SHIRLEY SCHOOL

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 21985, 8 January 1937, Page 13

SHIRLEY SCHOOL

TO TUB CDITOX OF THB PBIBC. sir,—There are several questions I would like to ask the chairman of the Shirley School Committee; (1) On whose advice and on what grounds did he dismiss the late caretaker, and on whose authority did he advertise for applications for the position? (2) What does Mr Geary mean by a “stacked meeting?" Did he have the advertisement put in such a' conspicuous place hoping none but his own friends would attend the meeting? Was it not for all householders and parents? (3) He has also stated that many were at the meeting who were not entitled to be present. This is a reflection on Mr C,' S. Thompson, who was chairman of the meeting and who (Mr Geary will remember) made it perfectly clear that only householders and parents or guardians were to take part in the discussion and Mr Geary and his friends were there to challenge any who spoke, so that was all square and above board. (4) Mr Geary stated in your issue of December 12 “that the committee was taking no further action in the matter.” Now. Mr Bradley, who is a committeeman, stated on December 17 that no meeting has been called. Who does Mr Geary consider is the committee? The conclusion I have arrived at is that the Shirley School Committee is 99 per cent, chairman. Am I correct? It seems remarkable that during this controversy for the benefit of Shirley School not one of'the committee members has thought fit openly to support the chairman’s actions either •at the householders’ meeting or through these columns. Is it lack of knowledge or have they no sense of justice? (5) Does Mr Geary still maintain that the method used for the election of the caretaker was the one used by the Education Board, and did he use the same method to ensure the election of his co-worker to the committee to fill a vacancy? (6) Why did the chairman omit to send the notice of the meeting of householders through the school, children, which is his usual custom? There are several other que ;tions I would like to ask, but these will suffice for the present if they are answered in a conscientious manner.—Yours, etc., SHIRLEY HOUSEHOLDER. December 22, 1936. [Mr Geary said he -had no comment to make on this letter, when it was referred to him. "When the correspondent signs his name, the committee will answer it," he said.3 [Subject to the right of reply of “Householder,” this correspondence Is now closed. —Ed., “The Press.”]