THE CAMBRIDGE SCHOOL COMMITTEE. The Teacher v. the Chairman: A Case of Criminal Libel.

Waikato Times, Volume XXI, Issue 1782, 6 December 1883, Page 2

THE CAMBRIDGE SCHOOL COMMITTEE. The Teacher v. the Chairman: A Case of Criminal Libel.

Those concerned in the difference whichhas recently ai isen between (he committee of the Cambridge High School on the one hand, and the head teacher (Mr K. D. Stewart) and the parents on the other, will doubtless be surprised to learn that matters are likely to culminate in the Supreme Court at Auckland, in the shape of a criminal libel, the worthy chairman of the cojnniittee (Mr Hosking) figuring in the capacity of defendant, and Mr Arnold, the late assistant teacher of the High School, as complainant. It will be remembered by all who read our report of the proceeding-!, that at the last meeting of the committee, Mr Hosking stated that since Mr Wilson had left the High School, the pupils had made no progress whatever, and that they were altogether ignorant of the subjects set down in the High School curriculum, together with other assertions of a like character. As the pupils of the High School .since Mr Wilson's departure have been under the tuition of Mr Arnold (who bears an excellent reputation as a teacher), that gentleman considered Mr Hosking's assertions about the non-progress of the school, and the non-proficiency of the pupils as specially directed at him, and feeling that those were not altogether undesei ved, but. to his mind, decidedly untruthful, he forthwith wrote to Mr Hoiking, demanding a full and unqualified retraction of his statements, and a public apology through the Press for having ever made use of them ; and also that if this demand was not complied witli before Saturday proceedings for criminal libel should at once be instituted. Mr Hosking, we understand, has interviewed Mr Arnold on the matter with the object of arriving at an amicable understanding, but without effect. He assured Mr Arnold the committee would give him as good a testimonial as he ever got in his life-time ; but that gentleman will accept nothing short of an unqualified retraction and a public apology, which Mr Hosking, we understand, does not feel inclined to make. Mr M. R. Keeping, solicitor, has been instructed by Mr Arnold to give effeo.t to his intention in case of Mr Hosking's non-compliance, which, if. not given by Monday, proceedings will be immediately instituted.