BURNHAM INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVI, Issue 14170, 19 September 1906, Page 2

BURNHAM INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL.

THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY. The inquiry into the conduct of the Burnham Industrial School was resumed yesterday before Mr H. W. Bishop, Special Commissioner. Dr Symes, desiring to elaborate his previous evidence, was recalled, and made a lengthy statement from the medical point of view regarding moral defectives and their treatment. In the first place, however, he said his attention had been called to the statement of a witness reflecting upon his conduct, in stating that sick boys were brought downstairs to be examined. This was absolutely untrue. The patients were examined in whatever- place he w r as asked to do so. That rested entirely with the matron and 'sub-matron. He had absolutely nothing to do with the matter, especially as ho had generally no previous knowledge of the cases. He was not aware of ever having omitted to visit a sick boy in bed, if necessary. When the inmate Lewis was brought to him ho was quite convalescent from •his recent sore throat, and it was not till eight days later that lie developed symptoms of subacute rheumatic fever. He was never asked to visit Lewis in bed. He regarded a much bettor supply of water to the swimming baths as eminently desirable. . Dealing with the question of moral defectives of the criminal class, ho said 10 per cent of the boys belonged to this class. He described the principal features of the natures of the class—their lack of control over themselves, ungovernable passions and confirmed evil habits. He described the treatment advisable, and followed, in these cases. He thought that an important assistant in these cases won Id be physical culture, which would distribute in better balance the bloodcirculation. He suggested that Sir Hormbrook should bo employed to organise instruction in such exercises. In the cases of such inmates as could not he cured of their self-destroying habitsby any other means, he advocated that they should be offered a certain operation. He again advocated shot-drill, or the cat as a punishment for senior boys. On occasions, when persons desired to give the boys instruction or amusement, they should be given all reasonable facilities, and the manager should be empowered to give them free passes.

The Rev T. J. Smythe, vicar of Lincoln, stated that _ he attended Burnham to give the inmates religious instruction. On frequent occasions ho slept in an attendant’s room off one of the dormitories on Saturday nights, and had ample opportunity of knowing the boys under all possible circumstances during three years and * j 011 d he was so , satisfied with the results achieved by the school that he frequently brought visitors to it. He referred to cases of boys who had made successes of their lives after leaving the school, and read a grateful letter from a man who was ex-inmate.. Boys had returned to the school themselves, and been warmly received by the manager, indicating a warm feeling between the inmates and the manager. He Solemnly declared that lie had never once seen the manager under the influence of liquor, and he did not see how such a failing on his part could possibly have escaped the witness’s notice. ,He was an excitable man, and when anything went wrong often became very excited: Regarding classification, he thought that there should be a separate place for those boys who, while not insane, were not quite all there”; and the inoorrigibles should be brought under the operations of the proposed Habitual Criminals Act.' The site of Burnham was far too large and far too poor; and if it was decided to replace Burnham by another institution, it should be placed upon a much smaller and better piece of land, not more than twelve miles from a town. The attendants must, however, work in harniony with the system if there was to be content.

In cross-examination he stated that Mr Archey was the most humane man lie knew. He favoured a training ship very strongly as a restriction for the worst hoys. It would be better, too, in that it would not be under the surveillance of political parties. The irresponsible writings of persons who knew nothing about the school were chiefly responsible for the inquiry. Regarding the of Miss Laing, witness said' he did not think Mrs Archey could have known she was suffering when she asked for leave. Mrs Archey was a most kind-hearted woman. He felt that there was less esprit de corps than there should be among tho staff. But that' any such circumstances as led to this inquiry should arise took him absolutely by surprise. To Mr Pope: He knew South Canterbury, and thought that an institution could well bo situated there. Ha had been stationed at Pleasant Point, and tlio land was good there. Mr Archey had never placed the slightest obstruction in the way of his carrying out his duties. If he had, witness would have reported at once to the Board of Advice.

John Alexander M’Cullough, tinsmith, stated .that Messrs Cooper and Best, the boy Lewis, and indirectly Mr Power supplied him with the information from which he wrote the article regarding the case of Lewis. He produced letters he had received from Mr Cooper, but the Commissioner ,'did not allow these to be put in. Witness gave details as to his knowledge of the case as he had stated in print. Both Best and Cooper had told him Lewis had had to strip and stand on concrete to wash, but he admitted that this was a misunderstanding on hie part. They also told him, by word of mouth, that the attendants recognised that Lewis was being treated in an inhuman manner, but that they were powerless to act. He had referred to the previous inquiry as a “Star Chamber” inquiry, and considered the term applicable, and that to some extent, as the phrase implied, the facts had been' burked at that inquiry. He was glad that his article had led to this inquiry. Ho was not using the case of Lewis as a lever- for ameliorating the work and hours of the staff. He did not admit that the article was ‘‘ a column of exaggeration,” ( as Mr Wright called it. He was not willing, by a long way, to publish the complaints of any Civil servant. In this case he considered he had the facts by his inquiries. He had seen Lewis, and considered his to be prime evidence. Ho had seen him once, and had never been to Burn-' ham. The statement about maggoty meat’being given to the boys had been made to him by Messrs Cooper ant}, Best.

Mr Bishop: Of course, that is an absolutely untrue statement ; we have not a tittle of evidence to support it. Mr Bishop said that Mr M’Cullough’e position was not assailed, but he questioned’ hie discretion. It was very doubtful whether it was ever desirable to publish statements that affected so many persons without first inquiring very fully into the grounds for tho statements. If witness had had as much experience as the speaker in the differences that arose between ex parte statements and tho same matters submitted to a proper examination, he would be more cautious as to what he .accented. Mr M’Cullough then read a written statement of his attitude in the matter. This described the course of negotiations : iand discussions that led to the Depart-

mental inquiry, and afterwards to tire present one. Practically all the attendants had urged him on to the course ho had taken. He said that ho did not think there would have been any inquiry at all except for the statements made by Attendant Gale to Mr Davey. Mr T. I. Smail. lay evangelist, stated that he had visited Burnham weekly since 1898. He held a Bible-class of about eighty or ninety of the Protestant boys on Thursday evenings, and stayed over-! night. Ho did not have much opportunity for private oommuhicgtion with the boys. No obstacle was ever placed in his way to prevent his mixing or speaking with the -boys. During the time h° had known the school he considered the moral tone had improved. He had noticed the marked attention he received from the boys, dienoting a great benefit. He had met boys outside the institution who had made the most kindly remarks about Burnham. One had said to him in that he thanked God ho had been, sent to Burnham, and that ,if it had not been for Burnham he would have been in gaol all his life. The very hoy who had stabbed-Mr Arohey, and who was now. in gaol, had said recently that the manager was his beet friend. Mr Archey wa* an excellent man to have charge of the school. He had the interests of the school greatly at heart, and of the staff also. He had witnessed the efforts of the manager to secure increases of salary for the attendants, and to give them what benefits he could. He had never seen him the worse for liquor. The matron was an extremely kind, though undemonstrative, woman, and he had frequently seen her in the institution. She knew all about the boys, and manifested a keen interest in the school and its inmates. Regarding Lewis, witness said ho had seen Lewis in the Hospital; the boy told him Mrs Arohey had just left him. He mad© absolutely no complaint. He did not think Mrs Ardbey would treat a boy as it was alleged she had treated Lewis. No hoy had ever spoken to witness, who had met a great many, disrespectfully of either, the matron or Mr Archey. He referred to the case of the boy whose agony from toothache had been described. He heard the case reported in the office, and concluded from that that the boy must be in a state of convulsions or collapse. He saw the patient, and found that the description had been much exaggerated;- as was the description given in the inquiry. • . After the lunch adjournment, Mr Smail was cross-examined. Ho advocated the removal of the institution to a position nearer Christchurch or another' centre. The isolation of the school was, he considered, a valid cause of complaint by the attendants. The proximity to Christchurch of the Mental Hospital had had no bad influence There should he no question of expense at all on such a matter. The buildings at Burnham would not last much longer. If it was desired to have really good. men. working at the institution, the conditions must be made such that tlie men would not b© ostracised by going there. He considered that the work of classification should he done de novo. At present there was practically no classification. The first thing that should be don© was to remove some of the boys who were there. The cottage home system, was an. unfortunate misnomer, as there was really no cottage home life at all. The first step in classifying should he to put the boys into a receiving ward, in the charge of a good attendant, under the manager. In tins ward the hoys would he studied individually, and their possibilities ascertained." There would be no difficulty in selecting the boys according to two or three classes. The first class would-be the best. Boys put into the second class would be offered advancement into the better class. They would be induced to work for this advancement, for the sake of the greater liberties, greater amusements, and the granting of badges. A training ship was eminently desirable for the incorngibles. He did not mean a. ship for teaching seamanship, but one moored near the shore. The ship would not ho so much a place for teaching trades, as one for the disciplining of inoorrigibles. He considered that the Education Department had made a great mistake in suppressing the name of reformatory. People did not recognise that Burnham had seat to it boys for reformatory training, and that a reformatory was a fourth-class prison. Mr Bishop said that Mr Smail was quite right; reformatories were not recognised in legal parlance at all in this colony. Replying to further questions Mr Smail said the manager and matron had been disgracefully treated. In the course of his experience he had felt very sorry for them on account of the attacks made upon them. Witness was quite opposed to the hoys being allowed to play games on Sundays. _ It would be a bad thing for the nation if boys were to bo taken from their homes, sent to a reformatory and mad© worse by being allowed to play games on Sundays. There were many ways of making Sunday pleasant without going to the extreme of playing games. He considered that the detention yard was of little use, and that the boys kept there should have a separate donatory, where they should take their meal®.

Replying to' Mr Bishop, who asked if witness knew what was the cause of most of the lapses on the part of boys discharged from Burnham, Mr Small said he thought it was mostly due to their early home training. Ho held that the authorities at the school oould tell when boW came of age whether they were likely to continue a menace to society. Boys who were likely to prove a menace should be detained indeterminately. Defectives should never be in the school, as they were a source of danger to other boys. Regards ing punishments, witness advocated that the chastisement of hoys should he impressed on the rest of the hoys as a very serious, matter. There should be no tying up for punishment such as Dr Sym p s advocated. Mrs E. T. Black said that , she had been for six years a member of the Board of Advice. Her duties had never been defined to her by the Department, and she never felt that the Board was more than a body of official visitors. Her opinion, was that the De-

partmant wanted very little advlcef from the Board. Mr Smith was an point©© by the Department, but sntt had only seen him once at a meeting] during the past three years. She wa« not aware how the Board was oonsti-J tuted. The Board visited the School monthly. On occasions when the visit was not expected- the members found, the school just the same as usual. Sh«e had written to the Department con*] cerning the long hours of the attend dants. She considered that the question of h oure was not a eurpneina matter for complaint. The Board had felt very strongly against the establish* ment of the detention yard, and wrote! in April, 1903,' to the manager suggest* ing that the yard should be made lead, of. the nature of a gaol. A meeting} of the Board was held to protest against! the yard. The protest, however, was unavailing. The situation, lack qfi classification, long hours of work for attendants, and the “barrack” system' on which the place was conducted alt I militated against the success of the School. She was repeatedly ..struck byi the fact that almost ©very .time thall Board visited the School there was ar new attendant. It appeared to witness that the attendants were chosen for their ability to do certain work on! the place, their influence over the boys being a secondary matter.' The matron did hot seem to. grasp her position. She did her work in what seemed to be\a. mechanical way. ■ Witness was of opinion that a matron of such! a place should not have other interests to divide her care with the work of the school. The hoys were well, fed and clothed, hut there was too much of thoj barrack system; She considered the Board of Advice was such only nominally. In email matters, the .Department usually conceded to the : re-,

quest® of the Board. In some cases .on greater importance, the Board had, been told that no good purpose would? be served by inquiring into them. The. boys did not seem inclined to speak to ,the members of the Board. She believed Mr Archey. to be very/‘.fall of his work,” and anxious to do his best.) She considered, however, that he wa* very quick tempered, and such- a maw was likely to be irritating an,i oontra-l dictory at times, - ; 1 The inquiry then adjourned till 10.3Q(i a.m. to-day. ,^