THE ANDERSON BAY SCHOOL.

Evening Star, Issue 3986, 3 December 1875, Page 2

THE ANDERSON BAY SCHOOL.

To the Editor, • ‘ ?IK v ) '^'^ ere can no doubt that the Education Board has doae wißey in deferring the consideration of the case of the Anderson’s Bay teacher, so ns to enable the Inspector to furnish the necessary data for a c dm and dispassionate decision ; and the fSclmol t 'onimbtee, thinking, no doubt, that Mr Clark has acted very injudiciously in trails ering his cause to the tribunal of public opiu.on, have determined to make no replv to his charges or rather insinuations. Now the co -mitt-e,’ imiielled by their conscientious solicitude for the interests entrusted to them, have tak-n a step which they would not have taken had they consulted their own inclinations ; and many peopl<*in the district feel that they owe it as a duty to the committee to vindicate them from the charges, or rather insinuations, made by the teacher. Having long taken an interest in educational matters here, and kept myself acquainted with the proceedings both of the committee and of the teacher, I am in a position to state that their treatment of him has been characterised by the utmost forbearance and by a disposition to give him the greatest possible amount of freedom in hi- - work, while his attitude towards them has been a position of defiance. Mr Clark says in bis letter (and'.thi* may be taken as a fair specimen of his straightforward mode of expression) that there are “120 children in actual connection with the school.” What the phrase “actual connection” here means I cannot guess but can state, without fear of contradict-oa, that the present attendance at the school dins net mnuli exceed a third of that, number, ami that" includes the classes that are under the charge of the school-’ mistress. - • >inci- Mr Clark has referred s i triumphantly to his quarterly returns. I may bo u.-rmitted to ask whether the reason why bo has made no return at all for two qu rteis is that he was conscious that they could nut bn made to show a very flourishing s’nP' of affairs? Mr Clark has tried to convey the impression that the committee have been guilty of an attempt to deprive him ot part of the school fees, although he evidently shanks from making a oat pu.ical assertion to that effe t. Now, It so happens chat 1 can explain ibis allusion. Wheu the committee some time ago ob allied the sanction of the Board to the appointment of a schoolmistress, Mr Clark was informed that 1,10 of 'ho school lees must go to supplement her a Jury n terms of the regulation— a, proposal to which vi r t dark d;murre l. And this, foVsooth! is the worst example Mr luk lias teen able to se,e t of the. ‘ tyranny, inju tice, and op -ressum ho has suffered at the bauds of the commi (tee. Mr Clark dates his letter from Anderson’s n-iy, but 1 ma imntion that he Lad ceased long prior to the date rf the !e ter to honor the district with his residence in it, He lias removed In? household gods to a di-tuuce of ai om, ten times Tom . uubas' u’s B»y. and there he carries on pretty extensive operations a« a tanner oi a not. very nanv.w strip of not ‘j? unproductive ground, so that his appeal ad misencordiam might have b en left unwritten and unpublished.- Yours, kc , a i ,T, . . CBSSBVfiB, Anderson s Bay, December 1,