THE Manawatu Times. SATURDAY, OCT. 16, 1880. THE STONEY CREEK SCHOOL.

Manawatu Times, Volume IV, Issue 80, 16 October 1880, Page 2

THE Manawatu Times.

SATURDAY, OCT. 16, 1880. THE STONEY CREEK SCHOOL.

" \Tcrdi »r« thljiga, and a drop «( ink fulling like dew upsn a thought, pmlucw tKtt wkiab Mnkea thousaads, ftrs3.pt millions think."

Httherto we have studiously refrained from making the slightest comment upon the unfortunate unpleasantness which has existed between a portion of the Stoney Creek School Committee and Mr. M.vlcoltm, the master m charge, and our reason for so doing was that we thought it moi'e politic to reserve comment until we were m possession of the full factß and circumstances connected with the caso. We have received and published letters affecting it, been interviewed by members of the Committee and the master, and attended a public meeting at which the matter was most fully discussed, and consequently we feel that now we are m a position to deal fairly and impartially with the difference between the parties, without doing an injustice through the want of knowledge of the particulars. On the 13th of last month corporal punishment was 'inflicted upon a boy, »<<ed tileven years, for a disgusting offence, which it was asserted wa« unneccessarily severe and exceeded due bounds. The action of the master was referred to the Wanganui Education Board, *4d while a censure was passed upon Mr. Malcolm, he, and all other teachers were referred to the Regulations relative to corporal punishment, the Board wishing to impress upon them the importance of exercising the greatest caution not to exceed the limits of discretion indicated by the Regulations, aud the reasonable amount of punishment to beinflisted. It was, moreover, placed before the Board that the master had agreed to setile all legal and medical charges connected with tlie case, and give the father of the boy a solatium of £2 m consideration of his stopping further proceedings. Of course, Mr. Malcolm did not admit that the money was giren as a bribe, but nevertheless the charge was praferred against him as such before the Board, but that bodj while condemning the aotion, decided that neither the severity of the caatigation, nor the subsequent action to hush the oonsequences, was a sufficient reason to call far the master's removal. There can be no doubt Jthat the Committee f.cted quite right m taking its first action, and placing his conduct before a superior tribunal. They could not do otherwise. They had the doctor's certificate that "m this case tho punishment has exceeded due bounds," and although it appeared that Shaplefski, who complained of tho brutal treatment of his son, had received a recompense which left him willing to withdraw the charge, th» Committee could take no cogniianoo, nor be influenced by sach action. They were the guardians of the pupils attending the school, and for the protection of their charges, it was necessary that any breach of the 3?egulationa nhould be dealt with. The case wai placed bsfore the Board m what — let us hope — was a fair and truthful manner, and there the responsibility of the Committee ceas»d. Had they contented themselves with proceeding thus far and ho farther, they would be entitled to the thanks of the community. Onoe the complaint was placed before the Board it was for aver taken out of their hands, and consequently m ignoring the decision of the Board, and reopening the cas«, they have acted m an unwarrantable manner, insulted the superior bodj, assumed functions to. which they &aye no clai^ whatever, and worst of all, left very good presumptive evidence that from the very first they were not actuated by a conscientious desire to. discharge their duties but '■ gather a wish, to wreak some private ¥eveug« upon a victim within their reach. I£ it be m the power of a committee to set aside the rerdict of fclie Board, th«n plainly it is nothing hi^fc the broadest farce: fco pay it the empty cornpUmenij of passing a judgment which.

wil l not ba carried into effect. Out of the five comnntteemen who closed the school, Mr Blixt the only one who was present at: the meeting, anil it is more than possible that the earnest protest lodged ag&int the removal of Air. Malcolm had considerable influence m urging him to sign the petition for Ins retention and the re-opeuing of the school. It may be urged and eren provrii, that the master brought pecuniary weight to bear upon Shaflrfski to change his opinion as to the severity of his son's punishment, but it -would be an insult to reason and common senis? to imagine that the thirty-two settlers who spoke so strongly m Mr. Malcolm's favor could bo swayed by inteivsted motives. We have' never attended a meting where there was such thorough earnest unanimity, and even supposing Hie committee were acting m a legal manner — which they certainly were not — such a weight and unity of public opinion should cause them to pause iv their action.