The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1919-03-11
A|kStIE DENIES He
RECOMMENDED CUT
Mayor Dispatches Letter 10 ACtinH
superintendent OF schools. in
Which He Says He Did Not
Urged Teachers Pay BE Low
cFeG

|
flatloln cHrrent Tepcfts that ne
ma recommended cut IN salaries Tor
scho"' teachers as untrue. Mayor
,,eofSe AlhShe Yesterday wrote TO A.
n; lflh' acting snp.rintendent OF
SSiioois, ara GenieQ taxing such &C
. Gon' IL mas oeen SAID that the rumoT
as generated by poutcal opponents
Oh inc mayor, ana arose out or the
recent discussions or the financial
Sl'uaI on ny the mayor. Inc letter
ana reply by Mr.. Hin follows:
a III. nm, Acting superintendent
or schools: Dear sir,--It has bacn
reported 10 me on several occasi pns
p tlHt the schooi teachers or the city
are saying That they have h""n told
ny me Schooi authorities. presumably
! those IN charge OF the schools. ard
are circulating tho statement that
ara the advisory board haEo made the
recommendatlo made by us concern
/ ing School5 Tor the purpose OF cutting
me raY or teachers. | paid no alton
t'oll 10 thtS rufnor when / hrst heard
IL, nut II has been brought to me as
coming from SO many teachers that
therc must be some ground for it.
Scch ming IS SO utterly false aud
entirety mt variance with our action
concerning the appropriation iol
schools that I nm amazed that any
BODY should credit II, TO say nothing
or those who are employed for the
purpose or Importing knowledge to
others. efnphatically deny that the
question or salaries OF school teachers
was ever discussed by US or consid-
cred by us In the preparation of tho
nnaget' as me charter does not au-
'" "a I1' Us " ia mem.
made plain 20 YOU and vonr secre-
terv Mr. yaIrora nm s.yoral Ca
!
based UNION an opinion Of The c,,v ct
tornev and ts estirnated to nro,,,co
the sum + s974. 600 a gum moro than
$3.50 600 In excess Of that thn schools
received from the city last year
While I am aware that the school all
thorjttes have circuIarfzaa tho c,ty
with an nr'rion Of the attorpav.ven-
eral of the state - variance VIII Inn,
of the CITY attorney Inc latter 10 ths
legal adviser Of the citv ana al, lie
officers and n l. upon h,s cr,n,nr
that VA. have IN taka a~t,or. but
whether his orinton 10 r,ph. or wrorg
IL IL tho orinion tnon which I'VE raiy
and tbp iis, i;fnt syss .an,, ,y,,t t,,;n
rho haads ~ tho ,nacbn~s ava In ~
ING repeated nv them tS.t cur an
! t,on~vas Designed s;mnlv 70 ~. +heir
salaries is a to,auv false On. rn,s
rnuc, as the echoo, teachars ave -ay
ing that they have received This nd
vice from their sfloertors will IVA
obliged If Won viii tail rno r"hnt.a
within yotlr knowtedre xo,,r on, ~.
the school hoard Ia resnonsihIa Far ths
statement nesnectf,,,,v
t (gignedl "GEORGE AINrSrru
| MAJ "
| uu,,
! As1Hy'
t TO THIS Mr.. Hin replied az follows;
/ hoQ AHle George Ainflie. Mayor,
Afchmoh@ virginia. My dear sir
! your iei'9r OF March 10 handed me
! by ~ aciai messenger;
you nsk ne In regard 10 The rumor
mat You your Advisory Board have
fnaae recomta endatons for the pur-
| pose OF cutting the pay of teachers"
1 have aiwsys said that you made
the recomn1F ndation to put us on the
nVe mill tax basis on constitutional
/ grounds, whether II would produce
Tor the schools $40, 600, sa7A, 900 or
oven larger sun, As matter Of
| Tact however, under this 'ox II looks
to us as II the amount for the schools
would be only $4,000. because the
TAX OH iutancibles would certainly be
contested. and If the case went
against VIZ IL would be Illegal for the
council TO supplement- whatever pro-
ceeds this tax yields. because 1t Is the
maximum allowed ny the constitu-
"a