire to do il. I IS an I'M
pleasant duty that the,ouId much
prefer to have the prifal perform,
~ IL has 70 be- perform One objec-
ton urged lest nighgaihst the
present rule is that puI &c not have
the proper fear OF the.ohu because
thev know he or she lno power to
punish. want TO sanat nose lew
3 nprils who have to loonrolled or
r. nppished by oorporallnislment are
not likely to be m'd " sueh a
thought, for they XIV th't they
= deserve whipping tprinnp'i VIII
do the job so thew Justas certain
: of a whipping as if { teacher could
5 administer it. No, tpropo'ed Oange
= in the rule will nobe populawith
the people. "
The gentleman secs to havepund
= ideas ON the subject, It il verprob
= able that the day ofporpral pish-
ment in public schools OF mern'
y progressive tendenoie has passe In
> fact, for many yeats FApsh'
whipping pupils has heei ne of
g punishment used only in sggnted
70 and exceptional cases, ad iught
l. with profit be abolished hireirhe
tendency is now to place thosepils
is who cannot be controlhi an her
d way, out of the schools 'rtirehtil
10 thew are taught to observe theles.
...hor nroposad change the