L—B

5

22. Then your view is that that would not be overtaken between six and seven years?— Not so well overtaken. 23. Mr. Walker.] Yon have not quite taken up Mr. Ormond's question. He asked whether specialists differed on a certain point, and yon replied that certain people were not well informed?— I think it will be found that I admitted the diversity of opinion. I should, however, like to say, before leaving this point, that the attendance of very young children in a school where there is only one teacher creates very great difficulties in the conduct of the school; and, further, that these young children in such a school cannot receive a due share of attention or be taught according to the method suited to their years. My opinion as to the admission to school of children of five years of age is connected with the provision of suitable methods of instruction and discipline. 24. From what you said last, I take it you would have the Committee to infer that, in your opinion, the country schools are not in the same position as the town schools in relation to this part of the subject ? —That is quite my meaning. 25. Do you think, Mr. Habens, that, as regards the whole bearing of this question, people who object to the early age of commencing school are very much confused in their ideas regarding its importance, as to whether the children belong to labouring parents, or parents who belong to what we would call the middle class ? —I think there is some confusion of ideas. 26. A member of the House has said that he would not allow his children to be put to school before they were seven years old. Before that age, in his case, presumably his children were in the nursery under the establishment of a certain discipline imposed by attendance cf persons on them. Such is not the case with children of parents of the labouring class. It is mainly, therefore, with regard to these that you were speaking?—ln a former part of my evidence I think I said that the children of the labourer and the artisan ought to be specially considered. They have not the advantage of the nursery and suitable attendance at the earliest age ; they are not receiving before the school-age that practical education which the children of the professional class, for instance, receive from mere intercourse with their parents. 27. You would not argue from one class to the other, and say that, because the child of a well-to-do man need not go to school before seven years of age, all need not go ?—I think the different conditions of children ought to be considered. The children of the labourer and the artisan, because they will leave school and go to work at an early age, ought to be admitted to school earlier. _ 28. So far as you know, then, in a well-ordered school there is no complaint on the subject of undue pressure ?—lf the question applies to very young children, I would say that, as to these, I have never heard of over-pressure. I have heard of over-pressure from too much home-work being given to children more advanced—that is, in the upper classes—but I have never heard of mental strain in regard to the younger children. 29. Mr. M. J. S. Mackenzie.] What specific meaning do you attach to the phrase which you used towards the commencement of your evidence, " detrimental in a moral and intellectual point of view " ? —I had in my mind the possibility of children running in the streets. 30. Did you mean the contamination of bad company and idleness? —I mean that children playing in the streets without control or supervision are apt to acquire bad manners and form bad habits. . 31. Do you not think the same manners, habits, or language may be imported into the schools. Five years is not an arbitrary age to begin to learn evil, and if the evil may be imported into the school it might become so that the difference would be little whether the child was outside or in ? — The difference would be this : that in school the children are under discipline during school-hours; outside they are not. _ . 32. Is there any danger, in your opinion, of the confirmation of habits of idleness the longer a child remains away from school over five years? —I should not attach much value to any such consideration. I should not, if there were a difference between two children with respect to habits of indolence, attribute that difference to the mere circumstance that one of the children had acquired a habit of indolence, but to the want of training. It is tho want of training that is the great disad--33. Am I right in supposing that the sooner a child goes to school the sooner he picks up knowledge—knowledge without system or effort ?—I do not know that I understand the point of the question. 34. I be» your pardon. I admit that my question, as I put it, was faulty; but 1 have heard many people say, and it appears to be generally understood, that children of tender years do break down under the school-system. What I want to know is, do these children of tender years absorb knowledge without much systematic effort beyond the mere attendance? —In the first place, I would answer that I do not think a child of tender years is capable of much systematic effort, and if that is demanded of him the result will be not only failure but probably serious injury to his mental constitution. But in a school so organized and taught as to be suited to children of tender years a very considerable amount of information is obtained, and there is some value in the training of their mental powers without appreciable straining of their faculties. At the same time, I believe that, in a school where the method of teaching is not adapted to children of tender years, the absence of anything to call forth the child's interest is likely to create a habit of listlessness and indifference to any instruction. I feel very strongly with regard to children sent at a very early age to school where there is no proper provision suited to their age. They are a trouble to the master, the time hangs heavily on their hands, and they must look on the school as a place of very disagreeable detention. ~,-,, -. -~ . __ , . . 35. In all your experience, did you ever know a child of good ordinary physique to break clown through school-work in a well-conducted school ?—I can only say that I cannot recall an instance. 36. I ask the question because I have heard that frequently stated?—l have not myself ever met with such a case,