The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-02-29

Reference is made to the action of
the state board seven years ago In re-
adopting the Johnson's artthmetics rs
IL 10 show that by this action some
peculiar merit Is proved for these
texts. The same board at the same
time adopted the Southworth slime
arithmetics for the cities. and were
impelled to this action In part by the
desire expressed from certain cities to
have better books than the Johnson
texts. Yet these same Southworth-
Stone arithmetics have been dropped
from the present list without COM
meut or .commotion.
Tho Supposed Debt to the johnson
Company.
The minority report refers to the
Johnson Publishing Company as a
Virginia concern which has accom-
plished much in bringing down the
price CT books throughout the South
and has greatly encouraged Virginia
and Southern authorship.
The State board has proper regard
for the interest OF Virginia concerns,
and its action shows that where II
regarded other things as at all equal IL
has given the preference to them. Tho
boards attitude. where other Things
in it's judgment are not equal. may De
we'll expressed by the following quota
ton. 1T must be rememt cred always
that in the discharge of its obligation
to the schools the State Board or Edu-
cation awards it's contracts not with
view of substituting home enterprises
nor OF furthering the fortunes of any
publisher, foreign or domestic" This
quotation is from a brief prepared by
that patriotic Virginian and dis
tinguished Richmonder, the late
Beverly B. Munford, presented TO the
state Board OF Education in the aaop-
ton of 1898.
In the adoption of the twenty odd
basal titles, bids on twelve came from
the city of Richmond. OF these eight
were awarded to Richmond. More
over. of the other texts adopted eight
or ten are manufactured in the city
OF Richmond. From an economic
standpoint it is not particularly signi-
flcant who writes the book, or who
edits IL, or what company offers IT.
The most important economic factor
is the question, where is the book
made? In consideration of the above
fact the suggestion that the action CT
the state board was at all hostile 70
nich7nord In the recent adoption 10
clearly unwarrantcd
AS TO the responsibility CT the John
son Company for reducing prices Of
books in the South. we may say that
this company has doubtless con-
tributed its share to bring about re-
duction in price just as every COM
peting house contributes toward the
same end. The fact is patent, how
ever that in the recent adoption, the
bids OF the Johnson Company were no
lower than those of certain other con-
Germs
In regard to Virginia and Southern
authorship. ii is necessary merely to
quote the following from a report OF
the State Board of Education in 1894.
before the Johnson Company was
organized ION our adopted list are
sixty-fve books-twenty- of them
from the pen OF Virginians and one
revised by a Virginia educator" We
doubt II any Southern State can ex-
hibit higher per cent of local author
ship since the establishment Of this
concern than that shown BY the b, ok
list OF 1894. before it's establishment
Relative Cost OF Old and New IAst.
The Johnson Company estimates
the difference between their former
price and their reduced bid on arith-
also the difference between their re-
duCcd bid on arithmetics and the cost
Of the books actually adopted at sI5,-
5000 According TO their own esri-
mates. then, the arithmetics adopted
are cheaper than the former Johnson
prices by s20.2Q0.0o.
But we do not depend on the estt-
mates prepared by this company.
From our own careful and painstaking
study Of the cost OF books, our calcula-
tions based on the depository sales for
1914, and verified by a certified public
accountant. prove cenclusively that We
will save the people OF Virginia on
basal books for the period OF this
adoption not less than $50 900 90.
The minority report leaves the ex-
planation of the changes in arith
metics, speller and Fifth Reader to
those responsible for the changes. We
accept that responsibility with en-
phass and pride. To have adopted the
texts urged by the minority would
have caused as real change as has
occurred We believe with deliberate
conviction based upon a painstaNing
study o: books and of prices that we
have voted for changes only when
they were demanded by consideration
y
voted for the cheapest books con-
sistent with the best interest of the
schools.
We assert that we have every In
clination to favor Virginia concern
where other things are equal We
have felt II our duty, however, to
adopt textbooks not publishers, for we
have placed above everything else Cur
consideration of the children in the
schools. We have not been unmindfut,
at the same time, of the best interest
of patrons in the matter of book
prices.
We emphatically deny that our vote
in this adoption has placed an added
tax on the people of Virginia. On the
contrary, We affirm that we have
greatly reduced the future cost of text
books in Virginia and have ut the
same time given the children tho best
books that have ever been used in the
school system OF this State.