PHYSICAL TRAINING IN SCHOOLS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15855, 29 August 1913, Page 7

PHYSICAL TRAINING IN SCHOOLS.

APPOINTMENT OF MR GARLICK. PROGRESS OTTHE INQUIRY. (Pta United' Psias Association.) WELLINGTON, August 28. The Royd Garlick Committee of Inquiry met this afternoon to hear the evidence from Mr Laurenson in support of his statement in the House during the debate on the Address-in-reply. to the effect that the Hon. Mr Allen (Minister of Education) had appointed " a personal friend to a billet worth £500 per year, and he did not know his qualifications." Mr Laurenson said his justification for making the statement was that- he knew that Mr Garlick had no exceptional qualifications for the position. The Hon. Mr Allen had stated that he knew Mr Garlick, and as he appointed him to an available position without advertising or calling for applications he (Mr Laurenson) was justified in concluding that Mr Garlick got the position because he was personally known to the Minister. He quoted from comments in the Lyttelton Times to show that it was current talk that Mr Garlick was on terms of friendship with several members of the Cabinet, Those statements had not been denied' by the Minister.

To Mr Herdman: He spoke in the House ■pith, a sense of responsibility. He declined to say whether it was his duty to first satisfy himself as to the accuracy of his statements before he made them. He was to some extent fortified in his charge by the statement made to the correspon-' dent of the Lyttelton Times by Mr Allen himself. He denied ever having said that Mr Garlick was incompetent, but he did not think he was more competent than other men in the dominion whose services were available, Ho knew of no appointments of importanoe in the public service that had been made by Liberal Governments without advertising. Where the head-masters of schools could only reach £400 a year, he thought £600 was too much for Mr Garlick. .

To Mr Guthrie: If Mr Allen were to assure'him that Mr Garlick was not his personal friend he would accept it, but without that assurance .he would make the same_ statement again. In view of all the circumstances surrounding the appointment the statement was perfectly justified, and was not as unfair as many statements made against the -Liberal Governments by Mr Allen and his friends. He thought that if Mr Allen had.to go through the business again he would not appoint Mr Garlick.

To Mr Poland: While the country was not able to give head-masters £600 tie did not think the Minister was justified in giving Mr Garlick £600. The committee then proceeded to consider the statement by Mr Forbes (member for Hurunui) that "It had been freely stated that the appointment was made for political purposes. Mr Forbes said it was freely stated in the press and in the street that the appointment was political. He had said that he, personally, did not think tho appoint ment was political, but that other people were not of that opinion, and their view was to some extent justified by other appointments made by the Massey Govern ment, such as those to the Canterbury Land Board and the Westport Harbour Board. He thought Mr Wilford in his speech had made out' a strong case in this direction, and he had said so.

To Mr Guthrie: He would not admit that the inference that the appointment was a political one could be drawn from his speech. He was anxious to have the matter cleared up, and so he had said he regretted that the suspicion of a political appointment should be attached to the Education Department. He thought his speech was a very fair statement of the position. Ho had read it through again that day, and he felt rather proud of it. There was nothing of innuendo in the speech.

To Mr Thomson : He knew- nothing of Mr Garlick's political opinions. He would not accept the opinion of a majority of the House that his speech was full of innuendoes if that majority was made up of Government supporters. Mr Allen then asked leave to make a statement in reference to Mr charge that he had appointed a personal friend. He said that no evidence had been adduced in support of this charge except an extract from a newspaper. He had never seen Mr Garlick prior to September 14. He had already determined to ask the advice of some expert in physical training, and he requested the Inspector-general, Dr Hardwick Smith, and Dr Makgill, with whom he had been in touch and who were enthusiasts in physical training, to Tecommend such an expert to sit on the Committee of Advice which he had set up to assist him in the establishment of the scheme of physical training in the public schools. Both Dr Hardwick Smith and Dr Makgill strongly recommended Mr Garlick and Mrs' Heap, who was teaching physical training in Auckland. He wrote to Mt Garlick asking him if he would act. He consented to do eo, and that was the first time he had seen him. Since then ho had not seen him except in an official capacity. He had never been in Mr Garlick's house, and Mr Garlick had never been in his. He denied absolutely that he had appointed a personal friend in Mr Garlick. 1

Royd Garlick, who was called on this point, said he had nothing to add to Mr Allen's statement. It was perfectly true that he had never seen or communicated with Mr Allen prior to September 14. This was all'the evidence on this point, and the committee adjourned until 3 p.m. to-morrow. .