Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DECISION RESERVED

CHARGE AGAINST A TEACHER. THE QUESTION OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT. (Special to tho “Times/') AUCKLAND, September U-. An important principle is involved in tho case which caiuo before the Uneivunga Court to-day, ’ when Air Mclntosh, headmaster, was charged with assaulting a pupil who was alleged td have been unduly caned. Counsel for the parents. Air Brookfield, contended that the administration of corporal punishment should be confined to deliberate breaches of discipline or wilful fault. What (asked Air Brookheld) was this boy's wilful fault? He was not there when the bell rang. If the master had given only one stroke he would have been guilty of an assault. He did not a-sk tho boy wfty he was late, but commanded that those who were late should stand out to receive punishment. It was tho duty of a master to find out why the boy was late, and whether he had a good reason for being late. This was not done, and therefore the punishment was unjust from beginning to end.

For the defence Dr Bamford urged that the schoolmaster being entitled to punish, the extent of the punishment .must be loft to his discretion. If a parent kept a child late he must Bend a note or the schoolmaster was entitled to punish. In this cose it was clear that the master believed this boy to be one of those who had been cribbing playtime.

His Worship: Do you mean to say that if men come here and don't say anything T am simply to understand them guilty and proceed to punish them? We ask them to plead, and if they don't plead we explain what plonrlm* moans, and tlmse are men, not boys. Dr Bamford: Yes. because the procedure of the Court is definitely laid down, and tho AUeistrnto is not a wit11P,C* of fact as fh« schoolmaster is. ITis \Aorslun- Whatever I do in tho matter I want to be able to lay down a principle. Wo aro roallv considering onr fnlnre men and woe-eu. not tide narficnlar boy or this particular teachor. It seems to mo that it ivonld be very hard on youngsters if they were nnnisWl and not any inouiry mad-' I realise that them is a considerable want of parental control.

His Worship intimated that bo would reserve his decision.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM19080915.2.78

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6625, 15 September 1908, Page 7

Word Count
386

DECISION RESERVED New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6625, 15 September 1908, Page 7

DECISION RESERVED New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6625, 15 September 1908, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert