INSPECTION OF PRIVATE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 10758, 11 September 1900, Page 4

INSPECTION OF PRIVATE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.

—— I As the charges against; the late managers of the Stoke Industrial School ore practically "sub judice," we are precluded at present from commenting on the merits of that particular cass. There is one point in the Commissioners' report, however, which we think demands attention. Wβ refer to their recommendation as to the Government inspection of private industrial schools. The Stoke enquiry iias made it

quite dear that in the public interests any industrial school or other institution to which children are committed by order of the Magistrate, or any such institution whidi is in receipt, of public money in aid of its maintenance, should bo subject to efficient Government inspection. The Oom- ' mission era point out that the rig&fc of inspection of industrial schools as governed by sections 49 and 50 of the Industrial, Schools Act, 1882. Under section 49, all members of both Houses of Parliament, Judges of tie Supreme Court, all Magia- j trates, inspectors appointed under the Act, j and all persons authorised in that "behalf, J hare the right to inspect any Government or local school; -while by section 50, the riglit of inspection of private schools is limited to inspectors appointed undsr the Act and inspectors of the Education Department appointed for that purpose. AU classes of Industrial Schools aire subject to any regulations made under tab* Act in regard to inspection, but no such regulations iiave been made of which the j Commissioners have any knowledge. So far i as regards inspection of' private industrial schools (in which the Stoke Orphanage is included) it appears that the Act has always been a dead letter. The Commissioners express the opinion that the right of inspection of private schools given by the Act is sufficient if the power to appoint inspectors is exercised, so that some two or more persons, one of whom should be, if possible, a medical man, resident in the district in -which, the school is situated, are appointed inspectors or official visitors, and their powers clearly defined. The Commissioners are against having too many inspectors, apparently on the principle that *' what is everybody's business becomes "nobody's business." If it is thought desirable to extend the right of inspection, however, they suggest that it might be given, in addition to the inspectors, to all members of both Houses of Parliament, Judges, Stipendiary Magistrates, and the Chairman of the Charitable Aid Board of the district in which the school is situated.

For ourselTßS we think the extended right of inspection here suggested should be carried into effect, and that the present session should not be allowed to close without the necessary amendment in the law. It is

qudte t?rae feat inspection is not an absolute safeguard against abuses—at any rate, it did not prove so some years ago in the case of Burnham. There is no doubt, however, that it would tend to make the managers of such institutions careful if they knew that immediately on a rumour getting out of anything being wrong in the administration they would be liable to a visit not only from a Government inspector, bat abo from any one of a number of honorary inspectors, such as ra«inbera of Parliament or the Chairman of the Charitable Aid Board. It is not at all necessary to wait for the termination of any further proceedings which may be taken in respect of the Stoke Industrial School before bringing forward such an amendment of the law, and we hope the Government will take it in hand at once.