Milford chronicle., 1922-04-07

were made to so compromise the sit
uation and TO so involve the various
districts in financial obligations that
the General Assembly would be un-
able to unscramble the eggs when
next it had the opportunity. The short
special session of 1920 came along;
an honest effort was made at this ses-
sion to give back to the people some
of the power we had usurped. You
see the people of Delaware are in
clined to believe that they are quite
capable of running their own affairs
without dictation from self-appointed
guardians of their children's welfare.
Some of us are foolish enough to
agree with them. We did improve
matters in this respect and succeeded
IN lowering taxes on real property.
You remember, of course, that prior
to that time the S1O0,0OO,0OO of
wealth in rural Delaware represented
by real property was bearing almost
all the tax burden; this was but a
small part of the wealth of the State,
Dut so far as my memory serves me 1
DO not recall that our volunteer crit
les and advisers shed one tear or
spoke one word in condemnation of
this condition. We had not the time to
attempt to do more than alleviate con-
ditiOns at the 1920 session.
The session of 1921 came along
with the small property owners of the
State almost in actual revolution;
and, sir, your opinion or any other
mans opinion to the contrary, I say
that they are. largely justified in their
attitude. 1t is true that some few did
play the demagogue in order to fur
ther their political ambitions, but it is
also true that most of the opposition !
was honorable. 1t is also true that |
for each demagogic critic there was a
bOot-licking advocate. The great |
mass of Delawareans belonged to /
neither class; they demanded two !
things; a chance to run their own
affairs and an honest distribution of
the tax burden. They were not and
they are not opposed to proper edu-
cation of our children. Moreover, the
school laws now in operation are
well; they have rough places 4
to be smOOthed and they are not as
responsive to the will of the people as
| personally would like, but they
junction, which is more than the over
praised code ever did, and they will
De improved upon as wisdom indi-
Gates. We do not feel at all that we
lave gone backward. On the con-
rary, in establishing the theory that
ducation is the business of the State
S whole and not the business of
he counties or of the various districts
re are ahead of any State in the
IniOn. We have been able to distri-
ute the tax burden in a very much II
lirer way. We have been able in II
lrge part to give Delawareans the
ght to regulate their own schools III
nd this power will be extended in III
le future. We are not ashamed of
lie course we have pursued and we III
'e offering no apologies for it. We Hi
elieve that men of the calibre of III
INES H. Hughes, of Dover, one time
candidate for governor; 3
)bert G. Houston, prominent citizen
Georgetown and deputy attorney
neral; DR.. R. w. Cooper, educator
1ong educators and so recognized
over the country; James F. Alice,
=, members of the State Senate and
ampiOn of the peoples rights, and
hers who worked out this present
", are honorable men of no mean
ility; their efforts were honest and
think they were also we'll directed.
III you not be good enough to tell
ur neighbOrs in Maryland so?
Except that it might be considered
would ask that you adj
e for me any member of the Mary
Id Legislature that you chance to
et that he will do well to scan
sely the educational bill now be-
e the Maryland Legislature, if, as
her from your remarks, it is SINH
to the Delaware code of 1919.
Sincerely yours,
WALLACE S. HANDY"