ARUNDEL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2702, 23 August 1894, Page 3

ARUNDEL.

Meeting of Householders. A meeting of householders in the Arundel School District was held on Monday last at 1 p.m. in the schoolhouse. There were present the Revs. George Barclay (Waimate), White (Pleasant Point), and Mr R. H. Pearpoint, members of the Education Board, besides twentytwo householders. The Rev. George Barclay, who was voted to the chair, explained his reasons for calling the meeting. The board had received rather conflicting* accounts for and against certain propositions with regard to the school, and they really found it difficult to decide on the matter. The deputation from the board had come there to collect data as to whether or not the school should be shifted from its present site. Therefore he only asked *or information from householders, and it was for the deputation to make up their mind afterwards as to what course to pursue. With regard to enlarging the school there was no difficulty in forming an opinion about that, as it was only a question ■simply of money. The chief question was: should the school be shifted to the Arundel Township ? He understood that the committee were unanimously in favor of keeping the school in its present position. Ho would ask some one on the other side to make some statements in favor of the proposal. , The Rev. Mr White enquired the distances of neighboring schools from Arundel, and they were given as follows : —Raugitata Station, 7 miles; Scotsburn, 6 miles; Orari Bridge, 5} miles.

Mr McMaster said that in the Arundel village there were some 30 children of school age, and immediately outside the village there were 11 children, making in all 41 from that part of the district. He would hand in a list of names in support of his statements. Thus these 41 children had to walk down from the township for the sake of about 15 from other parts of the district. There was po, doubt that people had tafcen up land in the Arundel Township believing that the school would be shifted to the school reserve there. He believed that they wore entitled to a school. Then they had been asked to pay the “ aided ” money debt wh(ch had been contracted before tljey came into the district, apd they were not entitled to pay it. They had come to the conclusion that if the board put an addition to the school and kept it in its present site, they would put up a school of their own in the township on their own freehold. (The Rev. Mr Barclay : “ That’s right, that’s liberal.”) Another thing, they wanted a Sunday School and a plaqe of- worship in the towhsiiip, and' if they could not got the school they were determined to bui : d a hall and use it as a school. *Mr Pearpoint asked the distances from the Arundel township to the present school, and they were giyan maximum distance 2J m ;i .ea\ average distance 2 ipileq. - ■ Mr. W. Robertson was not interested in the school in any way, but he considered that the school was in its proper place at present. |n the first place the housahqlders on the school side of the district boro the expense of building the schqol, and the township householders did not. Besides, it was not fair to deprive half the children of a school for t the sake of giving the township people a

school at their doois. Every man could not expect a school at his own particular door.

Mr McMaster said there was not a school committee metrber on his side of the district, except Mr G. Patrick, so that was the reason the committee were unanimously in favor of keeping the school where it is.

Mr Pearpoint, having gone through the school register, mentioned that there were 48 on the roll, with an attendance of 40. Out of this number 20 of the children came from the part of the district desirous of keeping the school where it is. Mr McMaster said taat Mr Pearpoint must have counted in children that lived out of the school district but attended the school.

The Rev. Mr Barclay maintained that if children lived in the North Island and went to school at. Arundel they would have to be counted in; the school district had nothing to do with it. Mr Patrick noticed on Mr McMaster’s list names of children from the north side of the river. He might mention that these children could not be counted on, as the residents on the other side of the river were moving in the matter of getting a school for themselves under the North Canterbury Board. The Rev. Mr Barclay asked how mmy of the 20 children would be deprived of a school if the building was shifted to Arundel township. S? Mr Patrick said the whole of these children would be without a school, as it would be too far to walk.

.Mr Woodley confirmed Mr Patrick’s statement with respect to householders on the other side of the river moving to get a school of their own, and he thought that the only children directly benefited by the school being shifted would be those in Arundel Township. He thought that the present site was the moat suitable one in the district, aud they would best retain a good school by keeping it where it is. Another thing, by shifting the school to Arundel Township, the Scotsburn school might be affected. The distance from Scotsburn to Arundel Township was 3J miles.

The Rev. G. Barclay said the deputation had now sufficient data to go upon. Of course he understood that seeing the board’s impecuniosity the people in Arundel Township were prepared to contribute very handsomely to the expense of having the school shifted. Mr McMaster asked “ What about the debt ? Shall we have to pay that too ?” Mr Jeffries said there would have been no debt on the school if the Arundel Township people had kept their promise. It was jealousy that caused the debt. The Township gave their promise .to send their children and after the school was built they refused to send them. Mr Patrick agreed with Mr Jeffries in this, and that when the school was built the people in and about the Arundel Township contributed about 15s, while the other residents gave about £2O in money and labour. If the school was shifted what would these householders get for their money and labour ? The Rev. Mr Barclay said they would not get back a shilling. The money was impounded. (Laughter.) It was mentioned that the land on which the school was built would sell at about £1 per acre, and the chairman said that would not go far towards the expense of shifting the school. Mr Woodley asked why the board was not compelled to build schools in cases where 25 children were guaranteed. The Rev. Mr Barclay said he did not know how the Government were spending their money, but certainly the Education Boards were not receiving it. . Perhaps they could find out if they wrote to Mr Masliu, M.H.R. Mr Pearpoint said that the building of a school was a contract between the board and the Arundel people in the present case. There was nothing in the Act to force the board to build a school if they did not think it necessary.

The Rev. Mr White said it was optional with the board whether they should build new schools.

Mr Woodley said in that case why did it not apply to Geraldine, Temuka, and other larger places I Why not make them in all fairness contribute to the building of their schools ? Mr Fearpoiut said it was the capitation received by the large schools that kept the small ones going. The Rev. Mr Barclay did not think it fair of the Government that people of Arundel or anywhere else should be mulcted for the building of a school, but it was not the fault of the board, for they had no money to spend on school buildings, It certainly was not free education, and he thought it a miserable thing on the part of the Government, seeing that people were taxed quite, enough in other ways. Mr Pearpoiut said that he noticed that the Government were likely to make a grant for school buildings.

Mr Patrick asked whether they could discuss the matter of a rebate on the local school debt.

The Rev. Mr Barclay said that the deputation could not discuss that matter. Mr Patrick proposed a hearty vote of thanks to the deputation. Mr McMaster seconded this motion, and the meeting terminated.