Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1919-05-01
The Herald Mail Bag ;
The Grand Forks Herald:

To The Grand Forks Herald:
On page IS Of a pamphlet called
Facts About North Dakota's New
Laws it is stated that l, among
others. "have indorsed' the new edu-
cational administration law,known as
senate Bill 1874, in the last Legislature.
This statement mas been circulated
throughout the state and even more
widely, and l receive letters daily
from school men who have known me
and my views on education. asking of
the report is true.
The ground of this inference and
report is probably the fact that I
among others (who are fully compe-
tent.fto speak for themselves) was
called to Bismarck to advise and con-
fer on that bill once by a member
of the board of regents and again
by Senator Cahill Of the state affairs
committee, which had the bill in
charge. I attended four or five con-
f%erences, and during every n of
these Gas the others can testify, I
stood for a different procedure and
a different bill. In fact. ! was 30 inv
sistent and persistent on every occa-
sion and on nearly every point that l
had a feeling that l was thought I'M
duly obstructive.
Participation in discussion on this
al Id " q f0lAu VI oAAAASAOAk O&6A
for representing me before the educa-
tional critics Of the state and nation in
the light of having indorsed" Bill
1874. l am not, however. charging
anyone with wilful misrepresentR-
ton.
1t is true that I tried to help i'm
prove that bill as it was first intro
duced. I played fair with those who
invited me to Bismarck. and I did
Wh al r -pN111I IN rn6Vn a Rfrnr0Ap
instead of a weaker bill: nor am I
unapprcciative Of the confidence inn
piled in the invitation. Butt insisted
all the time that the other plan would
commend itself to the best educational
judgment of the country, while Bill
.134 would not.
The plan which I outlined and ad.
'vocated before the committees at Bis
marck involved:
Cd A constitutional amendment
whereby, instead of the present plan,
a commissioner Of education would
be selected by a state board of edu-
cation and constituted the profession
al head. of the common graded and
high schools of the state, and who.
with his assistants. experts and In
spectors, would have charge of the
schools-the specific. technical and
professional functions generally.
(2) The kind of board which I adj
,vOcated was a representative n .iof
five members Cat first the bill had
three), appointed by the governor for
ia period of about five years and re-
movable only for cause. (Ths bill first
did not provide this.) One member
would retire each year. thus insuring
permanence. 4
(s) The members Of this board
were not to be in any a ex-officio;
and having only general. supervision,
1t was not to be a salaried board; none
rof the thirty or more states has found
any difficulty in securing the highest
type of men for such an honorable
public service. N q liberal per diem
and expense basis.
(4) The board I advocated was an
educational board only. and was not
to have charge Of tho other so-callsd
penal and charitable Institutions.
Thanking YOU In advance for. the
space and opportunity to make this
brief statement, since have been
brought into the discussion. Isremaln,
very sincerely.
JOSEPH KENNEDY.
6 University, N. D..