CENTRAL BOARD OF EDUCATION.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 32, 6 February 1873, Page 2

CENTRAL BOARD OF EDUCATION.

At the meeting of the Central Board, this morning, the following reports were brought up. Tbat on the amendment of the Education Act -was ordered to stand over for discussion next month, and the other, on the Examination for the Provincial Scholarships, was unanimously adopted : — Report op Committee as Examination roa Provincial Scholaeships. Tour Committee understand their duty to have

been to enquire (1) Whether there was any irregularity in the conduct of the . late examination; and (2) whether there is any g-ound for imputing this, or any partiality for or against particular candidates or teachers, to the Examiners.

In order to narrow tbe extensive . field before them, they first applied to the Examiners, on whose motion they were appointed, for a statement of the matters wherein they felt themselves aggrieved or attacked by criticisms and correspondence outside the Board. The statement appended hereto thus obtained is in the form of a complaint against Mr. Sunley, and they forwarded a copy thereof to that gentleman, whose reply is also appended. (1.) From these and other evidence it appears tbat a candidate, named Harris, saw one of the papers in proof at the printers', co as to recognise the handbook from which one question was taken. He did not distinguish himself, and so no injustice arose. Your Committee find that tbe examination papers were not delivered at Mr Hodgson's house but at the Board room or the College and were in proper custody to the time of the examination. This disposes of the suggestions relating to Mr Hodgson's son and nephew 'contained in Mr Sunlt-y's and Mr Luckie's report of young Harris's conversation. Young Hodgson and fc'add have also been examined, the former denies all knowledge of the conversation as then attributed to him, and says that he saw none of the papers at any time. T. Sadd denies having seen any of the papers until they were properly placed in his hands. Your Committee are satisfied of the truthfulness of these boys evidence.

Your Committee see no reason to doubt the fairness and regularity of the proceedings. (2). It appears clear that Mr Sunley in his conversation with Mr Elliott ;.and Mr Luckie merely repeated what he had heard from Harris respecting the examination paper seen by the latter at the printing office, but neither made nor insinuated any charge against the Exaniiners.

Respecting the classification of the boys Harley and Rout it is clear on the evidence of Mr Larchin tbat Mr Sunley did, on applying to enter them as of Hampden -street, inform the Examiners that it was not his own wish alone but that of their parents that they should be so entered. It is also clear that in a published letter (marked A in the attached papers), he most offensively insinuated that the classification was suspended until it appeared whether tbe boys were or were not likely to succeed. Mr Sunley 's statement to your Committee contains an explanation intended to' show that this was not h's' meaning. The explanation is not consistent with other facts of the case, but may be taken as withdrawing the insinuation. On the generosity of the references to Mr. Smith, of Stoke, in Mr. Sunley's printed letters, your Committee do not feel called on to expn ss any opinion. They desire, however, to say of the whole of the discussion out of doors that it would be right in future that teachers, candidates, or others, having complaints to make, or facts to make known respecting the conduct of these public examinations, should communicate in the first instance with the Board. By order of the Committee, J. C. Richmond, Chairman. The following resolution was then unanimously agreed to : — That the Central Board receives with satisfaction the report of the Select Committee, as to the charges made against the Examiners for the Scholarships.