Flogging in Schools

Manawatu Standard, Volume XL, Issue 7029, 13 June 1901, Page 4

Flogging in Schools

Mr W. B. Haselden, S.M., delivered the following judgment in the case McNeil v. Mulville:—

The case is of some importance to defendant, and possibly to teachers in State schools generally. The defendant was in charge of the State school at Mitchelltown. The boy McNeil, who is only eight years of age, and somewhat small, was a scholar thereat. He had been detected in a very serious offence, and a comparatively severe punishment was justifiable. The defendant ap-' pears to have proceeded in his duty in a calm . manner. He made due enquiry into the circumstances, and upon.the confession of the boy, he spoke to the scholars generally, pointing out' the necessity for severely punishing such an offence. He then administered four cuts of the cane on the boy's hands, and without divestj ing the boy of any of his clothing, gave him a numberof cuts on his hind I parts. The defendant says he gave nine cuts. Other witnesses, who spoke from an inspection of the boy's person, think he must have been given a good many more. The boy did not appear to suffer at the time very much, nor immediately afterwards, but there is no doubt that the boy was considerably marked. If the offence of which the boy had been guilty had been any of the ordinary breaches of discipline, I should say that the punishment was too severe, but considering the very grave offence, I think that a severe punishment was what the boy merited, and was really the truest kindness, both to the boy himself and to the school generally. Before I could find the defendant guilty, I should have to to come to the conclusion that the chastisement had been immoderate, and had been inflicted with a reckless disregard to the consequences. I am unable to find any such element in this case. The information is dismissed.—N.Z. Times.