TECHNICAL COLLEGE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19452, 7 October 1926, Page 14

TECHNICAL COLLEGE.

CONCLUSION OF INQUIRY.

THE DISAFFECTED MASTERS

NEED OF TRANSFER SYSTEM

After sitting on seven different days, the Auckland Technical College Commission closed its inquiry yesterday. The findings of the commissioner, Mr. J. 11. Salmon, S.M., upon the charges made by Mr. G. Laing against (ho director of the college, Mr. G. J. Park, and upon the control of tho institution, will be forwarded to the Government in due course. Mr. I. J. G oldstine, counsel for Mr. V.. Stephenson, one of the three masters who had heen invited to appear as witnesses, stated he had advised his client not lo give evidence. lie could find no evidence in the legal sense reflecting .on Mr. Stephenson. There had heen nothing more than suggestions against him.

Mr. L. P. Learv, counsel for the direc tor, remarked that no party to the pro. ceedings had made any charge against Mr. •Stephenson. He had said so when cor tain matters were being discussed.

Mr. H. A. Jones, a member of the college staff, who had previously given evidence, said a number of the teachers had requested him to state the circumstances leading up. In the formation of a new. branch of the Technical College Teachers' Association, with membership confined to the college staff. He proceeded to do so. Witness said a meeting of the. staff had passed a vote of confidence in Mr. Park ay director. I his concluded the evidence. The Board's Purpose. Mr. R. P. Towle, in add ressing the commissioner on behalf of the Board of Governors, said the real issue in the inquiry had been overclouded in the past two days by the allegations of Mr. Johnstone, as counsel for Mr. Allen, that the Board of Governors was attacking members of the staff. As a matter of fact, the board merely wished to obtain a full investigation of Mr. Laing's charges. In the proceedings it had been stated that certain masters had been hostile to the director. It was essential to the welfare of the college that the staff should be loyal to its head, and the matter was one upon which the commission might properly make a finding. The board was not attacking anybody. All it wished was to see that the college was well and efficiently conducted.

The inquiry at the outset had taken the form of a personal attack on Mr. Park by .Mr. Laing. No direct charge had been made against the board. It had been suggested the board had allowed Mr. Park to "run'' it, but this had been clearly disproved. It had been shown that the board was discharging its duties properly, and that the collago was obtaining good and progressively hotter results.

Intimidation Denied

Mr. Towle referred to a siai,->;t;-nt made to the commission by Mr. Hc.tnr.g, one of the masters, that the superintendent of technical education, Mr. La Trobe, had suggested to him that he and two others should resign. He wished to make it clear that the board had never approached the three masters in that way. When Mr. 1-inlay and his client, Mr. Laing, wished to retire from the case, the conditions of their retirement were discussed, and the board's representatives stated that if all tha charges were completely retracted and the three masters resigned the board would bo content to let the whole matter drop.

Mr. Leery, referring to the charges against Mr. Park, said it was remarkable that not a single parent had accepted the invitation ■to give evidence. Nor had a single member of the college staff appeared as a witness against Mr. Park. Considering the size of "the college and the many hundreds of people who had a direct concern in Mr. Park's administration, the absence of such complaints must be much in his favour.

Referring to v»lr. Herring's statement, Mr. Leary said tho original suggestion that the three masters should resign had been only incidental to the discussion of terms. It had been introduced because the three would have been Mr. Laing's principal witnesses if Mr. Laing had gone on, and it was acknowledged that they were the persons referred to in his petition. Mr. La Trobe informed Mr. Herring, us was quite fair, yet Mr. Laing had since declared that his action was intimidation.

Mr. Leary remarked that some friction due to incompatibility of temperament was bound to occur among the staff of any large institution. The remedy in all other Government departments was to transfer the dissatisfied officers to other surroundings. If this had been possible in the Education Department all the present trouble would have been avoided. The evidence had clearly shown tho cause of all the friction had been a knot of disaffected masters. He would submit that the- commissioner was entitled to refer to that aspect of the n'atter, and he hoped the report would contain some constructive recommendations upon it. Both counsel thanked the commissioner for the consideration he had shown to all parties and for the latitude he had permitted.