HAKATERAMEA SCHOOL AFFAIRS.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XV, Issue 4725, 21 July 1890, Page 4

HAKATERAMEA SCHOOL AFFAIRS.

TO THE BDITOK. SrR, —I see in your issue of to-day a letter signed " Ruat Ccelum." I expect this is "Justice" again. Everything is fair in lovo and war, but I wish it to bo distinctly understood that I want neither with "Justice." Now, let me say that thi3 Committeu want} some of Mrs Emmelt's teaching, but there Is not much chance of our getting it. No, we would be eatisfied to get along in our benighted state, but we do not want our children to be subjected to the same misfortune, which would be the result If Mrs Emmett were allowed to continue teaching. Nosy, one word to " Householder." Let me sincerely beseech you to let "Ruat Ccelnm " down aa Boftly as you can ; let me not look upon the mud as thick aB you can make it. One word of advice to all, if I may venture it; that is: Let Mrs Emmett'como to me if she wishes, and I will call a meeting of Committee and householders. Then let her and her friend "Justice" "Ruat Cce'.um" What's-hia-namc come, and lay their grievances fairly before the meeting, and let them be guided by its decision. This should be enough to satisfy Mrs Emmett, and I think the Committeo will deal fairly in the matter. I will not say anything here, but what I have to say I will say at a pnblic meeting. Good-bye, and may the mud be still, so that we do not lose our school teacher.—l am, etc., S. M. Cully, Chairman Hakateramea School Committee. Hakateramea, July 18, 1890.

TO THE EDITOII Sjk,— In yonr Issue of Wednesday I notice a reply, evidently the outcome of considerable mental tribulation for the Hakateramea School Committee, calling Into question the correctness of a letter of mine In the Waimate Times of 2nd nit. To me it aeema queer that this Committee should aeek to justify their very questionable treatment of their teacher—and that teacher a lady—in another educational district. Possibly it may be because their action 1133 excited nothing but disgußt aod indignation in the district both aides of the river, and they aeek that sympathy denied them in their own district. Their letter even justifies my previous atricture. I aaid tbey wera not able to adduce any reasons " good or bad" for such unmanly and' ungenerous treatment of a lady. Shame on them ! The only reason they now give is that the lady is uncertified, but the Board pointed out that the lady hid obtained a Ilcenee to teach, which Is, as tbey ought to know, equivalent to a certificate. They then charged the Board with granting her this certificate. Do these wi3e men not know, or won't know, that theso licenses are not Issued by the Baard, bnt by the Education Department alone. Their only reaaon then for thia scandalous treatment is tbua not only bad, hut very bad. They conclude their letter by consigning me to tbe tender mercies of the " City Fathers." I fear ! I quake ! ! I tremble! ! ! I know all the " City Fathers" of Sandhurst, and I am quite sare not one in the place would be guilty of tbe contemptible conduct of the kind in question. If I am informed rightly, the promiuenn leader In this business la much concerned In the " White Elephant." By the way, it aeems a curious coincidence that " Householder's" letter should alao appear at the same time as that of the H.S.C. Is it possible that this proceeds from a cull of this same flock. He aaya " the writer handles his or her subject regardlees of facts and truth." I may as well say I am a "he." He also aaya " the more I atlr tbe mud the thicker it will get." From the tone of his letter, nobody will, I think, regard him as anything else than a mud-allnger. Now for thia mudlarks' "fact." He bpglns by bringing in tbe lady's husband. Tho fact that Mr Emmett has been a valued and trusted servant of the Wai-> mate County Council for the last 14 yeara la a sufficient answer. I do not know what that " fact" has to do with the efficiency of tbe teacher. How does he make out that " the public are taxed," etc. Bosh .' His next fact is that she haß b ; en up for examination twice and failed The lady has been only once. Fact No. 3, that she is not a certificated 'eacher. I have diapoaed of that above. If this mnd-slinging bush lawyer had read the Act a little further he would have found that out. The fact that Mrs Emmett has successfully taught the school, and retained her position for the past six years, and that the Board will not countenance an act of gross injustice, together with the inspector's reports, sufficiently attest her qualifications and fitness for the post she occupies. What, then, do the Committee want ? I fancy an M. A. or even one possessing the qualifications of a " Shoulder to Shoulder." By tho bye, there is a chance for that gentleman to enter the Paradise of school teaching. In conclusion, I must leave "Householder " to wallow in that aiime which is evidently, by his own ahowiog, his congenial element, aud again sign myself Justice. Sandhurst, Jnly 17,1890.