North Otago Times.

Friday, November 27, 1885.

Secondary Education: Proposed Amendment of Constitution.

To the Editor.

Sir,—This letter is re-written after your intimation that "J. A. Fenton" is the venerable Archdeacon. The representations, that the yearly cost per pupil to the nation is either L50 or L70, was referred to by me as having been made by two gentlemen, one saying L50, the other, L70, and pooh-poohed. I made such use of it in my speech as to show I did not think these gentlemen likely to make a gross blunder in their estimate in such a case. But it was pooh-poohed by Mr Hislop as ridiculous; and now it is spoken of by the Archdeacon as "amazing." It happens that three days ago I obtained from the gentleman who had said L70 the detailed ground of his estimate; and I will give it to your readers. But I must first call attention to the lie of the land in relation to this matter.

The Archdeacon criticises this whole movement as if it had been simply mine, and favors the public with his views of what he supposes likely to be the amendment of the educational constitution sought by the promoters. The movement, in fact, is on behalf of a Conference completely representing the public interests of education connected with Oamaru and Waitaki County. The only point fairly raised at present in connection with it is that made by the unanimous resolution of Conference (6th Nov.), "that in the interest of Secondary education it is indispensable that the Waitaki High School be transferred to or near Oamaru under such a constitution as Parliament shall direct." The interest in view was that of the people of the locality in having "secondary education within easy reach of both sexes and all classes." To that resolution every householder in the county will soon have an opportunity of saying either "yes" or "no" for himself. In the meantime let it be marked that what the Archdeacon is opposing is a unanimous resolution, in the vital interest of the people's education, of the publicly recognised representatives of the people.

As to the new constitution, to be formed in the event of that resolution taking effect, the Archdeacon may have an opportunity of making suggestions to Parliament: the resolution speaks of that new constitutionas what "parliament shall direct." Why he now gives his opinions about what he supposes to be my views or intentions, I really do not know. The detailed matters of which he speaks here may, when the time comes, be considered by parliament "directing." In the mean time such matters may perhaps be taken into view by the Committee of Conference, which consists of the two statutory governors of Waitaki High School, three representatives of local School Committees, and a member of the Otago Board of Education. What the committee's views may be regarding a new constitution, they can report to the Conference or to the general public as they see cause. But any discussion of such details at present is obviously fitted to withdraw public attention from the one point of there solution of Conference, and is not obviously fitted for any other purpose.

In relation to the cost per boy of Waitaki School as now constituted, the representation which has "amazed" the Archdeacon had reference to the cost "to the nation." He makes this to mean, what the Government is contributing yearly," and apparently understands it as meaning, what the Waitaki Governors are actually laying out on education. Whether the two things are one, can be ascertained In due time. For the present let it be kep in mind that the question raised by that representation is, and is only, about the cost "to the nation."

The purpose of the representation was, to show the amount of an alleged abuse. The alleged abuse is, waste of public educational funds in paying for the education of the comparatively wealthy class, whose children would be well-educated though there were no Waitaki School in existence, so that the effect of the said payment is, not to educate the children, but to enrich the parents. The Archdeacon's estimate, of L25 per pupil, instead of either L50 or L75, Is really as straight to the purpose as if we should take the higher estimates. When the argument is, Here is waste of public money which ought to have been educating the children of the people, then to page break answer, The amount is only L25, not L50 or L75, Is like in a murder case pleading "not guilty" on the ground that the murdered person was not a giant. But now is to the amount of the waste.

Here is the estimate of my informant who said L70. The value of the endowments is L68,000; to which, in order to keep well within the limit of safe calculation he does not add the L5000 (?) with which the estate has been burdened for building On the same account he reckons the interest on that L68,000 at only 6 per cent. The yearly cost to the nation is thus L4080. To this he adds the L500 of Parliamentary grant last year: total L4580. Taking the number of pupils at 45, he makes out the whole cost per pupil to be L101, Deducting L10 per pupil for fees (which are made somewhat lower than the ten guineas to families having several boys in attendance), he finds the net cost to the nation to be L91. A result no doubt "amazing"—as on every favored pupil it makes the nation's outlay to be about half the whole cost of secondary education for mankind and womankind in the Oamaru Grammar School.

Since the above was first written (yesterday), I have been told that another estimate of the value of the endowments is 1.42,000. This at 6 per cent, gives L2520 a year of cost to the nation. Along with the L500 of grant last year, it makes up L3020; which, with deduction of an average of L10 for fees, would leave a net cost to the nation of L67 per pupil. If the L500 be added to the endowment instead of to last year's outlay, the net cost to the nation per pupil will be L83 upon the estimate of L68,000, and L47 upon the estimate of L42,000. The matter of these calculations, regarding amount of national wealth set apart for Waitaki School, is now being inquired into by men who will obtain exact and verified information. In the meantime the Archdeacon has done good service to the movement for an amended constitution by recalling attention to the amount of waste under the existing constitution.

Let it however be observed and kept In mind, that his reasoning has reference only to the amount of the waste. The essential contention, that it is all waste, with drawn f om the people's eduction, he does not touch. The national means of secondary education of the sons and daughters of the people are made practically inaccesible to them; and, it is reasoned, this costs the nation only L25 per pupil, not L50 or L70. Why should the nation pay anything for withholding secondary education from the sons and daughters of the people?

I now again call attention to the question, regarding the Waitaki School as now constituted: What is the use of it, what purpose does it serve? It does not and cannot educate the sons and daughters of the people. What it does is, to relieve the comparatively wealthy class of the expense of educating their children, at a cost to the nation, from public funds in ended for the people's education, of L50 or L70, say some; or, as the Archdeacon concludes, of only L25 per pupil.

Your own suggestion, In yesterday's leaderette, regarding the right manner of providing for girls under a new constitution, is very important. The matter of it ought, to be carefully considered in "such a constitution as the Parliament shall direct." Perhaps the Committee of Conference may be expected to consider, and in due time report upon, such matters from the Conference point of view. But at present we must carefully guard against allowing discussion of details from clouding men's view of the main essential point at present, namely, that the national establishment for secondary education ought not to be allowed to remain unfit for the purpose of educating the people. Let us not be led aside into debating about the best manner of making the provision for girls: that will only tend to the continuance of a system which "makes no provision for girls," and provides for the boys only of the comparatively wealthy class.