CORRESPONDENCE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XIV, Issue 41, 17 February 1879, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor of the " Evening Mail."

Sir— ln your Saturday's issue appears a copy of a circular letter from the master of Greytown school, in the district of Wellington. Feeling that such a letter, if allowed to pass without comment, may do much harm, I will, with your permission, say a little ou the other side. Let me premise that I know nothing personally of Mr Wakeliu, and tbat he may, for aught I know to the contrary, have heen very ill-used indeed. I have no intention of entering into the personal question raised towards the close of his letter, contenting myself with discussing the broader issue raised in the earlier part of his circular. But it is hardly raising a personal question to say that it is clear to tbe most hasty reader that we have not the whole case before us. Before any teacher can be dismissed, two bodies, a School Committee and an Education Board, must be consulted, and must agree. But the existence of these powerf ul safeguards agaiust oppression i9 carefully kept in the background, the Inspector alone being thrust prominently forward as being autocratic. This, however, is a minor matter. My contention is tjvofold.. Ist. That the check imposed by School Committees and Education Boards (always assuming tbat they do their duty) is a sufficient protection to teachers; and, 2nd, that the instituting of " a Tribunal of Appeal to bear complaints against Inspectors " would be simply mischievous, and would afford no guarantee beyond what the law already provides.

Por, as to my first contention, the Education Boards are intended to act, and, in Nelson, have constantly acted, as Courts of Appeal, against the hasty or unjust action of School Committees or Inspectors. There i« nothing to prevent the members of the Education Board from re-examining any school where they have reason to believe that the Inspector has not done the teachers justice. Nor can I admit that, out of a body of men such as Education Boards usually consist of, it would be impossible to select at leaßt two or three who " know something about the procedure and principles of examination." It is only on the unwarrantable assumption tbat School Committees and Education Boards are alike negligent and incompetent tbat the appointment of an additional costly and cumbrous " Tribunal of Appeal " can be justified. The argument from experience is surely worth something; and I will confidently appeal to every reader of this letter whether he can recal to mind a single instance, in the Nelson district, at least, of wrongful dismissal of a teacher. With equal confidence I ask whether many cases have not occurred in which notoriouslyunfit teachers have been retained in office long after they should have been " requested to resign?" The probable result of the action of a Tribunal of Appeal would be as follows:— At the outset two-thirds of the teachers who were unfavorably reported on, with that impatience of an adverse decision which seems inbred in every colonial man, and boy, would call upon the Tribunal to redress the wrongs they had sustained at the bands of their critics. A very busy time would ensue. Without imputing extreme wrongheadedness to the Inspectors, or extreme captiousness to the Tribunal, it may easily be imagined that such a Court would feel bound to justify its very existence by reversing the verdict of the Inspector in some instances. The effect of this would be different on different natures. Touchy men, with strong convictions, would either resign at once or continue to report in much the same style as before, feeling assured that, in the main, they have been in the right. As far as these were concerned the educational pot would be kept in a constant state of simmer, which would soon become an intolerable nuisance to the general public. The weaker brethren among the inspe toral staff wouid, on the other hand, speedily adapt themselves to the altered conditions, by carefully eschewing ail possible cause of offence; and would issije report? which,

compdi-ed witii their previous utterances! would be li As moohjigSt ii to statlight, as to^ .is to viae." Whether lions trhosfe te"eth Had been drawn and whose claws had b^n clipped in this fashion, harmless beasts, in fact, r/tioSe f ut/ctfond 4eie restricted to roaring as gently as any Slicking doves, would be worth keeping at all, is a question that the public would do well to consider seriously before adopting Mr Wakelin's suggestion.—l am, &c, Hear Both Sides.