Their Views.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 858, 10 August 1888, Page 27

Their Views.

The Education Board has refused to

ask for a Commission of Inquiry with reference to the moral condition of the State schools. We greatly regret and sti’ongly disapprove this decision. We fear the Boai‘d will discover at no distant date that it has committed a grave error, and that if s’ action has been deeply prejudicial to interests of the system which the Jo card: strives so hard and so recklessly to bolster up. But that is its own/ look out, aud upon its head must rest the consequences. have said what we deemed a solemn duty to say, and there our function ends. We cannot compel the Board to do its duty. The remarks made by members of the Board concerning this journal and its action wereutterly contemptible in their childishness, and the Chairman’s wild assertion, that the only case brought under our notice was the one he quoted, was absolutely contrary to fact. We regret to say several occurrences were reported to us of which he appears not to have heard at all, and these allegations were supported by what we cannot but deem very strong evidence. Had the Commission been appointed, and had the statements made to us. been repeated to the Commissioners, we fear the Board would have had to make a very sudden and undignified descent from the pedestal of complacent incredulity on which it haß placed itself. The Chairman’s assertion, that we have shifted or modified our ground, is of course without a shadow of foundation in fact. Why did ho not quote our words, in support of this assertion ? Simply because he could not, and he knows that very well. We repeat: Our attitude has been entirely consistent and unchanged throughout, and we challenge disproof of our statement. It is not our fault if the Board will persist in fathering upon us charges that we never made. As for the silly vapouringc o£ writers who are notorious for their “ weathercockian ” changeableness ; who never hold any opinions excepting on the condition that *• ef they don’t suit they kin be altered ; ” who are consistent only in inconsistency, aud who would instantly “take a brief” on the other side if it suited them to do so, we can afford to treat these with calm contempt. Let them rave ! Their virulent abuse merely demonstrates the weakness of their case.