Ohio History Journal

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15







Under this caption the Lancaster Daily Eagle, of

September 13, 1927, publishes the following editorial:

In another portion of this paper, we reproduce, possibly for

the twentieth time, a resolution supposed to have been passed by a

Lancaster School Board away back, a hundred years ago, in 1828.

These records of the school board of that period are not obtain-

able, and even though they were, this resolution denying the use

of a schoolroom for a public debate as to whether or not railroads

were practical, would be absent from the minutes of the Lancaster

School Board's session of that date.

We were inclined for a time to take this matter as an insult

upon the discernment of our early citizenship, which for a century

or more has boasted of an intelligence of the superior stage.

Lancaster has produced three cabinet officers, Ewing of the

Treasury and Interior Department, Stansberry of the Attorney

General's office, and John Sherman, Secretary of the Treasury

under McKinley, and one of the greatest generals of the Civil

War, General Sherman. They are our jewels and we are proud

of them.

In those early days, along about the time that a Lancaster

School Board was supposed to have thought that telegraphs and

railroads were impossibilities and rank infidelity, our fair city

was credited with having the best and brainiest group of lawyers

of any county in the state and several educators and teachers of

national repute.

In Mr. Will Scott's article in another column it is plainly

shown that this resolution was not the product of a Lancaster

School Board, but of the South Charleston, Ohio, skeptics, a

little village more than fifty miles away. But even though it

should have had its birth in Lancaster, does the passage of a

resolution like that show a lack of learning or a deficiency of

grey matter?

No, absolutely not.