EDUCATION BOARD’S BAN ON PIANIST

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 281, 22 August 1940, Page 6

EDUCATION BOARD’S BAN ON PIANIST

Reasons Outlined

MOTION TO RESCIND IT NOT SUPPORTED

Au explanation of the steps leading up to tlie Wellington Education Board’s decision to forbid the entry into the schools iu its district of Mr. Paul .Schramm, pianist, aud music teacher, was given by the chairman, Mr. W. V. Dyer, at yesterday's meeting of the board. The subject was raised by Mr. C. H. W. Nicholls, who sought to have the previous resolution of the board rescinded and who moved further “that the reprimand to Mr. Paul Schramm was for the reasons that he disregarded the. board's instructions conveyed to him previously in writing that he was not to enter during school hours under this board’s jurisdiction: this board Jias no complaint otherwise against Mr. Schramm and Hurt be be handed a copy of this resolution.” Mr. Dyer said that Mr. Schramm had made application to the board for permission to give piano recitals in schools in school hours. The application had been turned down. Mr. Schramm bad later renewed his application aud in August, 1938, he had been advised that the board's decision was unaltered. The next thing was that the board found that Mr. Schramm had written to a number of schools in the Wairarapa and some other districts that he would be at certain schools on certain days and dates with the object of giving recitals for which the children bad to pay. At an earlier stage there had been a commendation of Mr, Schramm by the Minister of Education in the Education Gazette, which appeared to give the recitals the hall-mark of approval,, and some confusion had been caused. OU top of that, Colonel McDonald, Mr. Donald and himself were in Pahiatua one morning when they saw the school children going to a hall near the school to attend a recital by Mr. Schramm. When spoken to. Mr. Schramm had put over the thin excuse that the recital was nut in the school, but in a hall. “It seemed to. me,” added Mr. Dyer, “that, without a shadow of doubt, Mr. Schramm’s action was premeditated and done as part of a system. I’m afraid that whatever the inconvenience, Mr. Schramm has brought it on himself. It was a continued process of defying the board.” Might be Misunderstood.

’The recent decision of the board as published on June 20 would lead the general public to believe that some sinister action oy Mr. Schramm was behind the board’s action, said Mr. Nicholls. He had permission from the Wanganui board to enter the schools in Palmerston North, 95 miles from Wellington. but in Pahiatua, 105 miles away, he was denied the. right. The board’s action was justified but possibly Mr. -Schramm was unaware that Pahiatua was in the board’s district. , Mr. A. Donald seconded the motion pro forma. It was quite clear, he said, that Mr. Schramm knew that Pahiatua was in the board’s district, and when taxed about it, his explanation had been mere shuffling.

Mr. J. D. O’Connor said that at the annual meeting of the Wairarapa U.S.A., attended by 250 returned men, strong feeling had, been expressed against an alien being allowed into the schools.

In reply to Mr. J. J. Clark, Mr. Nicholls said that he had had no intimation or request from Mr. Schramm, either personally or through a third person. Mr. W. R. Nicol: The same course would have been adopted with any other person or organization. When the motion was put, Mr. Nicholls did not vote and it. did not find a supporter.

The ’board recently wrote to the Director of Education suggesting that paragraphs similar to the notice about Mr. Schramm appearing in the Education Gazette of February, 1940, be not inserted in future. In reply, the department said that it recognized that the granting of permission to enter schools was the prerogative of the board. It had been intended to stress that in the last sentence of the paragraph in the Gazette, but unfortunately, the wording “by arrangement witli the school authorities’’ did not appear to have made that perfectly clear.

“In view of what has happened, in this case,” the letter continued, “the department will in future not publish in the Gazette any statement that might be interpreted as giving approval to any outside person to enter the schools.”