MINIMUM PENALTY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27518, 12 October 1950, Page 3

MINIMUM PENALTY

Failure Of Child To Attend School PARENT CONVICTED The failure of a child to attend a country school on three Friday afternoons was the subject of a case heard before Mr J. G. Warrington, S.M., at a sitting of the Oamaru Magistrate’s Court yesterday. Raymond Presland (Mr H. J. S. Grater) was charged with failing to send his daughter, Paulette Presland, aged nine years, to school on the afternoons on August 11 and September 8 and 15. The magistrate fined Presland 2s, the minimum penalty permitted, on each charge. Mr A. C. Stephens represented the Education Department. Mr Stephens said the child was a pupil of the Teaneraki School and came to Oamaru on Friday afternoons for music lessons. Presland was a former secretary of the local School Committee, but had resigned from this position. Mr Stephens mentioned a similar case at Tauranga recently, where a conviction had been entered on each of seven charges. Following the Tauranga case, Presland had applied for and had been granted by the School Committee a certificate of exemption for his child. Upon examination of section 60 of the Act it had been found that no ground existed upon which the committee could grant the certificate. The certificate was subsequently cancelled by the board, and Presland had been informed of this by letter. The Education Department had published a notice in the Gazette to the effect that music lessons would not be accepted as sufficient reason for the absence of children from school, Mr Stephens said. A copy of this notice had been sent to Presland and every effort had been made to induce him to alter his attitude. Mr Grater said the defendant felt that the case was not a matter which concerned his child alone. Sections 59 and 60 of the Act did not cover the case of the country child. Mr Grater contended that the child’s education had not suffered by her attending music lessons. All the subjects taught at school on Friday afternoons were completed by her with the assistance of her mother and father. Mr Grater submitted the child’s examination reports for last year and this year. These showed that the child had secured between 90 and 100 per cent, last year for writing, expression, spelling, and languages, and between 80 and 00 per cent, for all other subjects with two exceptions. The court had before it, Mr Grater submitted, the case of a parent whose only wrong was that he had technically infringed an Act in order that he might improve his daughter’s education. Mr Warrington, in convicting Presland. said he felt he should not pass continent on the prosecution. As it was, there had been a technical breach of the Act. No doubt the breach had .been committed with the best possible motive on the part of Presland, but even counsel had admitted that it could not be entirely left to the discretion of parents whether or not they would carry out the law with respect to the attendance of their children at school