The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-04-12
ZONES BACK
leAIN At STtARAES
eetfon OF Capacity for Leader
SSld Sincerity Very Approprf-
- Raise as to Public Servant
@upEmNTFNDENTs POLICY.
Member Of State Board Oh
fnssnn Declares IL Was Not ire
80 Untn Book Adoption was
nueed 60 Have Been Conit'is'''"'

~ fol,owins reply to superin--
90 = Staarnes' recent statement
,ssrs~,, ont Yesterday by Professor
1T exington.-Editor.l
4 al 10 The Richmond FirRiniah' ,
~ 'SS~inrfon. Va. April li.--The ca
fv for leadership and sin'eIiAs 49,
+ 1inx with public matters -
4cpriate question to '"'ST aoaI-
& zsN IA any public servant IN N NC,
4 5Ss ..s.h rrfvate individual 90 IS
A 331&ss /. - .ris aort may be impert'nent.
n owl ~ reference TO public seFN@'''
u 5Sa9 assume a different aspect Ia.
iszssss sS = csa.a SUPERINTENDENT. in reply
& iS2sTsev staternent that the board wa
d - = 6;rnnned by a lack OF leaaefsh.p
n &S& definite policy, aT'ehap -.
z11&6ve that he had some sort OF 49,
( IN uuoting two paraera pms ~ W. al
s<sss1&s,tes Of the board. To the caSt.9'
4 ssss~sser these paragraphs possess Ge-
81 rkW Of piausihtlity. To any OF
II - ~ynn an elementary acquaintance
& ss.xs. 49, ,vhole hook business, no"
n z.s-. xna mutations awindle to the
- HE noln+ q having been hled
B ,sesf1, ebe board merely for the SAKE
d ~ son,e doubtful use as future rev
& 1srds rather than for the guidance -
s131e state board In an Important pun
y ~ matter. -.
The first quotation nay ~ ,(a-
& $500 r.ould be changed unless 70 per
1900 III the division superntondents as
n sSS<~~snA the book TO he unsatisfactory
sss3r refers TO a resolution when 'h"
Iuperintendent states was oHsf1d U"
April %. 19l -,.-..,., raa
n asnNu engaged IN the book aooph'''
u liner Jannary, 1914. Books hAd heen
studded, committee reports hao
d Xarepared, and the board hao i''' wi
Ffnt yeas intended TO be the fnAI
u acr4son At this time, after the
slertion OF books had been made the
81 s13.ss,erintendent offered a resolution
SsSSNlr, he now calls the definition on
z&saa5sfs1icv 70 guide the board In the selcc~
slrrrs ~ school books | attached no
" ;,serao,,. innortanCe 10 this resolution
n secaaase knew that in the comm l'ee
fS1eetlngs a day or 90 previous th .
Is fltate Superintendent had urged fad'Si''
EssY,anres-notably IN primers and IN
q Y.rxlish books Since the committees
al1apfpd down these changes, practcatE
q ssssn ssfrn ous,v. his resolution assumed
I ta nv mind more the aspect OF pfque
4 4han 81 policy such a resolution, 100.
d sSwna entirely impracticable. because u
" III r.s.rufat 10 shift on division super
Is 1fatendents IN part burden which tho
fg7Awy Y,Iaces on the state board. To say
U thai the state board should not
change q book until at least 20 per
Il cent OF the division superintfndentS
1ssn n that II be changed. would open
1 sfp again the whole stare 70 ranNass
nj eyery adoption and would thus re-
V4ve all OF the evils Of the multiple
sswrn4ern and save none Of It's virtues,
a Related "poficy."
The thing which utterly discredits
s41,fs so-calied policy" in the book
adoption however, Is the fact that u
YVES not presented until the adoption
syys.s supposed 10 have been completed.
The second quotation as an outline
~ ..poifcy'' Is hardly more fortunate.
Th% superintendent Save: And again
when the board met for the final adop-
don, to wit. on February 20, 1915. the
4 fo11owang program was insisted upon
o 81 the State Superintendent" New
u tfde had been called for in the fall or
&Mot4, and committees had been In
! s3ructed to report their recommends p
Stems on 9teythDoks 47yz February r.,
1918 The Superintendent now quotes
i the statement fled on February 20.
& and calls Ii the exhibition OF policy
III guide the board in doing something
III was supposed TO have completed on
Fehrnary s.
k III bv any stretch of the imagtna-
4ion these two quotations could be
Il nonstrued as defining a policy 70 guide
NJ t1ae State board in an important piece
||sst,f work. they have the very unique
aSafure of having been presented IN
case after the work by resolu-
Man OF the board had bee nordered
lame. They compare 70 definite con
IN4ructive policy very much as the dim
sgF 1isrb ~
kompares with the mighty headlight
vf the engine The latter really IL
IuminAfes and clears IN and points
MT the way: the former gives only a
&f4un OF the board had been ordered
4 srAu already passed over
DCaiculations Internationally
d The second quotation from IN" min
ntes is part Of a lengthy report on
9 Dxfces which was merely "fled' ny
S the State Superintendent on February
NJ no. 1915 The first part Of this re-
noft liz a series Of calculations. the
results of which are To my mind In
q accurate and untrustworthy Certain
very important items are duplicated
and Others are used which are very
doubtfnl BY one r4le the Roperin-
I'M 4endent estimated the cost Of chang
81 4nE certain books 10 he ,n seven years
bout s22S,00o and by another rule
s t464,0e0. These calculations appear
N be the premises Of the report, and
III fhe statement quoted Ia this article IL
81 hi part its conclusion With premises
A "a Inaccurate. no serious considera-
aA tim Fcouid be given to the conclusions.
s& ~ an estimate of the cost of change.
E9y Therefore gave the report 4 title
TS NH de5tce: and now, when q part OF
HI Brought forward as definition
IA = s.policy," ! can give It less cred
IXT
The superintendent says IN refer
" oncN 70 the California prices that The
" entire report is a matter u record in
81 ~ minutes of the Board and Colonel
81 H6gA forgets that he offered no OBJ
Nk50n 10, or criticism of. the figures
~ the time and that the minutes were
GpRoved without dissent on MIS-
The only basis | can find for
1T doubtful assertion Is a minute
Il Nay 81, 1914 tn part as follows
npprintendent Stearnes submitted a
Ss DGxt as to the results accomplished
himself and his associates report
~ written laterl lie states also
IA this report was aigned by the
o04rnor and the Attorney General.
- what this report TO be written
may or may not contain I
G4A not venture 10 guess but !
~ y -.