The Daily News. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1901. CONTROL OF INSPECTORS OF SCHOOLS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 206, 5 September 1901, Page 2

The Daily News. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1901. CONTROL OF INSPECTORS OF SCHOOLS.

What has taken place in Wellington should go a long way to help to forward the movement to place Inspectors of Schools under the control of the Education Department. We have always contended that the full value of the. knowledge and experience is not' and never will be received by the public so long as inspectors are under the control of Education/Boards. If desir-'j [able it would be easy to quote instances! where inspectors have been very much] hampered by members of Education] Boards who have failed to grasp the] full value of the inspectors suggestions. | [ The fear of offending the members of I the Board by whom they are employed is also a clog on Inspectors who nave not the strength of character or cannot afford to be independent. That this danger is a real live one is clearly proved in the case of Mr. Lee, the senior Inspector of the Wellington Education District. Mr. Lee k ai man wbo has filled many responsible positions as a teacher, and was selected j from a large number of applicants for the position of Inspector of the WelliDgtonjßoard|2B years ago. During the whole of these years be has done excellent service for the cause of education, and he has been recognised as an authority on education throughout the colony. During his term of service the Wellington district has grown until the services of three Inspectors have been found necessary. In spite of the responsible position he held, his years of service, and because Mr Lee has bad the misfortune to offend the members of the Board he serves, he is dismissed from their service in disgrace, without right of appeal. His offence was that in giving evidence before the late Commission on teachers salaries, he adversely criticised thefadministration of the Wellington Education Board, The result is that the cause of education in the Wellington district loses the value of the ripe experience of one of the strongest educationalist in the colony. If any argument were needed to show the wisdom of the proposal to place Inspectors in an independent position it is to be found here. The weakness of the position taken up by the Wellington Board may be judged by the fact that every newspaper throughout the Wellington i the

action of the Board in very severe! terms. We regret that want of space ( will not allow us to quote their remarks in full. The New Zealand Times, in the course of a leDgfchy and trenchant article, concludes : —But, apart altogether from the merits of the case, tlie way in which the Board hoi acted towards Mr. Lee is the reverse of creditable. Of course any ordinary worker who criticises and finds fault with his employer receives no sympathy when he is summarily dischprged ; but some allowance ought to be made for the .mistake of an important officia 1 , animated by zeal in the public interest, and speaking with all the weight of twenty-eight years' experience. We should indeed be sorry if the impression went abroad that faithful public servants of the New Zealand people have nothing else to look forward to in their old age than harsh treatment such as been dealt out to Mr. Lee." The Wellington Post, also, which cannot be accused of any desire to strengthen departmental control, concludes an equally forcible article as follows : —The time and manner of Mr. Lee's retirement creates a suspicion 60 strong as almost to amount to certainty that he is not dismissed on grounds of public policy so much as for personal reasons, and to punish him for stating what he honestly believed to be true about the Board's use or misuse of the patronage, and before a tribunal where honestly to do his duty to the country he was obliged to utter the truth that was in him. From facts which have reached us we are inclined to believe that there was much truth in Mr. Lse's statement?, and that, particularly in the matter of pupil-teichers' appointment?, the Board has allowed personal predilections frequently to override merit. In any case, Mr. Lee frankly stated hia opinions, and because be did this the opportunity would sesra to have been seized to bring about his fall. , . The circumstances attending his retirement are a serious refection upon the fioirf, and will so shake public confidence in its impartiality that people will begin to hope for greater centralisation. We can hardly believa that any department responsible, to Parliament would dismiss an old and tried servant in the brutal manner j adopted by the Board.