The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1888. PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOLS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1971, 16 October 1888, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1888. PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOLS.

W nting the other day on the subject of punishment m schools we expressed the opinion that, although a frequent recur rence to the rod was a proof of a wapt of good management on the part of the schoolmaster, there are undoubtedly occasions when the use of the cane or the tawse is indispensible if discipline is to be maintained. There are children and children — someare amenable to influences which have no effect upon others, and there are homes and homes, parents and parents. Where there is no proper home rule, where parents are foolishly indulgent, vicious or depraved, it cannot but be that the children will become unruly and wanting m respect for authority or decency, and with children so brought up the corrective discipline of the rod must be permitted to the schoolmaster when occasion requires, It would seem though that there are parents so foolish as not to recognise this, and only on Wednesday last the Committee of the South Oamaru school were called together at & special meeting for the purpose of investigating the complaint of such a parent (a Mr Burke) who claimed that his boy had been " cruelly, brutally illused." If- appeared that the VisitingCommittee for the month had gone to the school after hearing the complaint, and they reported that they " found, on enquiry, that the boy Burke had disobeyed the new teacher, and on being chastised kicked the teagher, and, patching the cane from the teacher's hand, threw it across the room. Ihe teacher then called Mr Rice, the Headmaster, and the boy was chastised for umuly conduct. The boy tben n.ged. Un mannerly words to his teacher, and was again whipped," The Committee added that the father had admitted^ that the boy was sullen and stubborn. The Fchoolmaster, Mr Bice, who was called upon to state the facts had this to say : — " The boy last year had given a deal of trouble, and he .whipped him reluctantly and by no means unmercifully. He, however, drew the line at the boy's kicking and using insulting language to a teacher. Had the boy gone unwhipped for that, there would have been an insurrection, for jvhjle Burke was kicking the teacher the other boys were prying "kjck harder, Burke T He had, therefore, to make an example of Burke, else there would have been a mutiny. He thrashed the boy for disobedience to the teacher, for kicking the teacher, and m order to. quell a mutiny. He Btruck the boy on the fleshy part of the body with the regulation tawse. He believed that he did not hurt the boy, and he did good to the school. He had given boys tea times more." In the face of this evidence the Committee very properly found that the boy « was not unduly punished ami that m the interests of the school Mr Rice only did his duty." And so will pay every unprejudiced person with the above facts before him.