THE LATE FLOGGING CASE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4442, 15 June 1875, Page 2

THE LATE FLOGGING CASE.

TO THE EDITOR. OF THE NEW ZE.AI.AXT> lISfES. Sir,—This point lias boon overlooked in the many letters on the flogging case, that the discipline of the school must suffer unless the cane punishes gross Impertinence. Dismiss the boy, say some. What would he care about that ? In England dismissal from a high school is indeed a penalty, and would, if known, hinder the boy from winning a cadetship. But how would he suffer here? In all schools the cane mu|t be used, and more in a small school than in a large one. In a large school it is comparatively easy to keep order. Boys like discipline ; they expect it in school; and in a large school the majority keepunder the minority. In a small school the minority have more power. If the boys thoroughly understand that they will be well thrashed for impertinence, they wiU not try to be impertinent. »Xh such a school the cane would be • scarcely used at all. Arnold would have thrashed soundly any boy who had dared to do what has been done here. To thrash a boy for blundering in his lesson would be'a mistake ; but this thrashing was most thoroughly deserved. I wish when the magistrates sentenced the master they had sentenced the boy to make an open apology for what ho did. Say that he was thrashed,, he has got damages. But where is the reparation for the injury done to the school J—l am, &c., June 14. An Old Master. tO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sir, —I am not going to trouble you with any argument on the merits or demerits of Mr. Pilking ton, as the public voice has, in spite of the strenuous efforts and underhand strategy of some, emphatically declared in his favor. But there is one question arising out of this case of very serious importance to all teachers, especially to those in charge of such public schools as are compelled to receive all comers, namely, what is the moderate punishment which the law allows the headmaster to inflict ? Teachers should not rest satisfied until the question is definitely answered, for they are at present in the cruel position of being amen&bla . undefined' law, and are liable at any time unconsciously to overstep the narrow boundary drawn no one knows where between positive duty and imputed criminality. In fact, a sort of barometrical line, which may vary with the temperament, education, or digestion of the presiding ■ magistrate, alone divides what teachers must do from what they must not do. I say "must do," for in spiteof the assertions of mock philanthropists, the exigencies of discipline in a large public daily school leave the teacher no choice but to use the rod. This will never be disputed by those who have had practical experience in the matter, and they only are entitled to speak upon the question.—l am, &c, A Teacher. Wellington, June 14.