SCHOOL BOUNDARIES.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVIII, Issue 11333, 29 July 1897, Page 6

SCHOOL BOUNDARIES.

TO THE SUITOR. Sib, —I accept the challenge from the teaching staff of the- West Christchurch school, made through Mr Foster, “ to report to the Board of Education a single instance whore a teacher of the West Christchurch School has asked any parent to remove a pupil from the Addington School,” if they will nominate some other ‘disinterested public body instead of the one suggested,—•! am, &c., ' ■ WALTER S. BEAN. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —I do not believe in replying to anonymous correspondence, and as for Mr Foster’s letter in yesterday's issue, 1 think it is beneath notice, as he is hair-splitting regarding’ the meaning of the word “ canvass,” and so he makes an attack upon Mr Beau and loaves my letter unanswered. However, with your permission, I may inform “ Pikestaff ” that I am prepared to bring evidence to show that parents have been induced by the West Christchurch teaching staff to remove their children from the Addington school so that they may attend at West Christchurch. Also, that the West Christchurch* teaching staff have prevented, or, tried* to prevent, parents living|in ; theoA{lcUiigton school district from sending their children to that school. 1 'At the present, time I have, only one,, family attending my school who' is ’residing in the West Christchurch school district,-and”' I challenge Mr Foster .to prove ' a single instance -of canvassing by piyself, in his district. Tn my own district circumstances have forced ine to do so. I also desire to state that I am 1 prepared’to prove that. I have informed the members of-my’staff riot to interfere in any way with this kindergarten - school. / Again,, I -’emphatically assert .that,.,there are no. children' on our school roll under five years of age, and at the, present time .there are only two children tirider that age in' "pur ' infant department. May I ask- ho.w many there are in West'Cliristchrirch school ? —I am,

ic„ • W. N. SEAY,, Head-Master, Addington'School, July-28,1997.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — Mr T: S. Fbster’S letter, which appeared in your' issue of July 27, ought to convince every reasonable person -who reads) it that ' the teaching, staff - of West Christchurch school are of guileless individuals, utterly incapable of anything so naughty ab'.canvassing, even if a substantial 1 slice of their neighbour’s district could be got by it, who could not possibly canvass members of the Board of Education in such a case. Of course, it would bo no use if they did, seeing that the Board would want to know the wishes ’ of the householders in- the coveted portion of that district, so as to enable them to act justly towards the. district and. its school. , And if “ 104 out of a change of boundary, those fair-dealing, im--3 partial, conscientious gentlemen composing | the Board v.'ould respect the. wishes oU j those householders, no matter what I euce might bO brought to bear frojpfin { opposite direction. Besides, Mr lister j states distinctly that he has, nothing to j do with the boundary dispute. That ought to settle the matter, and carry conviction to every mind. But, there are some . sceptical people who will not be convinced, i who, after reading the letter, want to know j who originated the dispute. Who first suggested the alteration of the boundary ? Did the West Christchurch School Com- . mittee ? One member of that committee, I when asked, some three months ago, what | their committee intended doing in the j matter, replied, “The committee have no I I hand in it”; or words to that; effect. Then tiia sceptical' ones want to know if the j .Board of Education originated it. For • they (the sceptics) do not believe that any !of the teaching stuff, or of the school committee fin' the smaller district, or- of the j 104 petitioners would originate such ■ a { dispute. Perhaps Mr Foster can furnish .1 some information respecting the originator I of this boundary dispute. Will you permit, I me, through your correspondence columns, to ask Mr Foster for such information ifcho can give it ? Hoping' he - will not hold it, as ho prefers doing with the “ rIA } entertainment ” he mentions in his lotts« | —I am, dc., ADDING TO.iN lAN. ”| ■ TO THE EDITOR. Sir., —I do not understand the rights j and wrongs of this controversy, nor do I ' know what particular area is affected by the alteration of the boundaries, but I

gather from the two letters appearing in your columns —ono signed “Go it. Little Chap,” which is mercifully asterisked, and the other “!!!” —that Sunnyside is included in the disputed territory, and I write to suggest that the disputants (sane and otherwise) should stop this unseemly quarrel in a public paper before they bring discredit on the teaching profession.—l am, &c., PAX.