South Canterbury Times, MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2437, 10 January 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1881.

Rumours of various kinds have lately obtained currency respecting the intentions of the Government, in reference to State education. The Ministerial beagles of the press have given voice, but they have apparently got on a false scent, or probably on no scent at all, for their notes are singularly discordant. The reimposition of school fees has been talked of in conjunction with the readmission of the Bible, but it is emphatically denied that either will be attempted. It is alleged that the transference o 1 the portfolio for education from Mr Rolleston to Mr Dick indicates no intended change of front,that Mr Dick

lias accepted the inevitable, and that notwithstanding his obligation to the Bible-in-schools party, he will carry out the secular system in its integrity. This is doubtless reassuring, but it would be more so if the colony knew that the Minister of Education had bis heart thoroughly in his work, and that he was carrying out a system of which his inner conscience approved. Granted, however, that the new Minister has condescended to forego his conscientious scruples, it does not follow that the education policy of the colony is out of danger. We believe it is menaced by dangers of a very serious nature, and that if the people remain silent, the graceful model, reared in a time of fictitious prosperity, will be cut and hacked out of all shape in a transient hour of adversity. The danger, we apprehend, lies in the ruthless pruning that the tree is likely to undergo at hands of the false friends of State education. The latter are numerous, and they were never more active or bitter than at present when fresh taxation is suspended, like the sword of Damocles by a fragile hair, over their State improved properties. If they can hut achieve their purpose, instead of judiciously trimming the tree of knowledge, they will saw and hew till its symmetry and vigor are destroyed. In making these remarks we are not denying the fact that the present system, if not extravagant, is too expensive to dovetail with the existing circumstances of the colony. It is generally admitted that there is room for a good deal of retrenchment in the education department. But there is a danger of retrenchment being carried too far, especially if it is entrusted to unfriendly hands. We believe there are a good many Danks in the colony who believe in sterling dirt and ignorance—that the peculiar Danks frame of mind is not strictly confined to the Mount Cook School Committee, hut that it permeates even Parliament, and perhaps to some extent the Treasury benches. If we ventured to suggest, for instance, that the Colonial Treasurer has a far higher opinion of the usefulness of the lazy armed constables, who dwell, like the children of lleclub, in tents, than he has of the moderate detachment of school teachers that the State supports, hut who, unlike the former, are not concentrated in Taranaki, we believe we would not be far astray. If the cry of the Ministerial beagles means anything at all, it means that if the State school is preserved at all, it will be submitted to a very rough overhauling. The flesh will probably he removed from the hones, and for once the spectacle will he presented of an animated skeleton

—a system of free, secular, and compulsory education, yet so feeble and emaciated as to be scarcely worth having.We have heard it stated that the great object in removing the portfolio of education from Mr Rollcston to Mr Dick is to subject the schools to a system approaching that which Nicolas Nicklehy experienced when ho sojourned in Do-the-boys Hall. Mr Rolleston was too genial and considerate for a Dominie Squeers, and hence the new appointment. It is now stated that on the assembling of Parliament the new Minister of Education, acting in the capacity of the representative of those benevolent land-marks, who consider free grass better than free education, and who maintain that the profits on greasy wool are of more importance than the cultivation of the human intellect, will propose an ingenious and highly practical method of getting rid of the greater part of what is called the “educational incubus.” We understand that it is proposed to do away with the infant department by making the school age range from 8 to 13, instead of from 5 to 13 as at present. In addition to this the capitation allowance will be reduced from £3 15s to £2 10s. This is merely rumor, but we believe it interprets pretty accurately the proposal that is likely to be made by the Government. A proposition of the kind is likely to be warmly supported. It will probably have the entire sympathy and concurrence of those who have lately been urging a policy of retrenchment and economy as a means of escaping a just system of direct taxation. Will the country stand passively by and see the State school emasculated, and to a great extent destroyed ? We do not deny that the present system is too costly, but to suddenly withdraw twothirds of its sustenance is to endanger its existence. Many will agree witli the abolition of the infant department, but to limit the school age to eight years is preposterous. To reduce the capitation allowance from £3 15s to £2 10s is simply to undermine the free national system. If such a proposal is carried into effect, the schools now in existence will have to become aided schools, and fees will thus be reimposed, or five out of every six will have to be closed. These rumors may be denied, and they will possibly be be declared to be foundationless, but to be forewarned is to be forearmed, and we deem it our duty to give them the utmost publicity, so that when the critical time comes the public may not have dust thrown in their eyes. It was alleged subsequent to the last general election that the majority of the constituencies were in favor of the Property Tax ; but we must have no loophole of this kind left for the justification of the opponents of national education. If there are Members of Parliament bent on political suicide let them go in heartily for starving the State school out of existence, but they must be deprived of the opportunity of excusing themselves afterwards, by raising the plea that their constituents and the country demanded retrenchment. The country demands a thorough revision of the present incidance of taxation, so that revenue of ample amount may be raised from those who can best bear the strain, but the people, we presume, will never consent to a false economy in connection with State education, which will necessitate the re-imposition of school fees, and result in the destruction of the present national system.