THE COST OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIII, Issue 11, 3 July 1885, Page 7

THE COST OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

(Sydney Freeman's Journal.') To natives and old colonists it was apparent, from the first, that any hope of dissuading tho majority from continuiug the present Public School system was altogether out of the question. The minds of the people were made up, and with the people in such a condition it was useles3 to argue. Led on. by those who ought to have known, and, we believe, who did know better, the colony went almost mad. on the Education question. If it was- pointed out that it was unfair to make one section of the people subscribe towards a system in which they could have no share, they looked upon you as if you were a simpleton — why, that was the very thing that gave 6uch a zest to the change. If you pleaded for the Christianity of the next generation, and pointed out that secular schools practically meant paganism they replied, with considerable truth, that Christianity was no longer the law of the land ; and hinted toal the less Chiistian the next generation might be, the better for the colony. Our readers will remember the tone of the Press, the stump speeches, and the debates in Parliament when the Edncation Act was being passed. To argue with such people was hopeless. Nothing bat the stern discipline of facts could convince them. To appeal to a justice which they ignored, or to a Christianity which they denied, was useless— the only argument which can reach such people is the very appreciable one of pounds, shillings, aud pence. The excuse put forward for abolishing the old denominational sj stem was its costliness. It was to relieve the taxpayer that the present system was instituted. The fallacy of this hope was pointed out also— but did not Sir Henry Parkes and Mr. Greenwood and the Herald and the ether gods of the hour say otherwise? Fortunately, figures are rot like justice, religion, and such unimportant matters, for about them there can be no dispute. In them we think we see the first faint sign of the downfall of the Education Act. In the year 1881— the last year of ths old {denominational system — the expenditure was £474,157 5s 7d. This was considered too costly, and under the very thin plea of economy, the secular system was commenced. Last year this system, which was to cause a saving to the tax-payers, cost no less than £774,357 6s— that is, making every allowance for the increase of population, the tax-payers have to pay about a quarter of a million more than they would have had to pay under the denominational system. Or, to put the figures more simply, the cost per pupil under the denominational system was £5 14s 4d ; last year it was £8 2s 9J. ! That is to say, the tax-payers are paying £2 8g 5d more per head for the luxury of depriving the next generation of its Christianity. But if the coat of the Primary schools shows how false was the excuse for the change, what can be said for the High schools ? Can it bn believed that these schools are worked at a loss — which is made up by the taxpayers—of £14 17s 6d a head ? The gieater part of this injustice to the tax-payers is caused by the country High schools, for the maintenance of which there does not seem to be even the semblance

oE justification. Let the returns from the High school at Bathurst— one of our oldest and wealthiest towns — tell us. Last year the average attendance was 23.5, and the fees received were £111 4s. As against this, there is debited £998 for salaries, and £385 for rent. These figures mean that this school is worked at a loss of £1240 15s, which sum the taxpayers have to subscribe in order that these Bathuist children may learn accomplishments almost free of cost. The cost of each of these children to the taxpayers is £51 a year. That is about £24 a year more than it would cost to send them to the University. Such figures as these indicate the ultimate fate of the Education Act. If the Education Vote is £300,000 more now than it was in 1881, what will it be years hence, when we have parted with oar land, when our debentures are falling due, when we have assumed national responsibilities, aud when the mob have become confirmed in those habits of extravagance — at other people's expense —which it is the policy of the Education Department to foster ? The system will crumble beneath its own weight. When the results are compared with the cost, and when the cost is felt as a real burden 10 be defrayed by direct taxation— then, and not till then, we may expect the masses to listen to reason.