Manamatu Herald. TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 1881. THE COMPULSORY CLAUSES OF THE COMPULSORY CLAUSES OF THE EDUCATION ACT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue 66, 19 April 1881, Page 2

Manamatu Herald. TUESDAY, APRIL 19, 1881. THE COMPULSORY CLAUSES OF THE COMPULSORY CLAUSES OF THE EDUCATION ACT.

At the last sitting of tho R. M. j Cojurt,at tOtyiUi, a case was. tried in which the plaiutiff was the Chairman of the local School Committee, and the defendant' a Mr Mitchell, who was charged with a breach of the 89th section of the Education Act. ThffisiSt/s of tho dase appear to be as follow. Mr Mitchell, who. is a member of the tSchool Ooinuiittee, sent his children 'to : the school for about six mouths after it was opened, but at the end of that time, having a grievances ■ TigViinsfc the • master, withdrew them. Hence the Committee, who had determined to bring into operation the compulsory clauses, opened fire on Mr Mitchell, and charged him with a breach of the 89th clause, which reads as follows :— Subject *o the provisions of this Act. the parent or guardian of any child not less , than seven nor more than thirteen years of age, shall in case such child lives within the distance of two miles measured according to the nearest mad from a public school -within a school district, SHiid -mch child to school for at leaM one half of the period in each year during whivh the school is usually open. To the charge defendant replied that " the period " mentioned referred to a year- from the time the 'School was opened, and said that the school having Ween open only ten months, oat of wln'cii his .children had attended six, he had fulfilled the 'requirements of the clause. The Magistrate.took a different view. He held that " the period " did not mean the full year, but each week, and gave a judgment against Mr Mitchell accordingly. Mr Ward stated that fie interpreted clause 89 by clause 93, which st ites that any parent or guardian ordered to send children to school who refuses or neglects to do so, shall be liable to a penalty of 40s, " and the same proceedings may be taken week by week in the case of failure by 4i«h parent to comply with^he order aforesaid." ' .The simple mention of " week by 'Week " in clause 93 strides one as a yery slender ground upon which to base Mi" Ward's interpretation of fCjause ß9.^ No one knows, better than Mr Ward "that ill fliftaost every penal clause of any. Ao£ th^same or a similar course 1 is* laid down. Iftrst it is pro-yided-tlifttif'BUchT^nd-such an offence is committed the offender may be fiuedjt an«L that if the offence is continued he sball be liable to a penalty for every'day«tif* its 'cdrffthuauce. Instances of this kind will be found scattered broadcast over the Statute ■^Ho^k. i In/ the^ -words of the 89th clause there is nothing to warrant Mr Ward's interpretation. It is there , distinctly stated- tlfat'every child must t(e £ent " to school f>r at least one e£ ihfrpefidd in each year during wnick the school is usually open." \%M plain reading of the clause appaahtp be that each child must be sent to' sciiool at least half of the year. .^ljiia is/a-jyery wise, provision m this country. Hundreds of the settlers in the country districts need during the spring and summer (seasons the assistance of thdit children on tneir farms for sowing and harvesting. The Act and says, " So long as oab half the year your children attend scnool, we will allow you to utilise their labour during the remainder." Under Mr Ward's iuterpr:tation of the Act* ;iUejJhnay -stay at hotne half the week, but mubt go the remainder, r a^is; wfiulllMte'lnast un'satisfactoi'y to the 'teachers, .who^would r .certainly mnohpflfer 'rnivin^ the'cliimreu at school six months cpiiaecutiyely, to, iiKftiug them half of each week. wit .t4f.>R%ce*Cft ittt I bhiailH sciiool year," the defendant appear* to kave

thought that the year hegan when jthe school was opened. This appears tb be an error, as clause 36 defines •the school year as being from the firgt if Jan nary to the thirty-first- of Deaembev* x'lie interpretation placed on the v ActhyMr Ward will place a most power in the hands of policemen, who are charged with ' administering the compulsory clauses. They may not exercise it in all cases. Still, ill View of the decision in Mr Mitchell's case, it will be their duty to enquire "from week to week" into the attendance of the scholars -and-preceed againstrthe parents of the delinquents. No doubt whichever way clause 89 is interpreted there,.^l be diffi culties in administering it. H the dictum of ihe B. M. is correct, there'will be the objections we have :/dinted out. No parent in any district where the compulsory clauses ire in operation will be able to utilise his children's labour for more than two and a-half days in e-tch week; if he does he will b- entirely it the mercy of the police. If, on the other hand, the clause simply ueans that a child must attend thp school one half the time it is open in the yenr, th^re will still be the difficulty of meeting the case of parent: who might keep their children at honit the first half and send them irregularly tke second half of the year. The interpretation adopted by Mr Ward is doubtless be3t calculated to compel the attendance of chilIren ; but it goes too far, for it defeats the' Evident object of the Legislature in permitting the children to be absent " half the period in each year during which the school is usually open." ■