St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1911-01-04


tions, recently submitted to me
through your columns, or any others
the public should hear discussed. l
know no phase of the normal school
situation which I have any desire to
conceal / would have written you
sooner If your questions had come
promptly to my notice.
Your first two questions may best
be answered together: 'fWill you ex-
plain to the public why the gentle
men first named by the speaker of the
house as a committee to visit the
Johnson Normal school and report
to the legislature did not go?" will
you explain to the public why you
did not want a man, whose name you
suggested to the speaker, to perform
the duties for which he was appoint
ed?" l at no time asked for any
thing but an impartial committee.
After the appointment I was inform
ed that the gentleman from st.
Johnsbury was decidedly opposed to
the continuance of the present nor
NAL schools, openly committed to a
single, central school, and actively
working with that end in view. In
an interview he admitted the truth
of each statement. / did not Ques-
ton his right to his own opinion, but
Q1O QuSSLtOA Tie PAOP14OLy1 0AOCA
these circumstances, of his visiting
Johnson officially and the possibility
of his considering justly Johnson's adj
vantages and claims. Others of the
representatives agreed with me. This
was the whole reason for the change
in committees. The men later appoint
ed were those sent to Investigate the
CastIeton school; and l have no
knowledge of their attitude toward
the present or the proposed central
schools. Would the editor of the
Caledonian, If on trial, care to sub
nit his case to a partial juryman?
/ have from different sources learned
that the member from ST. Johnsbury
whom I did not ask to have ap-
pointed on the committee has re-
ported that l objected to him be-
cause he would not pledge himself
beforehand to report favorable
to Johnson; 1 prefer to believe he
has not made any such false state
ment.
8. "What proportion of the
total expenses of the Johnson nor
NAL school is now paid by the state?"
1 supposed that every one knew that
the Johnson normal school is state
institution, supported by the state
and controlled entirely by the state
Dual I'll W01NA
burses all funds. The Lamoille
County Grammar School associa-
ton, with income from public lands,
has supplied the building, rent free,
thus enabling the states appropria-
tions to accomplish more than they
otherwise could. Never until two
years ago has the state expended
cent on the building; repairs then
made, in order to do added forms of
work demanded by the legislature,
cost $1633.76 during two years. At
the same time the trustees of the
association put in $484.15 (more
than their funds then on handy for
the same purpose. There appears to
be some disposition to punish John
son for thus assisting the state. 1t
might be added that for many years
the town assisted further by raising
by entertainments, subscription, etc.,
an additional $500 annually for the
maintenance of the school.
4: Is there a published report
showing the actual expenses of the
school and for what purposes the
states money is used?'' There is
such a report, published biennially
now by the Board of Education. A
classified account of the expenditures
at each normal school for the past
Two years Inlay UO 4OuAQ OA pages
10 and 20 of the current report,
published July 1910 and in the hands
of the legislators at the beginning of
the session. You can also find a full
statement in the State Auditors re-
port If further details are desired,
duplicate detailed accounts are kept
by the Treasurer of the Board and
the principals of the schools and
such accounts will be shown upon
application.
5. would you as business man
pay money for the support of any
institution until you knew what the
institution is doing towards it's own
support or what proportion of the
whole expense you were paying?" I
would not. I have not.
6. "Do you see any prospect, even
with the state appropriation, that the
Johnson normal school will secure
more pupils or graduate more train
ed teachers for work in Vermont
schools in the next decade than it has
in the past?" Under present legis-
lation, no. With high school train
ing as now enacted 1 cannot see how
the present schools or any central
school can secure attendance. In
general the reason for small attend
ance is to be found, not in the quality
VI Tie SCAOC1S, OuI III Cn0 SOASIduI
agitation and criticism by legisla-
lures and the press, in the lack of in
terest and support by the State Sup
erintendent of Education, and the
small salaries paid in the state.
sincerely hope the present legis-
lature will go to the root of the diff
ficulty. Why not profit by the ex-
perience of New Hampshire and
Massachusetts and counterfeit in a
measure the growing attractiveness
of other occupations? Why not let
the state add directly to the salary of
tested normal school graduates, now
required to make extra preparation,
beyond what we have before asked?
z. ''Do you believe the state
should pay as much per graduate
from the normal schools as it has
been paying in recent years?" / do.
Our normal school graduates have
cost less than those of most states;
probably we are less able to expend
equal money upon them. But we
should have each school so filed that
each plant serves as many as it can