The Richmond palladium. (Richmond, Ind.) 1906-1907, 1906-05-31
THE TEACHERS
HAVE PROTEST
Do not Like School Histories
Which Have Been
Adopted.
SAID NO HEED WAS GIVEN
MANY LETTERS HAVE BEEN
WRITTEN DECLARING THE
TEXT BOOK Is NOT ACCEPT.
ABLE,

1t Ia said that some Richmond and
Wayne county school teachers are
numbered among the hundreds OF
teachers in Indiana who have ex'
pressed dissatisfaction over the action
of the state board of education in adj
opting Montgomery's history OF the
United States for another five years.
1t is asserted that many of the teach
ers over the state were dissatisfied
with the book long before 1t was read
opted by the board, and before the sell
ection was made many letters were
written by them to members OF the
board, protesting against the contin-
uation of the Montgomery book, and
asking for the adoption of another
book.
These letters cana from every part
OF the State and pointed out to the
board what the te achers regarded as
defects in the old book and the good
qualities of the ones they favored.
One of the points raised was that the
Montgomery book had been used In
the schools of the State fcf fifteen
years and that 1t was not an up-to-date
textbook. 1t was urged also that the
teaching of history from that book had
become a monotonous duty for The
teachers and that new life could be
put into this branch of their work by
the adoption of different book.
County Superintendents Write.
T. n A6at he tu
tendents of lightweight out of the
ninety-two counties in Indiana wrote
letters of this kind and that a major
ity of the superintendent of schools
of the cities and towns of the State did
likewise Copies of these letters were
made and bound in book form and
full set was placed in the hands of
each member of the State Board OF
Education, but the board readopted the
Montgomery book for another term OF
five years.
This dislike of the teachers through
out the State for the Montgomery his
tory is now said TO have taken such
deep root that in some schools there
is open revolt 1t is even said that IN
some places there Is a plan on foot
to refuse to use the Montgomery his
tory, and that different book will be
used.
Such a course, however, is declared
by Acknowledgement Charles w. Miller
to be illegal and direct violation OF
the law He cites Section so of the
school laws of Indiana on this propos
ition, which reads as follows:
THE books chat have been, or may
hereafter be adopted by the State OF
Indiana for use in its common schools
by virtue of this act, or the act men
toned in Section 1 hereof, shall be
uniformly used in all the common
schools of the State. in teaching the
branches of learning treated of in such
books, and ii shall be the duty Of the
proper school officer and authorities to
use in such schools such books for
teaching the subjects treated in them.
The School Book Law.
The schoolbook law was construed by
the Supreme Court of Indiana in the
case of State VS.. Haworth, 1872 Ind.
462. In this case the court says:
THE Legislature has the power tc
require a designated series of books
to be used in the public schools, and to
require that the books selected shall
be obtained by the school officers from
the person to whom the contract for
supplying them may be awarded. II
may not only prescribe regulations fol-
using the books designated, but it may
also declare how the books shall be
obtained and distributed"
There can be no question" said Mr.
Miller, "but that the law specifically
prohibits the use of any other books
than those prescribed and adopted by
the State Board of Education"
What Mr.. Cotton Says.
An Indianapolis dispatch says:
When Fassett A. Cotton, State Super
intendent of Public Instruction, was
asked about the revolt against the
Montgomery history, he said: Il dc
not believe the demand for change
in histories In the schools is as great
as has been represented. In fact,
know 1t is not. II is true these letters
were written by teachers and superin
tendents, but they were solicited. The
rival book house has been collecting
these letters for the last two years. II
has sent copies of its history to each
of the teachers and asked for letter
of recommendation and these letters
were given for that reason.
THE teachers of the State are very
well satisfied with the Montgomery his
tory and do not wish a change.
have been over the State and have
talked with many of the teachers in
order to get their views on this sub
ject, and found their common ex
preston was, L am we'll satisfied with
the Montgomery history. We teach
ers are used to it now and it woult
not be wise to make a change That
is what they told me. I do not con
slider these letters asa fair represen
tation of the real feeling of the teach
ers."
n n