The Waipa Post. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1913. DISTRICT TECHNICALSCHOOL.

Waipa Post, Volume VI, Issue 248, 19 September 1913, Page 2

The Waipa Post. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1913. DISTRICT TECHNICALSCHOOL.

A CURSORY glance ai the list of. subscriptions received to date by the chairman of the local school committee towards the amount of subsidy required for the establishment of. a district Technical school and agricultural laboratories at £e Awamutu reveals the fact that a great many who could and who should be to the fore in .financially assisting this movement are not showing that interest which common sense demands. It also shows that it is the townsman rather than the farmer who i's responding to the school committee’s appeal for funds, for whilst the town lists show a fair proportion of acknowledgments, the.conn try lists bear scant-evidence of response. The position, unfortunately, is not foreign, to this district’s public affairs. It is the land-owner, not only within the confines' of the town district, but also in the adjacent settlements; who receives the greatest financial benefit as a result of the introduction of public facilities and conveniences, yet it frequently happens that in such cases as the one in question, the strain falls heaviest upon those whose interests in land are small, and whose- chances of return are, if not remote, very small by com■parisori. • But the case in point—the establishment of a technical school and agricultural laboratories —is of very much greater importauce to the farmer than the townsman. When the townsman ‘‘shows willing,” the least the farmer can do is to co-operate and so by concerted action assure to the district the establishment of a highly-valuable asset and the betterment of local educational facilities for both old and young. The benefits of technical education have been very clearly demonstrated whilst the necessity of scientific knowledge on the farm is admitted by everyone Here then, is an opportunity which every farmer should grasp with both hands. With an institution, the object of which is the imparting of scientific agricultural instruction, it will be possible for farmers of this district to gain valuable theory which can be immediately put to the test whilst engaged in the practical woi k of the farm. The benefits of this must be apparent. Farming tc-day is not for the dullard; it is the man who can combine, theoretical and practical knowledge who succeeds as a farmer. But these facts are well known. Why then, is it that this district’s farmers are so slow to grasp the opportunity now afforded them ? Is it that they are silent'in the hope that the “ other tellow ” will bear the whole cost ; is it that they are devoid of public spiritedness and lost entirely' to a sense of their moral responsibilities to their country, their district and their children? When it is considered that only £250 is asked for by the Government as a subsidy towards the cost of erecting buildings worth £3,000, and providing educational facilities of inestimable value, the apparent lack of interest is something to be wondered at. So much benefit will immediately accrue to the farmer by the carrying out of these proposals that the lack of his support is evidence of short-sightedness where his own immediate interests are concerned. We would not infer that the whole amount of the required subsidy should come out of the pockets of the farmer. Townsman and farmer alike are benefitted and each should contribute towards the fund, and so assure the speedy consummation of the scheme. But the District Technical School proposals have afforded yet another opportunity for a display of either thoughtlessness or lack of interest, more especially on the part of those men whose lands have so increased in value as the result of a something entirely outside their

■' wll efforts witn its consequent " unearned increm eut.” The carrying' out of public works—the .buiUing of technical scliools or the establishment of any othe>' facility for the public good— must enhance the value of every acre ofjand. Is it not fair then that those who principally benefit should devote a small percentage ot “ the gains” towards so worthy a purpose, instead of waiting for the “ other fellow ” to carry all the load or the greater part of it ? The proposal of the school committee to publish its subscription list is a good one. We will not go the length of suggesting that a further list, showing the names of those persons who failed to acknowledge the committee’s appeal be published, but the committee could scarcely be blamed if it did. It would, at least, make interesting reading. In the public interest it is only right that fullest possible publicity should* be given in matters of this sort, and we will find no fault with the committee should it decide so to do.