Evening star., 1920-03-09

WIG 10 say tn2I VOteo 70 uOtAAy nm
that he would not be reelected for
three reasons-:hat he IL . poor ex-
ecutfve, tinid in the matter OF a48um-
ing responsibility and disloyal to his
Official chiefs.
Regards Details Needless.
"It is needless to go into the de-
tails of the many things which led
myself and the other members of the
board to form our estimate Of the
superintendent. Sitting with him in
board meeting. and following the
operation of the schools, one forms
very definite and positive opinions
and basis of judgment.
The board reaches it's conclusion
IN the case of Mr.. Thurston not pri-
marily through any one act or omis-
sion as through the general color of
his work; his mentality, personality,
character and methods OF work.
In our judgment ne lacks quick
ness and positiveness of decision. He
lacks ability to delegate work. He
lacks courage in difficult situations
and lack of any one Of these things
Is fatal to an executive.
No matter how good man may
be, however sound his ideas. however
hard-working and devoted to his pro-
fession. as head of a great city school
system he is lost unless he is quick.
courageous and willing to trust other
people.
Mr. Thurston Not Forceful, He Says.
Mr.. Thurston is hard-working, de-
voted to the schools. and has many
good ideas. But he is not forceful
enough to be a leader-and he is too
tlmid and procrastinating and sus-
pic1ous to succeed as city superin-
tendent
Il desire to emphasize the fact that
the statute clearly places upon the
board the duty of exercising it's legal
power according to its own best
judgment. 1t cannot base its judg
ment upon the judgment of others.
The Judgment of citizens may be
OF great value. 1t is always studied
and weighed. But the board of edu
cation in the case of an office like a
superintendent OF schools has many
opportunities to know facts which
citizens generally do not possess. and
which form a basis of sound judg-
ment.
Three years ago this same ques-
tion was before the board. Mr..
Thurston's term was about to expire
and the duty of the board under the
statute then, as now, was to decide IL
he were competent man to I'LL the
place. The board was divided but
by a vote of FIVE to four Mr.. Thurston
was reelected.
Zone of the members voting for
Mr.. Thurston at that time stated that
she was not satisfied with his record
as superintendent. but desired to give
him a longer time in which to show
his ability. She stated that she voted
for him In the hope and belief that
he might develop and become salts
factory superintendent. Now she is
against his retention.
Seven Oppose Reelection.
"Of the present board there are
seven members who have been on the
board throughout his last term OF
Office OF these. six are against him.
made up at present. seven are against
his reelection.
my mind was made up before he be-
gan his campaign against the board
of education. If he had been a much
stronger man. fitted in every other
respect. and I had been in favor Of
his reelection. I should have voted
against him after his action in at
tempting to arouse public sentiment
against the policies and decisions of
the board.
'"The board gave him every oppor-
tunity to thresh out an educational
policy with it. The board heard all
his opinions and accepted many OF
them. After the board had unani-
mously agreed upon a policy It was
into line and try to make the policy Of
the board understood
"No Personal Quarrel"
II have no personal quarrel with
Mr. Thurston. I regret to see him
lose his patience. I regret to have him
leave a school system in which he
has done much good work.
But there is no position in the local
government more important than that
OF superintendent Of schools. No
local government task is fraught with
more momentous responsibilities than
that OF directing the education Of the
children.
ITO discharge my duty I must vote
against retaining Mr.. Thurston.
"The superintendent is correct in
saying that the conference Of some
OF the board members. where it was
decided to notify him that seven of
us would not vote for his reelection
was not legal meeting. It did not
purport to be. 1t was not intended to
be- The note to Mr.. Thurston ex-
pressly stated that formal action was
rot taken simply out of considera-
tion for him. We agreed that It was
fair play not to keep him In ignorance
until the end of the school year when
1t might be too late to get another
place. We did it quietly to give him
q chance to do what is done ninety
nine times out of a hundred-uuietlv
accept another opportunity for serv-
ice.
we did not have a conference with
Mr.. Thurston about our proposed ac-
tion because it did not rest funda-
mentally on disagreement or mis-
understanding. but on the kind of a
man he was. Nothing is likely to be
gained by comforting with man
about his size. We had no desire to
wound him unnecessarily.
Agrees With Superintendent,
II agree fully with what the super
fntendent saws about the duties of
board s1,.,.s ner,bers in relation to the
more vicious In school administration
in Washington than to have nine
little Observation-Disclosures inter-
fering with the real superintendent.
Board members have no business to
handle personally compla ints and
criticisms of employees and patrons, or
dictate appointments or promotions
''The board Of education is to out
line policies, look after appropria-
tions ard expenditures. and. as have
intendent to the community and the
community to the superintendent,
keeping both going along happily to-
gether
"It is perfectly futile to enter upon
a controversy as to whether board
members have trespassed upon the
province Of the superintendent. 1t is
much less a matter of act than of
spirit. The superintendent has al
ways been very willing to take for
consideration suggestions from board
members about appointments. He
has always gone over the matter
with the board in a painstaking way.
1t would be interesting to have the
figures as to the times that this
board had refused to confirm his
choice.
II recall only one case where took
positiye ground agains: his choice