APPENDIX D. PAPERS RELATING TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE MASSACHU- I. Introduction to account of legislative investigation. III.-Message of the governor and action by the legislature. a. Letter in Boston Herald. b. Letter in Boston Advertiser. 605 I.-INTRODUCTION TO ACCOUNT OF LEGISLATIVE INVESTIGATION. The action of the Massachusetts legislature in directing an official inquiry into the management of the Normal Art School, with the events immediately preceding this action; the result of that inquiry as embodied in the majority and minority reports of the legislative committee, and the application made of these reports by the governor of the State, in his annual message to the legislature, are here summarized; as a part of the contemporary history of the school, and as illustrating some of the difficulties that surround all such educational experiments. The official reports relating to the Normal Art School show that during the year ending June 30, 1881, some changes were made by the board of visitors in the personnel of the corps of instructors of the school, which were generally understood to be neither advised by, nor agreeable to, the director. A formidable opposition in the city had also developed against Professor Smith, which sought his removal from the State and city positions held by him.* This was caused partly, it was believed, by the fact that as director of drawing in the city schools he had at length announced that the time was near when special teachers in the high schools could be dispensed with, just as they had been in the lower schools. This, though in direct accord with the plan always announced from the first of having this study taught by the regular teachers of the schools, antagonized the special teachers and their friends. The principalship of the Normal Art School was bound up with the position of State director of art education. Professor Smith's earnest protest against certain changes in the drawing books for the public schools, his insisting that the good of the pupils demanded the least possible resort to adventitious aids, such as "guide points," etc.; that it was the training of the eye and the hand that was essential, not the prettiness of the work nor the amount of paper consumed-in all of which he was sustained by the committee on drawing-was, possibly, another element in the causes that eventually culminated in the severing of all his official relations. Causes originating in previous efforts to secure the removal from School street, were also thought to have contributed to swell the antagonism that had been gradually developing. It is in this connection that the following words of Dr. Miner, spoken at the first commencement of the school in 1876, assume something of a prophetic strain. He said: "The success of the school and the diffusion of its good required text books embodying its principles and methods, thus arraying against it long-established interest. Still further, every institution vigorously administered-and I believe the vigor of the administration of this school has not been questioned-runs across somebody's path and produces more or less of antagonism through interest, envy, or personal conflicts and prejudices." (See ante, page 159.) Some of the sources of the combined opposition subsequently experienced by Professor Smith in the performance of his varied duties, were thus clearly pointed out in advance. THE LEGISLATIVE PROCEEDINGS ANALYZED. The differences in regard to the management of the Normal Art School resulted in an appeal to the State legislature, and the ordering an investigation by the committee on education, with a view to further legislation if found desirable. This committee reported May 5, 1882,* that it was inexpedient to legislate, two of the committee dissenting." The sessions had been frequent, and the fact that within the past year there had arisen much friction between the chairman of the board of visitors and the principal of the school was disclosed, but many misun derstandings seemed to be removed, and some natural but erroneous inferences dissipated. The majority statement accompanying the report discussed at some length the reasons that led to the establishment of the school, gave the statistics of attendance, and summed up with the conclusion that many of the difficulties were trivial and transitory. * They are clear, however, that the board during the past year, in at tempting to curtail the proper prerogatives of the principal, exceeded its proper province. On the other hand, they think some of the difficulty due to the personal characteristics of the principal, and that much of the trouble "grew out of the personal peculiarities of the actors on both sides." "The blame for this unfortunate state of things does not belong wholly to any single individual, nor to one party." They say that "many of the existing difficulties were cleared up, and that others now seem to have been wholly misunderstandings." They are, however, emphatic in disapproving the attempt during the past year to "curtail the prerogatives of the principal." In conclusion, they recommend a reorganization of the board of visitors. In regard to the principal they say (Recommendation 3): "We are persuaded that the principal of the Normal Art School is open to just criticism in the recent troubles, and is deficient in some desirable qualities as an administrator; nevertheless we fully recognize his rare genius and skill in his department, and his phenomenal ability as an art educator.” Then, having before expressed their disapproval of the interference by the board with the principal, and recommended a reorganization of the board-all of which would be as a suggestion to the new board in the discharge of their duties-they conclude. We are fully convinced that the principal and the assistant teachers should still be hired by the board of visitors, and that the principal should be subject to their direction. It seems to the committee that so peculiar a course of instruction as this institution contemplates should be prepared and assigned to the assistant teachers by the principal, subject to revisal by the board of visitors. Finally, it is the clear conviction of your committee that the assistant teachers should be subordinate to the principal, and should perform such work as he may assign to them, subject to the approval of the board of visitors. It is to be hoped that the mutual explanations made in the course of this investigation have cleared up many misapprehensions under which some have labored, and contributed to the future harmony of the school. If so, the cost of the investigation, in time, labor, and money, will prove a profitable investment. CHARLES F. GERRY, Of the Senate. N. W. EVERETT, Of the House. BOSTON, May 5, 1882. * House No. 330, p. 23. A second statement agrees with the first in estimation of the great value of the school; disagrees with the recommendations and suggestions; sustains fully the chairman of the board, and so inferentially condemns the course of the principal of the school. This statement is signed by two senators, "J. M. Moore, Augustus Mudge, of the Senate." A third statement by one member of the house, Mr. Edwin N. Hill, disagrees with both the preceding, refuses to consider personal disagreements of individuals, but takes up the subject of the school itself, and expresses the opinion that it should be abolished, and such of its teaching as is essential should be transferred to the regular normal schools of the State, and recommends reference of the entire question. to the governor and council. A further statement, signed also by but a single member of the house (Mr. H. M. Humphrey), "while not formally dissenting from the able report of a majority of his colleagues," regrets that they did not go more fully and positively into the merits of the controversy. He states definitely that it is a personal quarrel between the chairman of the board of visitors and the principal of the school. He distributes praise and blame to either of the parties somewhat impartially, and then proceeds to differ wholly with his colleagues as to the need or desirability of any such school. To this part of his statement there will hereafter be occasion to allude. He closes by regretting that the resolution empowering the committee to act had not sufficient scope, and offers a resolution empowering the governor and council to "consider and report" also upon the "advisability of abolishing" the school. While this majority report of the legislative committee thus heartily indorsed the plans, organization, and purposes of the school, and practically supported the principal in his struggle to retain the executive government of the school in his own hands-absolutely essential if his usefulness was to continue-the matter was by no means ended. The sessions of the committee had developed the existence of an element of active personal hostility to Walter Smith. The two minority reports, each signed by a single member, unimportant in arguments or in number, as they were, yet voiced an opposition to the school, as well as to the head master of the school, and, if an inference may be drawn from the use since made of them by the governor, an opposition in the State not insignificant in numbers. They indicated a possibly growing hostility to the whole effort to develop and improve the industries of the State by means of elementary art training in the public schools. The report had recommended a reorganization of the board of visitors. This recommendation was not acted on. This being the case, it needed no prophet to predict the ultimate result. * Meantime the elements of opposition in the city, before alluded to, united, and succeeded, after several vain attempts, in outvoting the supporters of Professor Smith in the school committee; and thus, after twelve years of arduous and admirable service in the schools of Boston, Professor Smith's connection with them closed. Similar influences ultimately prevailed with the State authorities, and on July 6, 1882, Prof. Walter Smith ceased to hold the positions of State Art Director and of Principal of the Normal Art School. With the loss of Professor Ware, well known as the professor of architecture in the Institute of Technology, whose connection, with the * See letter from "A practical teacher," in Boston Herald, for concise résumé of Walter Smith's work for Boston schools, Appendix D, IV a. S. Ex. 209--39 |