Shall We Have Free Language

SHALL WE HAVE FREE LANGUAGES

Demand for New Policy at High School

AS TO TUITION CHARGES

Three Communications From Ann Arbor Tax Payers On the Subject

Ann Arbor, Sept. 25th, 1903.

Editor of Ann Arbor Argus:

    Dear Sir:- By the letter of Mr. Herbst in a recent issue of the Argus I have been greatly surprised to learn that Ann Arbor has the unique distinction among Michigan towns of charging tuition for language study in her high school. To a former student in two of the free high schools of the state and to a high school principal and superintendent for several years in other Michigan towns, and to a resident of Ann Arbor who in common with the citzenship of the state has taken a just pride in what we had supposed was the free school system of Michigan, you can imagine that it was something of a shock to his civic pride to learn that it remained for Ann Arbor, the boasted center of the educational life of the northwest,  to levy tribute on parents and students who have the capacity, taste and amibition to cultivate the study of the languages in her high school. In common with other tax-payers and citizens of the state, I had supposed that we had done with rate-bills and established a free system about forty years ago and while judging from our city's attitude toward a municipal water system and electrlc light plant, I was prepared to learn that we might be fifteen or twenty years behind the times, I would not have supposed that our educational matters, the chief object of our pride, were forty years behind the times. Policy and principal, It seems to me, require that tuition for languages and all other branches be  abolished for resident students, and the public schools be made free as the law intends. To charge for instruction is to violate the spirit if not the letter of the law and it is very questionable whether the courts would not pronounce the action illegal if the matter were brought before them. Whether legal or not the tuition is an unfair burden on many tax-payers and is plainly a case of double taxation. It also dlscrimlnates unfairly against the study of languages and tends to strengthen the influence that are lowering the standard of scholarship and making the aim of the schools the perfecting of a wealth producing and money earning machine and not the development of well rounded manhood and womanhood. Let us take a forward step of forty years and stand abreast of the progresalve cities of the state.

Let us have a free high school.

C. K. PERRINE.

Editor Argus:

   Will some present or former member of the school board enlighten resident school patrons, or tax-payers of Ann Arbor, why a tuition for language Greek, Latin, French and German- of $3 each a semester is charged? Who conceived the propriety, the wisdom and justice of imposing such a tax on the already burdened tax-payer? One may pertinently ask, was it to enable the school board to hire professors of languages at an expense of from $2,000 to $3,000 per annum, and to make it a success that pupils could not graduate unless they took languages?

   Please speak, some member or members of the present or former board, and enable us to see the propriety of such a tax, for unless this is done there will be a very hot campaign open in the future. And too, why should people who move into town to do business and to become permanent residents, tax-payers or not as yet, be obliged to pay tuition often amounting to $25 to $50 a year? Are such people, often poor laboring men, not burdened enough wlth the care of providing a winter's supply, with wages at $1.50 a day, or often not over $8.00 a week? Outrage! The hound stands ready to chase the child to school, extra tuition is demanded, food and clothing are the other necessities. Citizens, why do you allow wealthy gentlemen, men who are not blessed with children of school age, and single men to become your school officers? You complain and ask for relief, yet you stuff the ballot box with material that if it win out looks only to the interest and propagation of self. Of course if necessary the writer will pay the additional tax- or call it blood-money; but I believe the injustice- a tuitioned free- school- can not endure much longer, seeing the opposition and the hardship it entails on many people.

   Will not our present school board kindly do away with the offensive regulation and cease to be a hindrance to pupils graduating, or to their continuing  their studies to the end? Few families will and can endure the expense. It will amount to what a far-sighted gentleman remarked: "If this extra tax is not removed, in a short time we shall need no more language professors."

F. STOFFLET.

Editor Argus:

   In your editorial in the Argus of September 26th, under the caption "'Abolish the Tuition," you mention that all instruction in the public schools should be free, " that if the instruction in foreign languages is not to be free, throw them out. But if instruction in these subjects is to be provided in the public schools make it free to the children of all the residents of the city." You have hit the nail square on the head. I cannot see how this posltion can be succesfully assailed. lt was never in the contemplatlon of the state to demand payment for any branch of study in our public schools. If any study is of sufflcient importance to the people to demand its introduction into our public schools, and it is introducted there, it should become a part of our public school system free to all. If it is not of such importance, "keep it out," as expressed by you, and let those are able and wish to take such studies go to pay schools for it. The needs of the state and the people change with time. What seemed sufficient to make good citizens fifty years ago will not answer today. Our schools must grow with the growth of the state and society. The state is benefited in proportion as its inhabitants become self-supporting, law abidlng and good citlzens. Our public schools are liie ground work and foundation for the attalnment of these resulta. If the demands of the times make the study of bookkeeping or short hand, or manual training an important aid to produce self supporting good American citizens and the people of a community demand any of these studies to be a part of the curiculum of our public schools, they should be made such and be free to all. The same applies to the study of any language. And as stated by you, if the people do not wish any particular study to form a part of our free public system, "keep it out," and let us not have a mixture of free and pay schools in our public school system.

   We are frequently accosted with the remark that our public schools are merely for the teaching of the English branches. This is not correct. Our public schools are for the purpose of making the children of the state intelligent, self-supporting and law-abiding citizens, and that method of teaching which will produce the best results in that direction should be adopted by the state. If teaching German or bookkeeping or manual training give the boy and girl a better chance of earning a livelihood in the struggle for existence, these studies should be adopted in public schools and should be free. 

   A generous, broad and liberal policy adopted in the school system of the state will react upon the state and will repay it many fold financially by producing more and better taxpayers, intellectually and morally, by producing more intelligent and better men and women, and will produce broader citlzens all around.

GERMAN TAXPAYER.