SHIRLEY SCHOOL

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21972, 22 December 1936, Page 15

SHIRLEY SCHOOL

TO THI IDITOB OF TH» P»I8S Sir,—The chairman of the Shirley School Committee finds it easier to make charges of inaccuracies than to substantiate them. I must refer him again to my letter, and he will there find sufficient reason why enquiries oii my part did not merge into definite objection—especially when the system was explained as the ballot papers were being issued. I could have added that he was at that time the recipient of that degree of faith which is usually reposed in a chairman, especially when he clothes his statements with the supposed approval of the Education Board.

He states that I \vas at the following meeting when the minutes were confirmed and raised no objection. Objection to minutes should be raised only when they do not accurately record the transactions* of the previous meeting, and their confirmation cannot in any way be affected by the principle involved in these transactions. Authorities are emphatic on this point. I thought our chairman was aware of this. He is certainly aware that I raised no small objection when this meeting had reached the stage for general business; also, that he refused to debate the question with me before either the board members or the householders. When he was pressed at the householders' meeting respecting the authenticity of this system of ballot, we discovered that assumption rather than the opinion of a reliable authority was the background of his actions. He states* that he knows and many of the committee admit that the meeting was specially canvassed; therefore no action was taken, etc. Rumour has it that I was responsible for this meeting taking place and also was guilty of canvassing the district. The meeting was called because, in the first instance, a number of former committeemen had petitioned the board,

and I had no connexion with this action in any way. I did not notice the half-inch advertisement in the newspapers and was not aware that the householders were going to meet until 9 o'clock the night before. I may not be as black as I am painted when I say that canvassing on my part was out of the question. Now if the chairman knows of these things, and many of the committee have made a similar admission, we are entitled to believe that they know what they are talking about; but if they wish to deny it. a plain statement that neither he nor any of his supporters participated in a canvass would be appreciated. It would be interesting to know why he did not announce at the meeting that he had no intention of acting on the advice of the householders.

The cardinal point is, that if an alteration in the schedule of duties was to be made, one of those already employed • should have been given first option. Failure to do this leaves an inference of dissatisfaction, a point which was not raised by this committee before the dismissals, nor has it been proved since. The love of fair play and the spontaneity of the public will one day impress itself upon the chairman, and I hope he will act accordingly.—Yours, etc.,, J. BRADLEY. December 21, 1.936.