The times and democrat. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1881-current, 1911-06-29
About School Books.

About School Books.
The State Board of Education by
adopting the text books 1T did last
week for use in our public schools
seems 10 have stirred UP the ire of
State superintendent of Education
Swearingen. He makes it very plain
that he opposed the books. or many
of them, adopted by the Lard, and
declares that the sweeping changes
made in the list of books formerly
used Is without precedent IN this or
any other State. The action OF the
board, be says, amounts In effect to
the coafiscation or property worth
many thousands of dollars and oTued
by thousands of families.
The above arraignment OF the
board is severe enough, but MT.
Swearingen does not stop there. He
goes on to say, that "the new books
are higher priced and everytime a pu-
pil or patron Is required to exchange
an old book there must ne a cash
payment in addition" He also pro-
tests against, the refusal OF the mem
bers of the board 10 place themselves
on record as to what books they fav'
ored and voted for in the meeting
when the list Of books was being
selected and adopted. Mr.. Swearin-
gen is member of the board and was
present when the books were adopted.
The chief objection MT, Swearin-
gen has against the action of the
board Is that 1t made sweeping chan
ges In the list Of books adopted,
which, he says, amounts in effect to
the confscation Of property worth
many thousands Of dollars. The
Board Of Education is composed OF
good, honest men, and in doing what
they did, we have no doubnt but what
they thought they were acting for the
best interests Of the schc nls and the
children who attend thera, and the
fact that their action does not meet
the approval of Mr.. Swearingen Is
not conclusive evidence that 1t was
wrong.
The only way the people, could have
been saved from some loss IN the
change of books would have been for
the board to have readorSed the old
list of books without change Of any
kind. Mr.. Swearingen would hardly
have favored this plan. There were
some books on the old list, no doubs,
that he thought ought to be changed.
Possibly, each of the other members
Of the board was like Mr.. swearingen.
Some of the books n the old list
did not meet their approval, and ex-
ercising their judgment, ~ they had
a right to do, they voted Tor change
in the list of books.
Mr.. Swearingen was honest in his
desire to change the books he did
not like, and the other members OF
the board were equally es honest In
desiring to change the books they
did not like. Their judgment in the
matter yes Just as good as Mr. Swear
ingen's was. Then why should the
members Of the board be criticized
for exercising their Judgment any
more than Mr.. Swearingen for eercis-
ing his judgment? If the member OF
the board did wrong In making
changes, Mr.. Swearingen did wrong
in favoring any changes at all. They
are all in the same boat.
Mr.. Swearingen's attack .unfor-
tunate. It will do no good, and may
possibly do great deal Of harm. He
does not question the honesty OF the
members Of the board in adopting
the books they did. His chief griev-
ance seems to be thfe they did not
agree with him. This may be a fault,
but it Is not serious enough to. cause
the members o fthe State Board OF
Education to be held up and publicly
repreved by him. The law gives them
the right to do exactly what they did,
but it does not give the State superin-
tendent Of Education the right to
publicly scold them for not agreeing
with him.
Mr.. Swearingen showed bad taste
in criticising publicly officials whose
only fault, If such 1t may be, Is an
error Of Judgment. sEr: Swearingen
does not charge them with any great
er fault. He knows that the mem
bers on the State Board were actuat-
ed in their action by the best and
highest motives, and no doubt, he
has by this time realized that his
criticism is unjust and unfair to the
gentlemen composing the board. If
everything Mr.. Swearingen says Is
true, the board Is not ceusurable by
him, for the simple reason that they
thought their action was for the best
interests Of the schools, and no man
is censurable when he uses his best
Judgment In the discharge Of pub
lie duty.