EDUCATION BOARD.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1983, 2 July 1880, Page 4

EDUCATION BOARD.

The ordinary meeting of the Education Board of the North Canterbury District was held yesterday afternoon. Present—Mr Inglis (chairman), Mr A. Duncan, Mr H. J. Tancred, Kev. O. Fraser, Mr Cunningham, and Mr H. E. Webb. The usual statement pf eppointments made and expenditure authorised by the chairman since last meeting was read and approved. The Chairman stated that a petition had been received from a number of the residents of Southbridge regarding the removal of Mr Elwin, whose services they desired to retain. The petition was signed by a hundred signatures. A deputation appointed by the petitioners to wait upon the Board was in attendance. In reply to Mr Tancred, the Chairman explained the circumstances under which the removal of Mr Elwin had been decided on. The deputation was then received. Mr P. DeEidder, who acted as spokesman, pointed out that the signatures comprised the names of nearly all the parents of children at the school, and perhaps the only reason that others did not appear was that they were not at home at the time. He found a unanimous feeling against the action of the committee, which was felt to be the result of the influence exercised by one person, who appeared to be actuated by personal feelings in the matter. Petty matters that should not have been taken notice of were brought as charges against him, and, as a matter of fact, he had done nothing really wrong. The Chairman —Have you got any further light' to throw on the matter than what has appeared in the papers ? Mr DeEidder rcplitd that he could not say much more ; at the same time it was duo to point out that the newspapers gave rather a one-sided view of the case ; the “ Times,” for instance, refusing to publish a letter in reply to certain statements. Another member of the deputation remarked that they could only say that there was nothing in the charges brought by the committee against the master. They (the deputation) wore in attendance to support the prayer of the petition. In answer to the chairman.

Mr Doßidder remarked that the objectionable committeeman referred to was supported by the members of a society of which ho was a member. The chairman pointed out that Mr Elwin’s state of health was such as might compel him to leave under any circumstances. The deputation were aware of this, but wore simply anxious that Mr Elwin should be reinstated with a view of making amends for the injustice done to him. Mr Duncan asked whether it appeared Mr Elwin had over been discourteous to the committee. Mr Deßidder was of opinion that he had not committed any impropriety in that respect. All he had done that could be so construed, was to say in his own home to a friend, that whilst quite willing to recognise the authority of the committee as a body, he could not take instructions from Mr Woodbury. Ho did not dream f hat this would be repeated, but Mr Woodbury heard of it, and that was the cause of the complaint. It was entirely a matter “ behind the scenes.” The deputation then retired with the assurance that the Board would give the matter their careful consideration. Reports of the inspector es to various schools in the district were laid on the table. A report of the scholarships examinations was read as follows : To the Chairman of the Board of Education. Sir, —We have the honor to submit onr report on the examinations for scholarships, held on the Ist and 2nd of Juno, for classes A, B, and C, and on the Bth, 9th and 10th, for class D. The number of competitors was 80. Of these 17 were in class A (13 boys and 4 girls), in class B there were 21 candidates (16 boys and 5 girls), in class C 25 candidates (18 boys and 7 girls), in D 7 candidates (4 boys and 3 girls). Wo append a table of the marks assigned to each candidate in each subject. In class AW. Menuie is easily first, Matthew Butterfield is second, Janet Prosser and T. H. Green, who have an equal number of marks, are third, bnt are a long way below the first two. In class B J. H. Smith and T. Cresswell are first and second, and after some interval come C. Garrard and W. Jackman, who are close together. In class C the competition was very considerable, 6 of the candidates having obtained upwards _of 300 marks each; Catherine Lamb and Aimee Mills are first and second, with a difference _of only two marks ; R. Speight and J. Zacbariah come next with only 10 marks between them, and Mary Sword is only 5 marks below J. Zacbariah. In class D. Margaret Lorimer and Ellen Pitcaithly are easily first and second, only one other competitor succeeding in making halfmarks. We recommend that the two unappropriated scholarships be given to if. Speight and J. Zacbariah, both in class C, and as there will be so far only nineteen scholarships current, we recommend that the full number of twenty bo made up by giving a scholarship to Mary Sword, also in class C. J. Smith, B. Speight, and Ellen Pitcaitbley, hold scholarships gained last year, which they will now have to vacate. We recommend that scholarships tenable for one year, representing the nnexpired portions of those held by the candidates last named, be given to C. Garrard and W. Jackman, in class B, and E. Frizzel, in class C. We have the honor, &c., C. H. H. Coos, M.A.; J. V. C.-Yeel. M.A. The following will show the order of merit and the total marks gained by each candidate: Class A —Maximum, 550. 1. William A. Mennie, 390. 2. Matthew Butterfield, 336.. 3. Thos. H. Green and Janet Prosser, each 291. 5. Richard Clarkson, 269. 6. Hugh Leach, 249. 7. Benjamin Low, 231. 8. Joseph Nathan, 224. 9. William M’Langhlin, 221. 10. John Dolamore, 208. 11. Elizabeth Stevenson, 206. 12. Frederic Sims, 203. 13. Charles Simpson, 191. 14. Susanna Low, 182. 15. George Mulcock, 121. 16. Mabel Bell, 117. 17. George Collins, 56. Class B. — Maximum 550. 1. J. H. Smith, 354. 2. Thomas Cresswell, 329. 3. Charles Garrard, 310. 4. William Jackman, 304. 5. Mary Olliver, 290. 6. L. A. Cane, 264. 7. Edward Gee, 249. 8. Alfred Allison, 239. 9. Robert Martin,. 235. 10. Oscar Johnson, 234. 11. George Johnson, 219; Elizabeth Taylor, 219. 13. Gilbert Dalglish, 215. 14. William Sinclair, 203. 15. E. A. Nathan, 201. 16. J. A. Harvey, 193. 17 Stephen Keels. 18. Rachael Boss, 149. 19. Robert Rankin, 143. ,20. Minnie Penlington, 147. 21. Jane Bruce, 123. 22. Catherine Banks, 101. Class C —Maximum 550. 1. Catherine Lamb, 371. 2. Aim6e Mills, 369. 3. Robert Speight, 349. 4. Joseph Zacbariah, 339. 5. Mary Sword, 334. 6, Robt. Frizzell, 313. 7. Andrew Kirk, 289. 8. Thomas Reese, 278. 9. William Roberts, 271. 10. Edwin Wilson, 267. 11. Thomas Stephens, 249. 12. James Hills, 246. 13. P. Buckley, 236. 14. Anne Saunders, 235. 15. W. Thompson, 232. 16. C. G. W. Armitage, 229. 17. W. J. Smith, 225. 18. Reginald Hodder, 215. 19. Percival Shannon, 201. 20. Frederick Millton, 199. 21. John Watson, 180. 22. J. Lawrie, 175. 23. Sarah Yarr, 133. 24. Mary Andrew, 84. Class D —Maximum 600. 1. Margaret Lorimer, 360. 2. Ellen Pitcaithly, 352. 3. W. Marshall, 313. 4. W. Hayward, 241. 5. E. Searell, 208. 6. Eleanor Cross, 203. 7. G. Harris, 124. The Board agreed to accept the recommendations contained in the report. A communication was received from the Kowai Bush committee, recommending the appointment of the Rev. Mr Mclntosh. The Board agreed to the appointment. A further letter was received from Mr Newlan, in reference to the correspondence that had taken place between himself and the Board, and requesting that he be allowed three months’ salary, as ho considered himself still legally in the employ of the Board. It appeared that the solicitor to the Board had been written to on the subject of Mr Newlan’s claim, and his answer Was to the effect that the committee should demand possession, and if refused, to apply to the nearest Magistrate. The secretary was instructed to write the committee in terms of the above advice. The Chairman laid on the table a copy of the programme of the Melbourne Social Science Congress, forwarded for circulation. The Congress is to be held in connection with the Melbourne International Exhibition, 1880. An application was received from the Upper Heathcote district that its name should be changed tc “Spreydon” for the future. Agreed to. Tenders were accepted as follows :—Dunsaadel school—Taylor, £460 ; Tinwald —Muir and Reid, £440. From the Green Park school committee, an application was received for an enlargement of the play-ground, the letter stating that a piece of land could bo obtained for £SO, convenient to the school. The Board declined to purchase the section, A number of plans of schools, designed for building in brick and concrete and wood, were laid on the table for inspection, the chairman stating that they had been received from Otago. West Christchurch Side-school—The chairman stated that comparative estimates had been received from the architect, and correspondence was read from the committee. It was resolved—“ That the architect should consult with the committee with the view of preparing specifications.” With regard to the Little River school site, which had been before the Board on previous occasions, the secretary was instructed to write to the Government on the subject, to get an assurance as to their intention in the matter of changing the reserve, and also to write to Mr Allan, asking what price he would charge for the land required. An application from Mr Cans, for £5, on account of certain work, was declined. After disposing of some routine matters the Board took into consideration the Teachers’ Pension Bill, and recommendations in connection therewith. Mr Duncan moved—“ That this Board is of opinion that the Teachers’ Pension Bill, in its present form, is not a practicable measure.” The motion was seconded by Mr Cunningham, and carried. The Board then went into Committee, and on resuming adjourned.