The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-12-15
SUGGESTS FEWER
BOOK ADOPTIORS

patrons i'm the state.
Tho Acknowledgement read into tho re-
cord az this point statistics designed TO
be2r out his contentious as 20 the In
creased cost OF books under the single
list, and c~ontinuing. said.
1T was f0r these reasons. among others
that 1 came 20 the conclusion that IL
was better to adopt the multiple list.
According 20 the news OF the dlstiu-
Eulshcd educators on tho board. nearly
AN the books then on the list would have
been loft Off had we adopted "A single list.
II would not have presumed TO act on
these matters without advice. and 1 hal
tho advice ~ the ablest and best practical
educators ln this state.
Considered Prices.
Vow. as 20 whether due and prudence
were taken to secure the b.zt .DossibI.
prices. I will say that We did consider
this feature earnestly. and time and again
nc question was asked Ga the board. rs
This "a fair price FOR this or that book
But we had 70 rely largely upon the
department FOR Information on this line.
and tine department relied upon my
friends. Mr. Brent and Mr. McGilvray.
for most ~ the information furnished
ms as 10 prices.
"It was tho Judgment OF trained edu-
Gators that r. was better for us 10 paw
the prices charged for the books we
got than to get the class OF books used
in Tennessee at reduced prices.
Now. as 10 competition. Senator
STROBE seemed 20 think yesterday that
there had been no competition. Their
was the saarpest kind OF competition.
and each bidder was instructed 20 sub
NIT his very lowest figure when bidding.
There was competition. exclaimed
the witness with great earnestncss. cit
was competition as acute and sharp as
H. could have possibly been under all the
circumstances
There never was greater rivalry than
that which went on among the very
honorable and intelligent gentlemen rep
resenting the various competing houses"
zThis was Major Anderson 8 opening
statement. he was now taken Ira hand
by Chairman Byrd. who had sat all the
while quietly listening to the Attorney
Generals reasons for supporting the
multiple list.
Uniformity of Books.
'I am IN favor" ne said. IN answer 70 a
question. "of the state. as soon as IS
practicable. establishing uniformity of
books in all the schools. but by this I DO
not mean a one-book list
General. I cannot exactly understand
how you can favor uniformity and not a
single list. said Mr.. Byrd. and the chair
mand and the witness tried 90 get a
clearer idea OF each others views ou this
point.
You spoke Of Tennessee. General.
Would you be surprised II I should
tell you that we have information that
ia some Of the States that have the single
book list. books sold at smaller prices
than are being paid in Virginia are OF
a superior quality p
-"I have no Information on that sub
ject."
Il see that your board opened bids in
the afternoon and awarded contracts at
a night session OF the same day. DO you
think that was sufficient time 10 give TO
such an important question:
we gave the matter earnest considera-
ton. and all the time was devoted 70 IL
that we deemed necessary. / know / Of
ten asked about the prices Of various
books, though I don't mean that inquiry
was made us 10 the fairness Of the price
Of each individual book considered"
School registers and spelling blanks
were discussed at some length. and Chair
man Byrd demonstrated that he was pos
sessed OF a most inquiring mind concern
Ing school matters in general.
Talks Of Primers.
In tho State of Indiana" said Mr..
Byrd. but one primer is used. and tina
is a ten-cent primer. It seems 70 me
that Virginia could have a good ten-cent
primer. and not require the patrons 10
choose between books costing as high as
forty cents"
Il do not know anything about the In
diana primer. The board put the primers
on the list which they thought were
best"
Mr.. Cox took the witness at this point.
and asked him his views as 10 the
constitutional requirements concerning the
selection OF textbooks. and the latter
stated that the authority was conferred
upon the board by the Constitution. and
could not be delegated.
The member and the witness discussed
at length this question. and they agreed
that IL was the spirit and letter Of the
Constitution that the power OF selection
could not be delegated. but they differed
as 20 whether or not the board had dele
gated this authority when the local com
mittees of seven had been asked to rec
ommend books for their respective COM
munities.
II do not agree with the DISTINGUISHED
chairman Of this committee said Major
Anderson. that this was whipping the
deyil around the stump. I, was simply
getting as to local needs
upon which the board finally acted"
Major said Mr. Cox, I'VE agree that
1t was the undoubted sentiment OF the
convention that this power should rest
wholly in the Board of Education. D0bt
YOU him II was delegated in the last
adoption 90
4 do not. but 7 say very frankly
that II / had TO go over the matter again.
l would not vote for such a plan. Rv
this T do not mean that We violated the
Constitution 7 say we did not: but ]
do not think such a plan would now be
necessary. and again. IL entailed a good
deal of cost"
Opinion Filed.
Major Anderson filed with the stem
osrapher at this point an opinion rvn-
dored by himself with reference TO the
schoolbook question. in which he ex-
pressed views favorable 10 uniformity
Of books in the schools in the various
communities.
Il don't think there is anvthing I'm
tho Constitution" said the witness.
which could he construed. either direct