South Canterbury Times. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1882.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2971, 3 October 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1882.

The Timaru School Committee were last night called upon to handle a delicate and somewhat difficult subject. As a very large number of bur readers are deeply interested in the welfare of the Timaru school, we propose to review the whole question. Considering that the interests of about a thousand children are bound up, with the school, the importance of the subject now under discussion cannot very well be over-rated. The facts are, briefly, as follows ;—Some time ago the Committee, finding from various sources that things were not going on smoothly in the school, requested the Inspector to furnish them with a report upon it. The Inspector did report upon it, and laid the result of his observations before the Board at its last meeting. The Board declined to take action, without consulting the Committee, and asked that body to consider the report and make recommendations upon it. The Committee thereupon expressed some dissatisfaction at the action of the Inspector in placing his report, which they had asked for, before the Boarti first, instead of before them. This affair appears to us to be only another illustration of the slip-shod, thoroughl y unsatisfactory nature of the provisions of the A.ct; ami, we cannot help adding, of the culpable negligence of the Board. The Board ought, "long ago, to have required their , officer; to report, in the plainest terms, upon the school. They did not, however, -and at length the Committee request the Inspector to undertake the work. The Inspector, in complying with tho request, placed himself, unconsciously, in a false position; ha acted rather as

amicus curie than as a departmental officer. Yet, feeling bound by his official position, he tendered his report first to the Board ; hoping to conciliate the Committee while yielding due deference to the Board. His action appears to os to have been perfectly natural and correct, having undertaken the thing. But he never should have undertaken it, except by request of the Board, or on his own inspectoral responsibility. Above all, the Board, we repeat, should have required at his hands a report, two years ago. However, having passed by that little sore spot, the Committee entered upon a consideration of the subject of a report. The Inspector stated that there existed an utter want of harmony and of subordination in the school staff, and a general decline of tone, and in language somewhat too vague and guarded and mild, pointed out defects. It was necessary to read between the lines of this document. So read, it amounted to a heavy indictment against those in charge of the school. The Committee, holding this in their hands, and already in possession of certain facts which had induced them to seek an official inspection of the institution, found themselves compelled, in justice to themselves, the staff, the pupils, and the public, to call upon the Head Master for some explanation of the state of things referred to. Beports were forthcoming last night, from the Head Master, and from the Head Mistress, The latter fenced the question, and did everything but come to the point. Her letter consisted of a string of clever generalities. The Head Master, however, stated the case (from his side) cleverly enough. The fact, according to Mr Scott, is simply, this : that bis authority is perpetually set at defiance by the Head Mistress, and by implication he throws whatever blame there may be to throw upon her. This brought the Committe a step forward. They held an evasive letter from the mistress, and . a direct statement from the master. They had., .in iconsidering these, also to take into account what was within the scope of their own observation, and that of the public generally. The matter stands simply thus, on the showing of both the Inspector and the Head Master :~- 1. that the school is badly arranged ; 2, that there exists an utterly irreconcileable feud between the two highest members of the staff; 3, that the tone of the school is suffering from these conditions. On these considerations it was for the Committee to form ah opinion as to the best course to pursue." Perhaps in a more ordinary case they would have found it easier to do so. But in this instance there was at stake, not, perhaps, so much the professional reputation as the comfort ,of a gentleman who outside the ' school is deservedly popular. Every member of the Committee, without a single exception, it may be safely assumed, regards Mr Scott withthe highest esteem and respect. The Committee unanimously said, in effect, that his attainments were unquestionable, his character blameless, his professional status secure. But apart from this it was a fact patent to every member that the school over which Mr , Scott , presided was in an eminently unsatisfactory state. In short, there was a want of smart discipline, and the absence of a strong controlling hand was painfully evident. There was a highly conscientious, a kindly- hearfedj and able master, but there was not a vigorous commander. • On the other hand there was a person at the head of the female department whom, no authority could keep in her place—a very Arab. Against this eminently qualified (if somewhat unmanageable) lady a previous conviction had been recorded, however. She has been before charged with insubordination, and on that occasion she maintained her position only by dint of the exertions of her many friends. * The Committee therefore considered that she was simply an “ irreconcilable,” and recommended her dismissal. They, at the same time, required the Head Master to reorganise his staff more fairly, and: to assume absolute control of all the teachers:; This, they trust, the Board will approve, and the school profit by. There was a feeling in the minds of some members that the interests of the school would be best served by the dismissal of both Master and Mistress. If, indeed, dismissal were to take

place, we are inclined to think that would be the most logical course to pursue. But we should not counsel dismissal at all. The two persons concerned are excellent teachers, whom it would be no easy matter to replace. And, against the simple dismissal of Miss Forbes, we have, this argument to offer: she,, is not the responsible head, and the responsible head ought long ago to have reported upon her contumacy, when she might have been justly dismissed. In this case, however, she is under no direct charge. Her name is brought in by the Head Master while explaining a charge which lies at his own door. This complaint of his should have been made before, voluntarily, and it might then have been acted upon. We maintain that the complaint now made does not afford sufficient grounds for dismissing Miss Forbes, and that to pass such a sentence upon her is to make her a scape goat in an awkward business. We grant that the dismissal of that lady would be quite warranted on the ground of expediency, but not on that of justice. It is plain that while. she and the Head Master remain in the schoo’i together there can be no peace. We firmly believe it would be better for. the lady herself as well as for the school that she should obtain another appointment in which her undoubted qualifications would enable her to shine. We should not object to her dismissal on a distinct statement from the Inspector, or on a voluntary complaint from the Head Master. The dismissal would then be justly made; Now, Miss Forbes receives her dismissal on the ground of expediency, Sind against that we protest. We should suggest another course, and we invite the Board’s attention to this suggestion, jjet the Board direct its Inspector to assume a dictatorship of the School for a term ; let him have absolute carte blanche to re-organi.se the staff in the manner which bis professional

knowledge may suggest; let him set the machine going, and let everything work under his personal supervision, for a time. He would then issue certain instructions to all teachers, regarding their duties, and relative positions. There would be no friction then, we feel pretty confident; and at the end of, say, three months, the school might be handed over again to the Head Master. We predict, with confidence, that if some coarse like this is pursued a new spirit will be infused into the School, and any individuals whom contumacious temper now keeps in a fighting attitude, will have learned a very profitable lesson of submission to authority. If such individual should ■: not then have learned such lesson, she should, without donbt, be instantly dismissed. There is one point in connection with the internal management of the institution, which we feel called upon to notice. In so large and well-equipped a school as this, there is no necessity for the Head Master to teach regularly, and the less he does so, the.better for the school. “ The master’s eye does more than both hie hands.” There is quite sufficient occupation for the chief, in control, by directing, and supervising his subordinates. Against a calm, steady, vigilant discipline, where not the slightest suspicion of nepotism existed, and the. most inflexible, impartial justice prevailednO temper, however violent or difficult, no “. passive resistance ” or active mutiny, could be effectual, and the offender would speedily subside or retire. Such, it seems to us, is the position of matters. We wish to see no dismissals, but we certainly do long to see the Timaru School once more in harmonious working order*