CORRESPONDENCE

Evening Post, Volume XC, Issue 87, 11 October 1915, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE

NATIONAL SCHOOLS' DEFENCE LEAGUE 10 THE EDITOR. ' Sir, — I am directed by the executive of the N.Z. National Schools' Defence League to communicate the following statement to the press : — Avoiding any discussion on matters under truce the executive of the National Schools' Defence League is compelled to correct a misstatement of fact in the report (recently published in your columns) of the Bible-in-Schools League. The report states : " The executive's desire to emphasise the fact that a large number of members of Parliament — nearly one-half' — were returned pledged to vote in favour of the referendum." This is incorrect. Of members returned 48 were stoutly opposed to a referendum on a religious question. Of the remaining 28 only 19 were prepared to vote for the referendum as advocated by the Bible-in-Schools League. The other 9 made reservations, which would involve amendments which would not be accepted by the Bible-in-Schools League. We challenge the Bible-in-Schools League to publish the names of "nearly one-half" of the members of Parliament who, it is alleged, were returned pledged to vote for the referendum — i.e., for the referendum proposed by the Bible-in-Schools League. — I am, etc., HUGH MACKENZIE, Hon. Sec. N.Z. National Scßools' Defence League. 9th October, 1915. RECRUITING TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — I am a visitor to Wellington, farewelling relatives off to the war, and I have read with a deal of interest a letter on the above signed -" Safety." The writer pertinently asks, in effect, " What is the State itself doing with its own employees to encourage recruiting?" I might answer that it is not only doing very little in that direction, but is setting a very bad example by employing young men eligible for the front in positions, when plenty of older men could do the work equally as well, if not better. It is a sad sight in these times to stand outside some of our public buildings and see hundreds of young men pouring out of the doors at, say, 5 o'clock, who should be in the, fighting line. Of course, it will he argued .that the efficiency of- the Service must be maintained. Perhaps so. But if a State fighting for its existence is not prepared to lead the way in the necessary selfsacrifice, Bow can it expect private individuals to do so? It would be interesting to know how rhany young men eligible- for the front have been, taken into the Public Service since the outbreak of war. I am forty-seven years of age, a native of the Dominion, and during the last twelve month's have repeatedly applied to the Public Service Commissioner for casual clerical -work in the district where I reside, but have been turned down every time, I presume on account of my age. Too old to £erve one's country at forty-seyen, and 'too old to stay at home and do the work of one who could go to the front. A nice' state of affairs! There are plenty of casual men throughout the Dominion, quite capable of undertaking the duties of those in. the Publio Service 'desirous of proceeding to the war. — I am, etc., AN OLD VOLUNTEER. 9th October. [According to a return presented to Parliament last week, 988 employees in the Public Service under the control of Commissioners have volunteered and been accepted for 6ervice,-,and 1420 -in the Railway Service.] TEACHING OF WRITING TO 181 EDITOR. Sir, — I note with considerable^ interest jth« publication in tefda-y's itesue of your paper of a letter bearing upon the teaching of writing. One so seldom sees educational topics of this nature discussed in the press that one cannot but feel gratitude at its appearance. Nevertheless, I cannot refrain from expressing my condemnation of the inexcusably personal tone of the writer in criticising the lecturer's' statements. It seems to me that it would have sufficed merely to mention the speaker's name, and it is to be regretted that your correspondent has assumed the attitude that the lecturer was committing a conscious misdemeanour in propounding hie well-considered views. The contention to be proved is that perfection of form is a more important matter than rapidity of execution, and this, it is evident, the writer has signally failed to show. He proceeds to criticise the j lecturer by assuming that he belittles a high ideal of perfection, but for this £Ls&U32i£>tion lie does not produce <me scrap of evidence. Mr. Tennant's addresSj be it said, comes as a timely warning against a tendency, all too prevalent (especially among the older members of the profession), to devote an excessive amount of time to securing extreme accuracy of detail, while speed is either ignored or deprecated. The arguments against this tendency may be summed up briefly: — First. — The writing lesson at the present time often claims too big a share of the time-table, and the results are in no way commensurate with the time spent. It is my experience that those schools which spend only the minimum of time in formal writing lessons, and in which * writing is taught incidentally (composition, dictation, etc.), are the most successful in securing the three-fold aim of accuracy, legibility, and speed. .Second. — Absolute perfection of fora* and rapidity are incompatible, and since the latter is essential we must be content with (what seems to me a good and useful ideal) easy legibility.' Third. — Extreme perfection of form generally means that slavish exactitude and uniformity in copying is insisted upon. I would go to the opposite extreme and claim that the child's originality should be given as free a scope, as possible. Many a naturally good writer has been spoiled by having nn artificial style thrust upon him. Whether we wish it or not, he will develop a characteristic "hand" later in life, differing more or less from what he ( ha6 been taught, and it is safe to assume that the difference will be Jeast marked in those who have acquired rapidity at school. The use of copy-books, too, is condemned by the best teachers and educationists of our time, and this, not solely because an unattainable ideal is presented. The only real "argument" in favour of the copy-book is the teacher's inability to teach writing. The old contention that we should place before the pupil only that which is perfect is fast dying a natural death. It is part of a child's rightful inheritance to know, no matter how early, that even his educators are not perfect, and it is immoral to misrepresent them to him as perfect. Not only so, but some of our greatest lessons, and certainly the most impressive, are learned from the mistakes of others, and it seems necessary that common mistakes should be known in order that they may be a\oided. The use of the copy-book tells detrimentally on the written, work in other subjects. Nothing will convinco the child that his writing should be as good at any other time as when a perfect copy is "under his nose" and. of course, his copy-book is

ireant to contain his best efforts. The ci "' beconr' accustomed to slovenly an ireless ■ " * his exercise-book — a hal which sr>v, ' /"-haps one of the most distressin of the school. I would say, \ "m, that Mr. Tennar/, in e> j- , sentiments he did, was in ' ■ -cord with the weight of educ^uOi a opinion of to-day, and those who would combat bis theories must produce empirical' evidence based upon years of experience and investigation. — I am, etc., J. S. MACKENZIE. 9th October, 1915. THE CHATHAM ISLANDS TO THE EDITOR. Sip, — In obtaining all the information I can in connection with the work on the above islands that I am. now engaged in writing, Mr. jjaillie, chief librarian of the Civic Central Library, called my attention to certain correspondence published in the Parliamentary Papers of the House of Commons in 1835-1844 iolating to New Zealand. • As the matter seems to me to be interesting enough at the present time, will you kindly publish the copy that 1 have made of that portion of the correspondence? " Copy of a Letter from J. Somes, Esq., to Lord Stanley. "New Zealand House, " Broad-street Buildings, " 15th October, I°4l. "My Lord, — The directors of <h mv Zealand Company, being in trea 1 \ h certain parties officially connect*. Hamburgh and the' other free r Germany, acting on behalf of a < tion company now forming i« '••'' '" country, for the sale of the group of islands in the South Seas known the name of the Chatham Islands, their property in which was acquired by bona fide purchase from the Natives, they consider it right to inform your Lordship of the circumstance, although they believe that no claim to the sovereignty of the islands in question has ever been advanced on the part of the British Crown, and that the islands are to all intents and purposes a foreign . State, ruled by native chiefs, who have the undoubted right to cede their- sovereignty to any foreign Power they may think proper. I do not trouble your Lordship with any arguments on this point further than to observe that the Chatham Islands were not included within the limits of Governor Philip's commission for New South Wales and its dependencies in 1787 ; and that, like New Zealand, before the late cession of that country to Her Majesty, the Chathams are a foreign country within," etc., etc. - xf I "In submitting to the Government this respectful intimation of their intentions, the directors avail themselves of the opportunity to state to your Lordship that their desire to give useful neighbours to the settlements which they have founded in New Zealand is the motive which has principally induced, them to -dispose of their property in. the Chatham Islands to the representatives of communities so little likely to be animated, at any time, by political hostility to Great Britain, and who promise to conduct with vigour, and in an enlightened spirit, the enterprise which they contemplate, as the free cities of Germany. They feel assured that the arrangement upon which they are entering must be productive of material benefits, direct and indirect, to the colonists of New Zealand ,• and that not the • least ! satisfactory result will be to render Port Nicholson the centre of a wider circle of commerce' than could have been established if the Chatham Islands had 'remained in the exclusive possession of their present barbarous inhabitants. "Having this national object prominently in view it is the intention of the directors to make it a condition of the transfer that British subjects,- with their ships and" goods, shall at all times be placed in the ports of the Chatham Islands on the same footing as the national flag of the Hanse Towns, or the subjects of the 'sovereign power for the time being. B^ this stipulation, a new , and important market may he opened for British produce and . manufactures in the Southern Pacific. "The directors propose to restrict the purchasers from making any part of the" Chatham Islands a penal settlement for the reception of malefactors transported thither from any other country. — I have, etc., (Signed) Joseph Somes, Governor." There is further correspondence which is rather too long to copy; the result, however, was to' prevent the sale as proposed, and to make the Chatham Islands portion of New Zealand. It will be seen what a narrow escape this Dominion had of having afforded to Germany a base similar to that of Heligoland. — I am, etc., HENRY H. TRAVERS. . 9th October, 1915.