BOARD OF EDUCATION.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2115, 3 December 1880, Page 4

BOARD OF EDUCATION.

A meeting of the Board of Education for the difltriot of North Canterbury was held yesterday afternoon. Present —Mr Montgomery, acting chairman, Rev. 0. Eraser, Mr Cunningham, Mr Tanored. A statement of the business done by tho chairman since the previous meeting was read and approved. (The Chairman apologised for the absence of Mr Stevens by request, that gentleman having another important engagement by which he was detained. A deputation from Raiaia waited on the Board with reference to the removal of a teacher. The feeling of the distriot was against the teacher in question, but it was also submitted that he was not capable of instructißg any children but those in the lower standard. [At this stage Mr E. 0. J. Stevens took his seat.] . The Chairman pointed out that the inspector reported of this school that the attendance was not regular, hence a low standard. The deputation stated that the children had been punctual in attendance up to the time that dissatisfaction arose. [Mr H. B. Webb here entered the room.] The Chairman understood that a feeling of dissatisfaction existed on the part of the residents as to the eonduot of the school, and that it was considered desirable the master should be removed. After some further conversation, tho deputation were informed that the matter would receive due consideration and their decision made known to the district. The deputation then thanked the Board and withdrew. The adjourned debate respecting the regulation as to pupil teachers being examined in saored history was resumed. The Chairman read the minutes, &0., of the debate of last meeting, when the question was adjourned on the motion of Mr Stevens, on the ground that the Board was not proceeding In this matter according to the terms of the Education Act, under which the Board was constituted. The secretary explained that delay had occurred in issuing regulations for the approval of the Governor, and it was the' taking of this step which gave rise to the question about the examination in sacred history as referred to in the letter of the Minister of Education. The debate was resumed, on the motion of Mr Cunningham—" That the proposal of the Minister that examination in saored history be optional be accepted by the Board." After some discussion, Mr Cunningham withdrew his resolution in favor of the motion of Mr Eraser, given notice of at last meeting. The Eev. Ohas. Eraser then moved—" That in the examination of pupil teachers the subject of saored history be retained, under tho express condition that exemption shall be granted by the regulations to pupil teachers who claim it on the ground of conscience or religion," and repeated the arguments in support thereof which he adduced on a previous occasion. He pointed out that an ordinary education was incomplete without instruction in Saored history. The same objection would apply to the teaching of all history, as a thousand references to the subject must be found in all books used in that department of education. At tho same time, he did not oppose the proposal of the Minister of Education, in so far as Sacred history, as such, was to be exempted on the ground of conscience. The motion was seoonded by Mr Cunningbam. Mr Stevens referred to the wording of the Aet, which was essentially of a declaratory character, and indicated that the teaching under it should be entirely secular. He had yet to learn that saored history was a seoular subject, and he pointed out that the " instruction " referred to in the Aot was that in which the prejudices of a particular class of religionists might be offended ; and be thought the proposal under consideration was altogether inconsistent with the decision of the Legislature, which was the result of earnest and careful deliberation. He believed, in this instance, that the department had committed an error in suggesting the consideration of what he could not but regard as a direct innovation. Indeed, he felt so strongly on the subject that he should feel it impossible to retain his seat on the Board if he thought that the Board was going to assume to itself the powers of the Legislature. He believed it would do a mischief to the cause of educations and instruction under the Aot generally. He, therefore, proposed as an amendment—" That the Minister of Education be requested to state whether, in view of section 84, sub-Beotion 2, of the Education Aot, it is oompetent for the Board to include in their programme of examination for pupil teaohers, or instruction in schools, the subject of saored history." Mr Tanored seoonded the amendment, and ■aid he should oppose anything which in any way conflicted with the Act. The Bev. Charles Eraser could never think that the Act meant them to go to suoh an extreme as indicated in the position assumed by Mr Stevens. He (Mr Eraser) advocated the teaohing of sacred history as a natural part of instruction in literature, and contended that without it no education should be considered complete. Mr Cunningham thought Mr Stevens assumed that saored history meant necessarily instruction in religion. But he did not regard it in this light, and suggested if need were that they might alter the word sacred, and substitute ancient history. The question was then put, the result being that the original motion was lost on a division by four to three, the record being : —Ayes— Mr Cunningham, Mr Eraser, Mr Webb. Hoes—Mr Stevens, Mr Tanored, and this chairman, who also gave his casting vote against the motion. Mr Stevens then addressed himself to his amendment, which had then become the substantive motion, submitting that the Board should question tbe Minister as to the power of the'Board in this matter. Mr Cunningham thought the tenor of the Minister's letter indicated a presumption that the Board had the power under certain conditions. Mr Eraser said he should not oppose the resolution, because, on a reply being obtained from the department, the subject could be reopened, and he had hopes of being then able to pass a resolution tantamount to that which bad just been moved by him and negatived. The Chairman said the matter was one of very great importance, and the course to be taken was perhaps the best they could have adopted under the circumstances. The resolution moved by Mr Stevens was then put and carried. With regard to the proposed sohoel of arts, * The Chairman intimated that a conference between the committees of this Board and the Canterbury College had been held, and certain resolutions passed thereat, whioh he laid before the Board. Miss Kelly, one of the teaohers in the Normal School, sent in her resignation, which was accepted. A letter was read from the master of the Long Beach Main School, asking the Board to reconsider their notice of dismissal'in his case, pleading illness as the cause of low register at last examination. The Board resolved to adhere to its decision. Prom Little River, an application for extra teaching power was granted. The Kaiapoi Island school committee wrote suggesting that a former teacher might be appointed to the sohool. The Chairman said the question involved an important principle—whether in fact a teacher who had reoeived a retiring allowance ought to be retained in the service of the Board. It was ultimately resolved to allow the gentleman named to oontinue in his present position, but not to make the appointment permanent. A report on the Ashburton school was read, from which it appeared that the inspector found much room for unfavorable comment, many of the standards being far below the mark, and thestate of the school generally indicating loose management. The Board resolved to forward a copy of the report to the chairman of the school committee, and a suggestion by the chairman to the effect that in such cases the schools should be subjected to an interim special examination, met with general favor. A number of routine matters were dealt