Evening journal., 1920-05-27

Hanratty, Ksir, Lester. Parker and
Speaker Corbit
Mr.. Soper next offered an amend
ment TO abolish the attendance officers
in all three counties and friends Of
the code won the only victory OF the
afternoon when tney defeated this
amendment by a vote Of i3 yeas to p
nays.
Mr.. Lyons contended that by doing
away with the attendance officers the
burden would be placed on the teach
ers OF doing that work.
Mr.. McNabb said he could see no
advantage in compulsory educauon
law II there is no one 10 enforce II.
Mr.. Sope said he did not think the
duty would fall on the teachers. lie
| claimed the attendance Offices and tne
methods they use are a sore spot 10
the public in his district.
NJ. Lloyd suggested that the local
trustees should assist the teachers in
doing the work.
Mr.. Hastings Inquired OF Mr.. dupont
what increase there had been In al
tendance In the schools the past year
since the attendance officers were
named.
Mr. dupont replied that the attend
ance for the first six months OF this
school year averaged 400 more than
the previous school year. Mr.. DUPONT
said when The State Is spending a mil
lion or a million and a half for odu-
cation a year IL seemed 10 him worth
while TO spend $1,000 more a year 70
get In p per cent. more children. II
would be false economy, he said
Mr.. SOper inquired II Mr.. dupont
knew the increase In attendance was
due to the attendance officers.
Mr.. dupont replied that he did moi
/ absolutely know 10, but that the State
, Board had done nothing else practical
TO cause such an Increase and ne ten
sure the attendance officers caused the
Increase and he felt sure the attend
ance officers caused The Increase. III
remarked that everyone who should
, know, say attendance officers do goot
, work and that had also been the re
4 suit In other states. III the purpose
Is not to get the children into tht
school the educational system vii
, fair, Mr.. dupont concluded.
, Mr.. Soper denied that was the pur
pose OF the amendment.
Speaker Corbt again took the foo
and read a letter written by Charlie
W. Cullen, attorney for the SUSSEX
l. County Board Of Education Tn
letter was written in behalf OF tn
q board and urged that the attendanc
! officers be allowed 10 remain. Il als
stated that the Sussex county atten
\ dance officer had increased the atten
y dance In that county % per cent. an
the discontlnuance OF the Office wouli
q be a fatal blow 20 the educational sys
q tenn OF the county In bringing abou
this increase. Mr. Cullen stated not al
4 arrest had been made.
q Speaker COrhlt said TO his mind tn
q objection TO this feature Of the bill b
members as representing their con
l. sthuents, was solely 10 the compul
VI sorry law and only TO the ofiicer a
Y an instrument IN carrying out tha
II law.
d The vote was then taken and IN
l. amendment defeated The vote 70
lows.
d Yeas-Buckson. Bunting. Jeste
Lloyd. Llord, Murine, Paradee, II.
j, smith, J. W. Smith, SOper, Stats,
r, p. Warrington and S. j. Warringto
D. -i3.
,, Nays-Brooks, Clendaniel, Dancer
baker. Dean. Francis. Gregg, Har
ratty. Hardesty. Hart, Hastings. Jake
s. Jones. klair. Lester, Lyons, McNabl
s. Mulvcna, Parker. Quigley, sherwood
T, Snow and Speaker Corbit.-22.
The bill, as amended, was the
i nassed hv "A vote Of 20 20 6.