SCHOOLS IN THE BACK-BLOCKS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 602, 2 September 1909, Page 5

SCHOOLS IN THE BACK-BLOCKS.

"'. > AN IMPORTANT PEINOEPLE. ' (By Telogranh—Press AesoclaMon.) ( ■■■■',". '■.'■■ .'C Auckland, Septemoer I.'; j. ■ At a meeting of the Board of Education, to- : day,', a' warm dismission, took place on the , grievanoea of back-blocks settlors with regard ' to the expenditure of public money on school \ buildings. The question wae an Application \ for the erection of a school at Tokerinu Road, j a remote back-block on the Wanganui River. \ _ .' The secretary to the board stated that this application had bcen.sont to the Department, and a reply had been received that it an-; jioared that tho averago attendance wae only : '•: 10, and the sum asked for appeared to be t large expenditure for ijuch an attendance. Tho department, therefore, suggested that further inquiry bo made with a view to seeing if a cheaper school .could riot be provided.' Upon, this the cbiei' inspector submitted a report suggesting, that. settlers ' "should be requested to erect their own school. building. . . ' :•'• . • ■'■••■ Mr. H. J. Greonslade, M.P., took strong objection to the suggestion made by the s chief inspector; 'It;was grossly unfair to compel settlers to erect schools in backblocks. They , paid as much towards tho cost of education as any city dwellers, and should be entitled to precisely the tamo treatment. >He could imagine what sort of language any . city school committee would make use of if such a suggestion wero made ,to them. ■ ■.. ■ Mr. Macnenzio (chairman) said the ques- ~ tion was an important one, and' an important principle was involved in such cases as tho 'present, where the averago attendance of children at back-blocks schools was small and, uncertain. Ho-thought the architect to tho , board should bo asked to design a cheap building, capable of meeting actual require-, ments. If a small arid reasonable grant were : asked for tho Department would no doubt grant it. '■, ' .. ~ ' ' ' .. '• : After some discussion the chairman's pro- ! posal was adopted. . ' . . ' . '