THE DUNEDIN SCHOOL COMMITTEE AND THE EDUCATION BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 6791, 20 November 1883, Page 3

THE DUNEDIN SCHOOL COMMITTEE AND THE EDUCATION BOARD.

TO THE EDITOR.

Sib, —Mr Bolt ia incapable of boing disingenuous, and therefore I am at a loss to understand how he can represent me as disclaiming any knowledge of the Education Board's scale of allowances to committees, a discussion of which occupied more than half of my letter. My main object, indeed, in writing to you was to show that this muchabused scale was more favourable to the Dunedin than to the country schools, notwithstanding that 'the contrary had been as strongly asserted by the Dunedin Committee. Taking as my data the actual expenditure on the schools during five years, I proved, amongst other interesting conclusions, that while the scale allowances, supplemented by the "grants in aid," were not in any case sufficient for all necessary expenses, the deficiency for the Dunedin schools was only at the rate of 9d per scholar per year, while for the country schools it was 2s. Id per scholar per year. Kxcept for the halfpenny, which Mr D. M. Stuart magnanimously consents to waive, the grants in aid were equal; hence the scale allowances are in favour of Dunedin to the extent of la 4d per scholar per year. _ It is not, however, for the purpose of restating thia or any other of my former conclusions, which cannot now bo obscured by any juggling with figures, that I now ask for a portion of your space, but in order that I may give an additional explanation, suggested by Mr Bolt's letter in your issue of today. The bitterness with which' Mr Bolt descants, in more than a quartsr of a column, upon the grants in aid of committees seems to throw quite a flood of light upon tba cause of the chronic irritability from which the Duuediu Committee have Buffered, and of which no rational explanation has hitherto been offered. It appeare now, according to Mr Bolt, that the Committee do not really want more money from the Board, or only a very little more money; butthey cannotendursthatthey should have to request the Board to carry out certain works for them, instead of receiving money with which they might do it themselves. The expressions which Mr Bolt uses in this connection are only symptomatic of the malady which I have indicated, and are not to be taken as indicating a real grievance, seeing that the distribution of the grants in aid is admitted to have been perfectly fair. But for two excellent reasons, it would be a matter of indifference to the Board, as I believe it is regarded as a matter of indifference by every committee in Otago, except the Dunedin Committee, whether certain necessary works were done directly by the Board, or whether the works were done by the committees, and their allowances correspondingly increased. The firßt reason I paßs over, but the second alone will be quite satisfactory, even to Mr Bolt and the Committee. It is this: Whatever money the Board expends, either directly or in grants to committees, for specified works which can be regarded as improving the Board's property is charged to a special account; whereas any increase in the allowances to committees must, by law, bo taken out of the fund set apart for the salaries of the teachers—a fund which from the outset it has been the Board's policy to spare. The moral of all thia is that if people could only believe that the Education Board may_ know something of its own affairs, and that it may possibly have some reasonable motive for its actions, a few misunderstandings might be Bayed, as well as a great deal of worthless criticism.—l am, &c,

John Shand.

November 19,