The Temuka Leader. WEDNESDAY, JULY 23, 1879.
Wmssr we published our former remarks on the dispute between the. South Canterbury Board of. Education ami the Timaru School Committee the matter was still sub jv.dice, and accordingly we reserved comment. Tho importance of the question induces us to return to it now, after all parties have been heard, and when we can no longer prejudice .its , issue. The upshot of ir al!, as our readers will be aware, was that the School Committee resigned in a bed} 7 —the only course in. deed that was open tc them consistent with, self-respect. Their conduct is 'generally approved of, and the action they took from first to last is pronounced firm and well considered. Wo believe there is not a Committee in the country but thoroughly approves-of the way in which tlie Timaru one has conducted itself in a quarrel that has long been apprehended. The dispute begins with the refusal of the Board to ratify the election of the candidate chosen as setond master of. the Timaru school ; it ends with the unanimous resignation of the Committee. Between the two the action of the Committee was in no point hasty or irresolute. When they were directed by the Board to reconsider their choice they did not post off an impolite reply, but took up the bundle of testimonials once more, calmly went through them, and when they found that their former judgment still seemed the best they went to the pains of explaining in detail what principles had guided their choice. Now this was the very reverse of iuvit'ng a quarrel, and showed that the only wish of the Committee was to have a trustworthy and capable master for their school. Their action in resigning was such as would naturally suggest itself to gentlemen who could no longer work amicably with iheir superiors in power. It was furthermore tho shortest .and most effectual May of silencing, the quarrel, and certainly the only course Us at would cause tho Board regret. Tho only consideration that could have deterred them is that in the interval the affairs of trie Timaru school may slip into hopeless disorder. In resigning the}' have the sympathy ol the public, mid it is very doubtful whether any gentlemen will . he found to offer,
/.•.•mvi l.v>‘s .fui' tbs vacancy. V/m-thm - m net, the Board liiuo learned that fiolmol Jornii-itfccfi ire composed of iiien of spirit, whose Heelings tire .vnsniva to Mights ■ and we venture to piophocy that Iho South Canterbury Board o2: L ' if ■ tion will avoid rather than invite eoi.;:sions AVtlii School Committees for the future. Nothing would have pleased them better- than to have seen the Committee hold to their post, and they would have ft;lt the keenest delight in choosing the candidate over them. The whole com!net of the Board, as shown by the revelations made with regard to examination papers and other matters, places it beyond doubt that it was the Board not the School Committee who courted the quarrel. And they have had it to repletion. The Committee in resigning took the
The Committee in resigning took the opportunity of bringing the question before the Ministefttf or £ Jfiducatio ll , and it is to be hoped that a of legislation will be set right.* The words of the clause in the Education Act as it stands at.j:present are as follows “ The Board of each district shall be entitled to appoint teachers for every school under its control, or to remove such teachers from one school to any other school within the district, provided that the Committee nui} 7 recommend teachers to the Board for the appointment, and may also recommend the suspension or dismissal of any such teacher ; but no appointment, suspension, or dismissal shall take place until the Committee have been first consulted.” In plain English this means that the Board and the Committee must agree in their choice of (heir man ; the Committee “recommend,” that is elect; the Board “appoint,’'' that is have rigid of veto. And further we cannot go; but as long as the Committee draw one way, and it pleases the Board to draw' the other, so long does everything - remain at a standstill.
But the essence of law is Reinterpretation thereof, and in most districts a practise has been in use which makes- a very good system out of this faulty clause. As it stands it implies accumulation of labour, for both Board and Commit toe have to travel over the same ground, only with different purpose, the one to elect the other to confirm. As commonly worked it effects division of labour. The applications are sent in to the Board of Education, who thereupon exercise their peculiar function and choose out such as are fit in character and attainments. These and these only 7 are sent forward to the School Committee, who make their selection of the candidate who is best suited to the peculiar circumstances and demands of their school. Having made their choice they apply to the Board for a formal confirmation, find in giving this tho. Board “appoint” as required by the Act. , Thia-mYtliod gives duo importance to and Committee, and eff’ecJsxTvery rational division of labour. Board are best able to judge of the acquirements of candidates, and the value to bo attached to the multifarious things that .come under the. name “ testimonials,” while the School Committee are fittest judges of the stamp of man that will suit their own case, and they are 'perfectly free to use any private knowledge they may have of a candidate’s ability or integrity. The exercise of the veto becomes a mere form, and the invidiousness of a censorship) is avoided. If both parties are *o have a . voice in sc-lecting teachers this system is plainly the only safe one to follow ; if the function is to be reserved for one, that one should be the School Committee. They certainly are more f-hwoly interested in the appointment/ and/it.is complained on all sides that their powers are already severely contracted. .
The South Canterbupy Board has made it a custom to send forward only a few of the most qualified candidates, and when the Timaru School, Committee received the nine it was a reasonable presumption were qualified. The fir.-t cause of all the coil 'was the sending forward by the '‘Board, contrary to aT their pre\ions custom, a candidate whom they hold to be unqualified. It was ties that called into being for the first time their dormant right of rejection, and if it was not done designedly to tench school committees humility, it was at least a gross piece of little credit on t'lie'’Boprd that, after all, the final choice is loft unconditional!} 7 in the hands of the chairman. But the most insulting feature of tho whole business is the -scattering of telegrams widcoast that the Board have at length made up their mind to put up no longer with the meddling of school committees, who do all in their power to fetter the action of the Board. Such is the purport of a Timaru telegram flint we found in an Oamaru paper the other day. This is going abroad to learn news of ourselves with a vengeance, and our Southern friends, who are used to the plain, honest ways of the general By of committees, will pity ns no doubt. But' those who live amongst ns will know different. There are few more worthy than the plain, straightforward, publicspirited men who sit on our school commit toes. What they do is done for no reward and Utile thanks; they have in name less honor than the more pretentious Board-ma", hut their duties arc not lessened as their sphere is circumscribed. They have the surveillance, of iho wants
o! their own Jocal'ty, and in country distracts meet at the greatest inconvenience ; and without expecting the smallest return they address themselves cheerfully to the business before them. Uni ke 'the Board of Education, they have no fluids to banquet nn / and no crumbs fall in the ,-hape of travelling allowances. If their rhetoric is at times home-spun, it is very bad taste to sneer at it—as a journal has in this (asc done—in the style of pert professionals whose small whispered wit is inspired by the appearance, of smockfrocks in the jury box. Indeed many of the characteristics of jurymen belong to school committees, and v/hat Sir Edward Creasy has said of the one may be applied to the other : “The thoughtful observer cf their enduring zeal in the unpaid discharge of a burdensome function must reverence from the very depth of his heart the plain, good, honest, unlettered men who derive ho dignity but from the performance of their duties.”
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18790723.2.6
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Temuka Leader, Issue 164, 23 July 1879, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,460The Temuka Leader. WEDNESDAY, JULY 23, 1879. Temuka Leader, Issue 164, 23 July 1879, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.