THE RECENT TRUANCY CASE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 3763, 18 April 1907, Page 3

THE RECENT TRUANCY CASE.

Hi—dißHifnfft report to the Committee. At Monday night’s School Committee meeting, the headmaster forwarded a copy of a letter he forwarded to Magistrate Thompson in reference to a truancy case that was heard at the last sitting of the Court. It is as follows : Sir,— By this mail I forward the Manawatu Herald for 26th March, containing a report of the S.M. Court, held at Foxton on March 25th, and I beg most respectfully to call your attention to the truancy case of Samuel Feek (marked"). The Clerk of the Court informs me that Feek was not sworn, nor placed in the box, but that he addressed the Court from the body of the Hall. Now, I consider that my reputation has been injured, that the Court has been misled by Feek, and a miscarriage of justice has been enacted. I humbly beg of you, therefore, to make an order for the case (which was dismissed) to be tried again at the next sitting of your Court in Foxton, and that - Samuel Feek be placed upon his oath, and that all necessary witnesses be subpoenaed. In support of my prayer, I beg to submit the following explanations and evidence : Neither Gordon Feek nor any other boy has been expelled from the Foxton School. The Chairman and Secretary (letter enclosed) deny the truth or accuracy of Peek’s statement, about seeing or consulting the School Committee. S. Feek was summoned for his son’s (Gordon) absence for the week, February nth to 15th. Gordon’s attendances for that week were—

Feek stated that when his daughter had arrived late after attending a music lesson she had been marked absent.

This could hardly be, as the rolls v being marked twice during each K sitting, viz., 9.30, 10.50, 1.30 and 3. A child present at 9.30, his attendance would be marked in black ink ; a child coming in between 9.30 and 10.50 is marked present in red ink; and after that “absent” with a red a. The mistress, Miss Voysey, assures me she has never mdrked Lilian Feek ' absent because she was late. (A letter from Miss Voysey enclosed). Feek further complained that the children had to answer to numbers instead of their names, and that this caused confusion among the children. Lilian Feek is 13 years, of age, and is in a class of 20 girls, numbered consecutively one to 20. At 9.30 a.m. each of these 20 girls would, starting at No. 1. callout in turn their numbers, and should a child be absent the teacher calls her number out but no mark is put to her name. Out of these 20 girls theie may be two or three of them absent. At 10.50 the teacher calls out these three names, and enquires of their absence or otherwise. If they are present they speak for themselves and their late attendance is recorded in red ink. j If absent the letter a in red ink is ■ recorded. With all these precautions it is absolutely certain in my •mind that no mistake can occur. To my knowledge this method of marking the rolls has been in vogue in all large schools for the last thirty years, and I have never heard a complaint about it before. On the other hand. I do not know a method which is easier or secures greater accuracy. Peek’s children are noted for their irregular attendance. Gordon Peek’s attendance for last quarter was as follows: —0,0,10,8,7,2,9,9, 6,5,8,3=67 out of no ; Lilian Peek’s was 7,8,10,7,6,4,9,8,9,3,4, 6=Bl out of no. . Foxton, 27th March. ' Mr Adams, Headmaster. Sir, —In reference to your en- , 4 quiry re S. Feek. This man did not make any complaint to this committee in regard to the alleged I - expulsion of his boy, Gordon jpeek. A. E). ClEmett, Chairman, Foxton School Committee. The School, Foxton, March 27th, 1907. - Dear Mr Adams,— Mr Peek’s contention that he was summoned through a fault of mine is entirely without founda- ■ tion. Lilian Feek has never been . ' marked absent by me when she has come in late. I mark the rolls twice every morning, and twice every .afternoon, and a mistake cannot occur. —I am, yours faithfully, Alice Voysey.

M T W Th F n 12 13 14 15 A A a A la