New Britain herald., 1929-11-20

able that the school board merely suffered from being subjected to a vocal chorus Of criticism that was bound to find something to yodel about. The impression has grown that nothing done would be free Of habitual criticism. that the board was regarded as a good object for the venting of such indignation as comes naturally to many in an im- perfect world.
 The criticism we have noticed has extended to everything done since a conscientious effort was made to alleviate the school shortage which dated from the war When the new buildings were projected the first criticism was regarding the out lying land purchased for the build ings. The sites were too far in the suburbs, it was claimed. It had to be CA ApihillCu III lilS td~SS OL llC oltS iOi the Roosevelt school that the city would grow beyond that site long before the building wore out. It had to be said in the case Of the Lincoln school site that the few extra blocks to the school for some of the pupils would not be a hardship, and that larger and better school could be built there than on more limited land in the vicinity of the old site. When the buildings were being con- structed it was claimed they cost too much. and that they were too large. One critic claimed that instead Of such large buildings there should be more smaller buildings-.just the re- verse of modern practice.
 When the Benjamin Franklin school site was chosen there was satisfaction that that section Of the city would obtain modern building. If the criticism about the Lincoln and Roosevelt buildings were sound it would apply equally to the Frank lin school. But what do we find? Just the reverse! The criticism about the Franklin school has been that 1t is "too small" Why didn't the school board have sense enough to con- struct large enough premises while it was at it? etc. The more one analyses these criticisms the more one Is inclined to become cynical Of it's motives.
 The Franklin school is not large enough now because it's construction on Clinton street helped to build up that section Of the city. The school board is supposed to be composed Of mind readers, gentlemen who are able 10 determine far in advance just how many new residences will be in the general vicinity of a school building If the building isn't crowded within 8 few years the board can be criticized as having built on too expansive a scale: if crowded, then 1t can be criticized as having built on too economical scale. We fail 10 see the justice Of such criticisms.
 Criticism that has revolved around the senior high school addition is Of the same caliber. One faction of critics wanted new high school built in another section Of the city. which would have cost substantially more than the present addition and would have entailed hlgner operat- ing expenses. g The school board, the least expensive method, is criticized for having been lex trayagant."
 The anvil chorus against the in cusion of satisfactorily large audi torium in the enlarged senior high school has been the climax of short sighted criticism. In thousands Of cities throughout the land such audi toriums have been constructed in the high schools as civic resource. For years in this city there has been a every attempt 10 obtain such 3 re- source vas foiled by the attendant expense. Now we are 10 obtain n fitting substitute al comparatively l0w cost because it happens 10 be in a bulding that must be constructed anyway. Why be overly critical in the face of present and future needs? Such structure is for the future as well as the present. 1T the school board had enlarged the high school without an adequate audi torIum then, and then only 1t would have earned the condemnation Of citizens. And 1t would have received 1t.
 Let's be constructive.