SCHOOL LESSONS NOT DONE DURING EPIDEMIC PERIOD

Grey River Argus, 11 May 1948, Page 4

SCHOOL LESSONS NOT DONE DURING EPIDEMIC PERIOD

HAMILTON, May 9. A decision that the law made no provision to compel a child to carry out courses of correspondence instruction sent to him while the schools were closed during the recent epidemic was contained in a judgment given by Mr S. L. Paterson, S.M. The judgment, was in respect.of a case heard at Cambridge on April 27, in which a woman was charged under the Education Act, 1914, and the Finance Act, 193-1. The charge involved her child's alleged failure to carry out the requirements of a course of instruction issued by the Cambridge District High School. “The defendant pleaded guilty to the information, but could not appreciate what she was doing. She was obviously confused by the confusing and formidably-worded charge and the strange atmosphere of the Court,” the Magistrate. “Because all schools were closed on the dates set out in the information I question the valadity of the' charge. The informant said that under The Finance Act. 1931, the parents of children who did not do lessons sent out by post were liable to the same penalties as parents who neglected sending , their children to school when the schools were open. On examining Section 37 of the Finance Act. 1931. I can find nothing in it to support this proposition. In my opinion it applies only to' Uiildrcn who have been exemented from attendance under the provisions of the principal act for specific reasons, and these reasons are only distance from a school or public convevance, or imnassable. “The defendant’s child is enrolled on the register of the Cambridge District High School, which had been temporarily closed on an order of the Health Department. During the clossure no doubt, provision has been made for a course of instructions by correspondence, and the child has failed to carry out the requirements. While it is very desirable that every child should carry out the prescribed course of instruction and that provision should bo made to compel that to be done, the law has made no such provision.”