EDUCATION RETRENCHMENT.

Auckland Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 143, 18 June 1887, Page 4

EDUCATION RETRENCHMENT.

;A GOOD many random statements are taade about the sums whicli may ibe saved off the education vote. Now, as we have shown before, the Education Department in New* Zealand is giv.ing a higher standard of national education at a lower cost per head of the Children receiving 'instruction than is obtained ...in any other colony of Austiralasia.' This is not a matter of opinion ; it, is a fact statistically proved (as to cost); by Mr Hayter, the Government Statist of Victoiia, who can have no bias in the matter. The inference then, iy, that the local"Board system conduces to economy—it' is absurd ,to Ijelieve -otherwise. Centralism is ithe curse of our colonial administration. We are emphatically of opinion, _ therefore,' a ftor a careful ■ examinati on of the subject, that it would bo a fatal error to ', transfer. the powers arid pairohage of' our accessible, elective Board to certain inaccessible, nonselective ofllcjalsin Wellington

Now, with regard to the reduction in teachers' salaries, those who say that any very great saving can be made m this direction simply do not know what they are talking about. Out of the 044 teachers employed m the Provincial District of Auckland there are only sixteen who get more than £200 a-year, and of these only seven have salaries that exceed £300. The prizes (!) in the teaching profession are truly stupendous. They consist of the three big city schools, with the care of over 1,000 children each, at a salary of a fraction over £400 a-year. More than one-half of the teachers employed in the Auckland district, namely, 364, get less than £72 a-year. The financial Keform Association will find very little play here. Retrenchment in the education vote must take two main directions. The first applies to the administrative departments and building grants; the second to the standards. In the first there is very considerable room for economy j the second is a simple question of policy. If the country should decide to refuse ' admission to all children under seven years of age, 21,000 who are now on the school rolls of the colony would be shut out. And if the school course were terminated at Standard IV., 13,000 more would go. Estimating the capitation at £i per head, a reduction, of might perhaps _be secured in this way. The question, then, is, Would it be wise to do it ? The poor, and not the rich, would suffer, for the rich can get their boys educated no matter what the cost. We believe that the country will re-echo the battle-cry of Sir Kobert Stout on this question—to seriously impair the efficiency of our national schools is a crime against the commonwealth.