AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION.

Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 52, 2 March 1909, Page 7

AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION.

THE GB__T_ FOB HAMTLTOX SCHOOL. HOX. G. FOVTLDS rSTEKVIEWED. The Minister for Education was interviewed by a representative of the Auckland "Star' with regard to the important subject oi agricultural education, and especially in respect to the grant for the Hamilton school.

"I saw," said Mr. Fowlds, "in the 'Herald' recently an article headed -Agricultural Education' criticising the Education Department in relation to the grant for the school at Hamilton, in which there seems to be an idea that the grant -was wrung from the Department by compulsion, also that unnecessary delays had taken place regarding the grant being made. It is also stated that the amount of the grant had been reduced from the sum originally asked for."

"In respect to the latter, I suppose it was merely the present- tendency of the Government to curtail expenditure?"

"As a matter of fact that is forced not only upon the Education Department but every other department of the Government, and it is a good thing for die people of this country that caution resarding application for votes is exercised. It is a remarkable thing that the same people in the same papers that cry out that less money ha* been granted io Hamilton than the people wanted, should be the people who continually cry out regarding the extravagance to wastefulness of the Government. I can assure you that if the Government simply assented to the applications received, it would take two or three times the amount of the public money at its command to meet the demands that are put forward. In the case of Hamilton school, the Government has done as it wishes to do with every school started, namely, to provide education suitable foi the district in which the school is located. The Education Department endeavours to give education a bias in the direction of the industrial occupation 01 the people amongst whom the school is situated. Reverting to Hamilton school, I may mention that the first- application reached the Education Department in

February, 190S, the amount asked for being £6,000. The Education Board was communicated with regarding the application, that course being necessary before the Department could arrive at an intelligent conclusion upon the matter. No reply was received, and a second application was forwarded from Hamilton in October, and in this instance the

amount asked for was £3,350. In the

meantime the Inspector-General of Schools visited Hamilton, and a very -represent— trve meeting -was held. At that meeting all present agreed that

the Department's solution of t-L« matter was the best thatt could be done. The end of the matter was that the Department granted £3,560."

~I notice," said the "Star" representative, "that there was a statement in the article to which you refer that your Department has gone out of its way tc cut down the capitation in the agricultural classes."

Thai," said the Minister, "is a mistake. By an Order-in-Council last March the capitation payment for schools classes of agriculture was doubled in the case of recognised classes supewised by an approved itinerant instructor, and "by another Order-in-Coun-cil dated 17th December last the capitation was doubled per pupil in the case oi instruction in hand work including agriculture. There is no record in the Department of any intention of the controlling authorities of technical schools that, with a view of cutting down exI penses, the Department was about to j -reduce by one-half the capitation in

these classes that may be included in the curriculum of secondary schools. The j only case in which the total amount of capitation that can be earned by techni- I cal classes has been reduced is that for J commercial instruction, and that reduction only affects the commercial classes held in connection with technical day classes, which are attended mostly by junior free pupils holding certificates of proficiency. The maximum amount that can be earned by free pupils attending commercial classes is £12 10s. per an- ! num, and the maximum amount -which free pupils attending other classes for j technical instruction can earn ( including j agriculture) is £15 per annum. The payments for technical classes for agrij culture are precisely the same as for plumbing and woodcarving. The numI ber of such classes recognised last year I for elementary instruction throughout New Zealand numbered 48S as against I about a score two or three years ago. I You will see, therefore, that any attempt tc blame the Education Department or the Minister in charge of Education for j neglecting the interests of the farming community in this particular branch of education is simply ridiculous. L'n fortunately, up to the present time, the deter- '■ ruination of the farmers of New Zealand to secure the benefits of agricultural education for their children has not been very evident, for last year the attendance at the classes specially arranged for them (with the exception of those for wool sorting) was very poor. The Government has not declined a single ! application for a grant to provide faciliI ties for technical instruction in agrienlIture. where it has been shown that the 1 application was based upon reasonable j grounds. In all such cases votes have : been made to provide the facilities asked I for. As to the facilities for training agricultural instructors. I may say that | tie agricultural college at Lincoln and i the veterinary college in connection with I the University at Dunedin (the latter I havin<r received Government grants toj tailing £3.000) should provide some op- | portunities for those who wi~h tn obtain j training in that branch of education."