Republican news item. [volume] (Laport, Pa.) 1896-19??, 1905-12-21
Communication.
Editor of the News Item:

Ptflnif m1d llttie spa ce
in y, Il" columns To- reply tn articles
appearing lately in the correspon-
dence frLm Bernice:-
The corr,r poDdrnt lays consider
abl stress on the action of Cherry
School Board in tabling the petition
of MIR Dungleberg fer appointment
as janitor OF Ber,ice Graded School
Building. The Che rry Beard of Di-
rectors are bound under legal con
tract with the present janitnr, MIR
Lowry; therefore they could not do
anything but table the petition r. :
ferred to, when legal and justiiiabIe
causes for the removal of MIR. Lowry
had not been presented. Would
your correspondent assert that the
Board should violate the conditions
of ii contract without cause? If he
would assert this, then he display $
lack of honesty in his own IDEAS of
bu ,inrss affairs. The first step Mr..
Dungleberg should have taken was
to show some illegality in the
election of Mr.. Lowry or to show
that he (Lowry) had failed to do his
work properly.
If the Board of Directors failed to
elect Mr.. Dungleberg two reasons
may he given. Mr.. DungIeberg
offered to dO the janitor work for
Sl4.90 per month but he offered no
bid for doing the work of truanl
officer tor Bernice Schools, The
Board advertised in the three Du-
shore papers that they would receive
bids for both. Mr.. Lowry offered ii
bid of $40 per month for serving as
truant officer and janitor. Now, if
Mr.. Dungleberg WAS elected janitor
at his bid of Sl4.90, the Board would
have had difficulty in getting anyone
to act as truant officer for 81 10, the
difference i'm tho bids of Messrs.
Lowry and DangIeberg
AS "A member of Cherry Board
of Directors and as one who did not
vote for the present incumbent of the
janitorship, believe the board were
influenced by these conditions in the
bids and consequently elected Mr.
Lowry.
On the other hanh Mr.. Lowry
might have had more friends i'm the
Board than Dungelberg, Schell, or
| LitZclnian, the'other bidders. Mr.
Dungleberg was practically unknown
to several of the directors and did
not receive the vote of a director,
while Mr.. Schell received two VOTES
and Mr.. Lowry four. Under these
conditions, | would like to ask what
is morally or Loyalty wrong about
the election of Mr.. .ssLowry?
In another issue of the News Item
besides attacking the Board on the
election of the janitor (His eyes,
perhaps have grown dim, watching
up the janitorship), he asked, "Does
anyone know why we are e ing to
have only six months SchooI?n
Then, by an appeal TO the voters, he
seems to accuse the board members
of graft, or some other illegal usuage
of school funds. The correspondent
has not openly or personally made
charges against a director, hence,
t, el that he assumes that the whole
Board, including mySelfarr grafterS
and in this Mr. Editor, you find II
cause for the writing of this article.
| will endeavor to make clear the
reason why the Board contracted
with the teachers for a six month
term of school. Cherry School ID 5
trict employed twenty seven teachers
during the term of 1904 %. Their
salaries together with full repairs ety.
caused the annual expenses to exceed
the receipts. This was due in the
main to the going into effect of the
Teachers Minimum Salary law which
compelled the Board to pay teachers
at least $50 per month beginning
with June 1904. The amount of or
ders issued during any month of the
school term would exceed a CORES
ponding month in prect eding tern
by over $500. In the wear an Ex
penditnre of over $500 more thai
i'm preceding years was the result.
The Board for several years hat
be N levying the maximum millagt
of t., mills ON the Assessed valuation