 |
| May 05, 2024 |
Welcome! Click here to Login
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Click to visit the
Official Town Site
|
|
|
|
|
|
General News: The Case Snowballed Against Him
January 14, 2008
A snowfall and children frolicking in the white wonderland brings to mind a scene in Cornwall-on-Hudson more than a hundred years ago.
On a Tuesday in January, 1895, a young boy was accused of throwing a snowball in the schoolyard, then denying he had done so. Suspension from school quickly followed with the boy ordered to stay home until he apologized.
A month later, his case was heard by the school board in front of a packed audience.*
The alleged snowball thrower was John Fanning, a local boy who had no father to represent him. A man named Thomas Sullivan argued before the board that Fanning’s guilt had never been proven because the teacher, Miss Alida Ward, never saw the snowball leave his hand. And as a result of this miscarriage of justice, Fanning was losing out on a valuable education, Sullivan told the board.
The board then heard the results of an investigation by a teachers’ committee in which a half-dozen school children were asked if Fanning had thrown the snowball. Three said they did not see him and three said they did -- including one who said the snowball hit him. Miss Ward also said that she saw Fanning throw a snowball. The investigation found that Fanning had insulted the teacher by calling her a liar and the report concluded that the principal was correct to suspend the student.
Mr. Sullivan appealed to the board to allow John Fanning to appear as a witness in his own defense, a bid denied. The principal, Mr. Chase, testified that Miss Ward’s testimony and character were “unimpeachable” and that it was in Fanning’s interest to deny the act. Chase also noted that ‘the evidence of small children is not very reliable,’ thereby tilting the case further against the accused.
As the school board wound up its hearing, one witness was allowed to testify for Fanning. Another schoolboy, William Knapp, was asked if he saw Fanning throw a ball. He said no. Then he was asked if he was positive that Fanning did not throw a snowball. “No, sir, not positive,” he replied.
With no one else testifying for Fanning, the board voted to adopt the Teachers’ Committee report and continued the student’s suspension until he apologized.
It is not known when, or even if, John Fanning was able to return to his studies at the school on Idlewild Avenue in Cornwall-on-Hudson.
*The transcript of this meeting was reproduced in the February 14, 1895 edition of the Cornwall Local.
Comments:
|
OH, you *know* I am going to comment on this one!
How times have changed. I feel badly for lil' John , faced with the imposing and intimidating presence of so many grownups, but the interesting thing here is that there was a public hearing and several perspectives were sought. Not all were admitted as evidence, though. But it seems that it was less about the snowball and more about lying and calling a teacher a liar. Fast forward 100 years - now we have a teacher thrown out of school, to the detriment of her students, because one ill-mannered lout whines and cries and won't accept responsibility for his actions. All the investigation is done in secret, and the sickest part - the lout couldn't care less that he is wasting his time but the hardworking students are losing "valuable instructional time" the week before exams... .
posted by kate benson on 01/14/08 at 9:50 PM
|
Add a Comment:
Please signup or login to add a comment.
|
 |
|
|
|
