CANING A SCHOOLGIRL

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16157, 19 February 1916, Page 5

CANING A SCHOOLGIRL

HEAD TEACHER PROSECUTED.

ASSAULT CHARGE DISMISSED. RIVERHEAD SCHOOL INCIDENT. A private prosecution, arising out of the infliction of corporal punishment on a child at the Riverhead school on November 3 last, occupied the Police Court for over eight hours yesterday. William Masson (Mr. R. J. Moody, instructed .by Mr. Hall Skelton), headmaster of the Riverhead school, was charged on the information of Archibald McNair (Mr. J. H. Gregory) with assaulting Catherine McNair, a child of 10 years, by striking her with a cane across th© back, shoulders and arms.

Evidence was given by a schoolgirl named Emily Osborne, who was in the witness box for two and a-half hours, that she was sitting near Catherine McNair on the morning of November 3. The teacher, Mr. Masson, told Catherine" to speak out loudly. Catherine spcke out distinctly. Then Mr. Masson came forward and took hold of the child roughly. He pushed her forward and she fell on to the floor. He then struck the child repeatedly. The strokes were very severe. He first used a supple-jack. This broke, and he then used a cane.

Julia McNair, mother of the child Catherine McNair, said her child's body was marked with weals that might have been made by a cane. In cross-examina-tion, she said that she never punished her children, and would never let her husband touch them.

Medical Testimony. Dr. McDowell, -who examined the .child on November 4, stated that she had 12 distinct marks on the shoulder, back, arms, and legs, such as mieht have been made by the tip of a supple-jack. He regarded the punishment as altogether excessive. He was of opinion that corporal punishment should not be inflicted on a young girl. Even in cases where a grave moral fault had been committed, corporal punishment should be inflicted with care. He found Catherine McNair to be a frail girl, and of a highly-nervous dispositon. Evidence was also given by William, Goody and Constance McNair that the thrashing was severe. Archibald McNair gave evidence as to the appearance cf the child "when she arrived home. Miss Burton, secretary of the Society for the Protection of Women and Children, gave evidence as to examining the child. She saw the marks on her body, and regarded the punishment that caused them to be cruel.

The child, Catherine McNair, also gave evidence.

The Teacher's Version.

The defendant said that on November 3 last he was giving a lesson in reading to the class of which Catherine McNair was a member. He asked the girl to speak more loudly. The request was made in a reasonable tone, but the child did. not attempt to speak out. She then said she would not speak out, and that she ■would tell her father. Witness then went to her desk, and caught her quietly by the shoulder. She evidently thought she | was going to get a beating, and she pulled back. The result was that she fell on to the floor, and in doing so she struck herself on a desk. Witness put her on her feet calmly and dispassionately. She then walked forward to the front of the classroom. Witness thought that in view of the fact that the child had repeatedly ■wilfully disobeyed him she deserved punishment. He ordered her to put out her hand. She refused to do so, saying that she was not to be caned, and that she would, tell her father. Witness then tapped the child on the legs. She. still refused to hold out her hand, and witness hit her across the shoulder. She then held out her hand. He caned her twice. The girl then went on with her work, and proceeded to do so throughout the day. He was annoyed at the child's disobedience, but he was positive he did not lose his temper. He had been teaching for 20 years, and had never been accused of treating a child cruelly before. His whole purpose in punishing the child was to preserve discipline. He had found Catherine McNair to be very stubborn and disobedient.

-Joseph Dowling, chairman of Riverhead School Committee, said that he regarded Mr. Mas3on as a satisfactory teacher. He had heard no complaint about him except in this case.

Miss Moore, an assistant teacher, said she witnessed part of the episode between Mr. Masson and the child Catherine McNair. She did not consider the punishment to be unduly severe or protracted.

The Magistrate's Comments. The magistrate, in giving judgment, said it had been shown that the child was stubborn, disobedient and undisciplined. There was nothing more objectionable in a school than an undisciplined child. -The child resisted when being brought to the front. She fell and hurt herself on a projecting edge of a desk. The teacher insisted on the child holding out her hand. Owing to the unfortunate lack of family discipline, she refused, and threatened to tell her father if she were caned. Mr- Frazer said that his own experience as a teacher convinced him that wilful opposition by a pupil was most annoying. No parent had the right to interfere between teacher and pupil. The medical evidence showed that the child had.been excessively punished. . The . - magistrate pointed out, that the doctor was not aware that the severe bruises on the shoulder were caused '■- by <i the fall on the desk. He considered thatdespite this the child ; had | been ■_. more severely punished than was . quite ■ reasonable, considering her » age, size and sex. It would have been wiser had the teacher postponed- the punishment for a while. The punishment was not so severe as to be quite beyond the teacher's discretion. Severe punishment of some sort was necessary in the circumstances. He felt that the punishment inflicted was rather excessive, and at first sight he felt that the informant had grounds for prosecuting. But in view of all the circumstances, he did" not feel that the tether should jbe blamed. The information-would- be dismissed, .' the costs 7to be arranged between the parties. .