MISS GILROY'S NOMINATION.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3776, 22 August 1883, Page 3

MISS GILROY'S NOMINATION.

[To the Editor of the Daily Telegraph.J Sin, —The action of the Education Board in rejecting—which virtually they have done —the recommendation of the Napier school committee in the matter of the appointment of an assistant mistress appears so very extraordinary that it Avould not be ri'dit to allow it to pass Avithout comment. •'AYhy all this outcry about 3liss Gilroy's nomination '(" -will be the first question that Avill present itself to tho majority of householders on reading the newspaper reports of tho Board's meeting. The solution is, in my opinion, by no means difficult, and for the information of those avlio have not had a peep behind the curtains I shall explain matters so far as they are knoAvn to mo. 3lr Hill appears osteusiblg as tho first person to raise au objection to Miss Gilroy's appointment, and in his zeal to servo the AVould-be lay figure, Avho has evidently been doing a bit of Aviro-pulling, our indefatigable inspector steps slightly outside- the mark of veracity, and not only insinuates in a manner that does him small credit that 3liss Gilroy is an inefficient teacher, but actually asserts Avhat he must have known was contrary to fact, viz., that all tho"previous assistant mistresses at Napier held higher certificates than that possessed by Miss Gilroy. AVhat about Miss 3lann P AVas her certificate higher r And lioav much higher Avas 3lrs Stanleys* One degree! . . . Really, Mr Hill, this Avon't do. You knoAV as avcll as anyone, and have admitted it moreover, that it is not ahvays the person who holds the highest certificate that is the best teacher. . . .

I have taken the trouble to enquire—a duty AA'hich tho Education Board strangely neglected —and find that 3liss Gilroy is a most efficient teacher, and holds undeniable testimonials of ability of a far higher order than any other candidate who applied for tho position. I haA-e grave reason to believe that 3lr Hill avus prompted by other motives than those he professed in his objection to 3liss Gilroy, and I much regret that he should havo given the slightest grounds for the belief that he is not taking an independent stand in the matter. 3lr Sidey tried hard to hide Lis identity as ono of those opposed to 3liss Gilroy, but ultimately was constrained to express a fear that she was "too young." AVhy did he not say at once, " 3iiss Gilroy is not a Presbyterian" Such an objection as that raised by 3lr Sidey is frivolous and absurd in the oxtreino. The day has iioav gone by when merit Avas measured by age, aud people haA-e groAvn sufficiently Aviso to Ijiioav that one young person possessed of a vigorous itelfcct and healthy frame is Avortha dozen dyspeptic old fogies Avilhbolh mind and body impaired by age. Hoping tho Napier .school committee "will assert their rights, aud not alloAV themslvcs to bo hoodwinked. —I am, kc, Oxe o'clock. Napier, August 22, 1883. [Our correspondent Avill observe that avc havo excised tAvo sentences which were of rather a personal character. —Ed. D.T.]