You will have received yesterday a telegram from our Chairman giving the result of the financing of a Committee of the Otago Education Board, convened to consider the question of retrenchment. In moving for the appointment of this Committee, I considered I was simply discharging an obligation that now lies upon every public body in the colony to support the Ministry of the day in their effort to bring about radical retrenchment. In my opinion we can come down to £10,000-per-annum reduction, if necessary, without in the slightest degree impairing the efficieney of the service; and, if we can do this in Otago, the colony can surely reduce £100,000. The most pleasant feature of the whole business is the cheerful co-operation of the teachers themselves, who, as a body, are perfectly satisfied to have their incomes shrunk to meet the exigencies of the situation. I feel certain that you will appreciate our spontaneous efforts to assist you, and that our action will greatly strengthen your hands in dealing with other Education Boards.

"I simply took action on the broad ground of retrenchment, and from no other reason: indeed, as a matter of fact, I cannot be classed as a supporter of the present Ministry.—I have, &c.,

"John F. M. Fraser,

"Member of Otago Education Board."

I ask honourable members to specially mark that part of the letter which refers to the willingness of the teachers to assist in the retrenchment scheme, because it has been said that the only result of our proposals will be a reduction in the salaries of the teachers, and a feeling of antagonism has been set up on that account. Some Education Boards have taken up a distinctly antagonistic attitude the Wellington Education Board has thought proper to send out to the teachers a definite intimation that the proposals of the Government mean a reduction in the salaries of the teachers, and that only. I do not think that is at all a creditable manner in which to meet the proposals of the Government. It would have been much better if the Board had taken time to consider the subject before sending out such an intimation.

Dr. Newman.—It was the Chairman who sent that circular, not the Board.

The Victorian salaries are very much the same, and the Victorian Minister of Public Instruction has stated in Parliament that the Victorian teachers are the highest-paid teachers in the world. It should also be remembered that, in addition to their salaries, many teachers in New Zealand receive liberal bonuses. Especially is that the case in the page 10 Otago Education District. And further, the greater proportion of teachers in New Zealand are provided with residences. I do not say that these residences are given free in all districts, but in many they arc. In making these comparisons, I desire to illustrate the further point as to the necessity for the adoption of some more general plan for the payment of teachers. For what do the figures in regard to the salaries show? They show this inequality: The highest salary paid to a headmaster is £495, in Hawke's Bay. The lowest, £272, is paid to the headmaster in Taranaki—who, it may be presumed, is a man of equal scholastic attainments. The highest-paid headmaster in Otago gets £483. The highest assistant-master at Hawke's Bay receives £353; the head assistant at Wanganui receives £177. In Otago the highest head assistant receives £287, as against £353 in Hawke's Bay; and in other parts of the colony the payments are as follow:—

—	A.		B.		C.
	1.	2.	1.	2.	1.	2.
	£	£	£	£	£	£
Auckland	455	80	250	30	170	28
Taranaki	272	84	180	50	114	55
Wanganui	347	128	177	50	107	20
Wellington	370	120	230	60	190	25
Hawko's Bay	105	152	353	60	150	72
Marlborough	300	130	162	40	130	15
Nelson	300	72	250	12	140	44
Grey	320	140	245	50	150	18
Westland	339	175	210	76	151	10
North Canterbury	450	86	326	65	164	30
South Canterbury	840	130	210	50	164	64
Otago	483	153	287	70	197	70
Southland	351	149	255	100	163	52

Columns A 1 and 2 give highest and lowest salaries for headmasters in the several districts; columns B 1 and 2, highest and lowest for assistants; and columns C 1 and 2, highest and lowest for solo teachers.

That is the experience of Auckland. When we come to Wellington the experience of members of the Education Board is that the [unclear: soc] the Training College is abolished the better Having mentioned that, I need say no may with regard to Wellington. I think it much better that we should adopt the Victorian system, namely, that of training our [unclear: teachers] the public schools, which is more likely to [unclear: giv] them experience in the work they will be called page 11 upon to perform when they come to occupy the position of teachers. The instruction given in the training-colleges is purely of a literary character, and is not calculated to enable the teachers to carry out the duties which afterwards devolve upon them. And, even if we speak of literary training, I am bound to say that the literary training imparted in the training colleges is much below the standard of that which could be obtained in the universities of the colony; and I believe the highly-paid Professors in these institutions are absolutely starving for want of pupils. What better function, then, could these Professors take upon themselves than that of training teachers for the public schools? Many of the headmasters and assistant masters of the public schools are gentlemen who have taken university degrees, and they have proved the best qualified and most able teachers. I would suggest that our teachers for the public schools should undergo a properly-graduated course of training or apprenticeship in the public schools, and that at the end of a four or five years' course they should be granted the E certificate, which would give them a fair standing as teachers. In this way we could provide an ample supply of efficient assistants. Sir, I might detain the Committee much longer in discussing this branch of the question, which is to me a most interesting study. It is a portion of our education system in which I take a great deal of interest: but I do not wish to take up the time of the Committee longer. I have only occupied time sufficient to explain the proposals of the Government, so that the Committee may clearly understand them, and the form in which they will be put to the Committee. An honourable member asks me to say something in regard to the Syllabus. That is a subject on which very strong opinions are held, and I do not feel justified in burdening the general question with the consideration of that branch of the subject now.

Mr. Seymour would like to hear the honourable gentleman's views on the subject of higher education, as that was a subject of very great importance in this country.

In New South Wales there are six high schools, with an average attendance of 688 pupils, who cost a fraction over £10 per pupil.

The figures relating to the cost of high schools in Now South Wales are taken from the "Special Report of the Assistant Inspector-General of Victoria on Public Instruction in New South Wales." Mr. Brodribb, the officer named, was specially instructed by the Victorian Minister of Public Instruction to visit Now South Wales and report upon the school-system of that colony. His report was extremely interesting, and was rather a surprise to the Victorian people, for it showed that in many respects the school-system of New South Wales was superior to the Victorian system. As I have shown, the cost per high-school pupil in New South Wales is £10, against £21 1s. 10d. in New Zealand.

Mr. Fitzherbert asked if the Minister would say something about industrial and Native schools.

Mr. Fisher wished to inform the Committee that he had specially excluded all questions from this discussion which did not directly affect it. He thought this was not the time for entering into questions relating to the Native schools or the industrial schools. He was sure if they once touched upon the industrial schools they would open up the whole question of the administration of charitable aid.

Sir J. Vogel asked if the Minister considered school-buildings beyond the limits of the present discussion.

Mr. Fisher did not say that the expenditure upon school-buildings went beyond the scope of the present discussion, but the expenditure upon school-buildings was a question already disposed of, having been discussed on the public-works estimates.

Mr. W. P. Reeves said the Minister had told them that the saving proposed by reason of the school-age being raised to six years had been estimated to come to about £26,000. On the other hand, the Minister of Education told honourable members that a certain sum would be required to keep the country schools open. Had any estimate been made of the sum that would be required to keep the country schools open?—because that would materially interfere with the saving to be effected.

Mr. Fisher said an amount would be taken in the Appropriation Act to cover the necessary cost of keeping the country schools open.

Mr. W. P. Reeves.—What amount?

Mr. Fisher asked whether it was not sufficient that the Government gave a pledge, understanding, or undertaking that the country schools should not be closed. Might it not he left to the Government to adopt the very simple process of taking an amount which would be sufficient to keep the country schools open?

Mr. Seddon said that, if the matter were left to the Government, one Board might be treated liberally and another might be treated in a contrary manner. It was giving too much power to the Government.

Mr. Fisher hoped the honourable gentleman would accept the assurance that the Government would take the view that they were dealing with the system of education, and not with a particular district or with a particular Board or with a particular member. They would take the large view of the matter.

Mr. W. P. Reeves said the reason why he pressed the question was that it distinctly ought to have weight with the House as to whether they should adopt the proposals of the Government. There was only one reason why they should adopt their proposals—namely, that this large saving was to be made; but, if a considerable portion of it was required for keeping country schools open, then there was no reason why the proposals should be adopted.

Mr. Fish said that, in any event, there must be a considerable saving if the plan of the Government was carried out. It would not affect large schools or suburban districts, but small country schools, and he imagined then that not many country schools would be affected. There would be a very large saving; and, if they desired to make any attempt to save on the education vote, they should leave a considerable discretionary power with the Government until the experiment was fairly tested. He was disposed to place the fullest confidence in the Government in this matter.

Mr. Cadman said there was one thing the Minister had not explained, and that was with respect to opening new schools in the country districts. This was a very important matter, as in a few years a number of new schools would be required all over the colony.

Mr. Fisher would like the honourable gentleman to understand that, although they were endeavouring to curtail expenditure, the Government would not fail to make provision for new schools. He hoped the honourable gentleman was as clear in his mind on that point as he (Mr. Fisher) was.

Mr. Levestam said there was another matter on which the honourable gentleman had not spoken at all, and that was as to withholding the capitation for any boys or girls who had passed the Sixth Standard, irrespective of age. What he wanted to know was this: Did the Minister of Education intend to adhere or not to what was stated in the Proclamation, that capitation money would no longer be paid for children who had passed the Sixth Standard? The Minister had carefully avoided to state that, although he had asked the question very distinctly. He should like the Minister to reply distinctly to that question Another statement made by the Minister was that, out of thirty-nine gentlemen who had been asked to state their opinion as to the school-collage, nineteen were in favour of raising they school-age and sixteen were against it; and he then went on particularly to tell honourable members that these sixteen were all interested in continuing the age as at present. [unclear: But] did not toll them who the nineteen were, and whether they had any interest the other way.

Mr. Fisher said they were mostly School Inspectors.

Mr. Levestam would like the honourable gentleman to explain what his intentions [unclear: wer] with regard to children who had passed [unclear: th] Sixth Standard but who were not of the [unclear: age] fifteen.

Mr. Fisher said the answer was that [unclear: as] rule the pupils were close up to fifteen [unclear: wh] they passed the Sixth Standard he could understand the honourable gentleman's objection coming from the members from the We Coast, where there were no training colleges and yet the children on the West [unclear: Coa] passed the Sixth Standard a year earlier [unclear: th] those in any other part of the colony. [unclear: H] opinion was that, where a bright or intelligent child, male or female, distinguished itself [unclear: a] got to the Sixth Standard below the age, [unclear: th] child ought to be taken up by the Education Department and educated as a pupil-teacher and, whether made a pupil-teacher or [unclear: not], ought to have the right to go forward and [unclear: tak] a scholarship if it could do so. That [unclear: was] point to which he should pay special attention. But there were children of well-[unclear: to] people—he would not say wealthy people because he did not wish to raise class distinctions—who were kept in the schools after [unclear: th] had reached the age-limit and had [unclear: passed] Sixth Standard; and what he said was this that if those people wished to give [unclear: th] children a higher-class education [unclear: which] children of the mass of the people did [unclear: not] they ought to pay for it. If they [unclear: desired] reach a higher standard of education [unclear: than] generality of children attending the commend schools, they ought to attend the [unclear: colleges] district high schools, and the Education Act section 56, said that for the education give at district high schools those who [unclear: received] should pay.

Mr. Smith thought that, if the [unclear: school] were raised, it would be wise at first [unclear: to] it apply only to the boroughs, and let [unclear: coun] schools be entirely exempted. There would they be a chance of carrying the proposal; but [unclear: he] not think that country members would [unclear: ag] to their schools being affected. In [unclear: his] district there were a large number [unclear: of] schools, mostly in new settlements, and [unclear: ab] a third of the children attending them [unclear: v] under the ago of six. Therefore, if these children were shut out, the schools [unclear: would] starved. There was also this confederating The parents of these children were mostly [unclear: P] people, and even the mothers had often [unclear: to] absent from home at work, and it [unclear: was] page 13 better that these children should be safe in schools than running about uncared-for. Even if no capitation were paidon them they should be allowed to attend the schools. He hoped the whole proposal as to raising the school-age would be abandoned; but, if not, it should certainly be confined to the borough schools.

Mr. Fisher said that, representations having been made to the Government by members on both sides of the House as to the strong feeling existing faith regard to the school-ago proposal, the Government had determined to modify their proposals he did not say that any communication or representation to the Government made by a section of members should be regarded as binding on the Committee; but the honourable members to whom he referred, speaking for themselves, had suggested that, if the Government did not press the proposal for raising the school-age, they would not object to the other proposals of the Government. He did not know how far that might be in accord with the views of the Committee as a whole, but, speaking for the Government, he was disposed to accept the agreement.

"This circular states that the amount to be paid, beginning in January, 1888, will be £3 15s. for each child in average daily attendance; but that no children under six years of age, and no child that has passed the Sixth Standard, will be paid for.

"I assume that the Parliament will be asked to sanction these proposals by Act, as, in my opinion, the Governor in Council has no power to make regulations to give effect to them. The power of the Governor in Council to make regulations is limited to nine things: see section 100, which is as follows:—

"'Tho Governor in Council may, subject to the provisions of this Act, from time to time alter and repeal regulations and orders—

"'(1.) For the organization and management of the Department of Education:

"'(2.) For defining the principle on which daily average attendance shall be calculated:

"'(3.) For the examination and classification of teachers:

"'(4.) For the employment, education, and examination of pupil-teachers:

"'(5.) For the issue of certificates of competency to teachers:

"'(6.) For the establishment and management of normal or training colleges:

"'(7.) For defining the standards of education which, under the provisions of this Act, may be prescribed by regulations:

"'(8.) For prescribing the times and manner of auditing the accounts of Boards and Committees.

"'(9.) For making such other regulations as may be necessary to secure the due administration of this Act.

"'And all such regulations shall fix a day on which the same come into force, and shall be published in the Gazette, after which they shall have the force of law, and shall be laid before both Houses of the General Assembly as soon after they are passed as circumstances will permit.'

"If it were contended that under subsection (2) there was power to alter the school-age I might point out that this subsection refers obviously to subsection (2) of section 8, which is as follows: 'In payment to the Board of every district of a sum of £3 15s. for each child in average daily attendance at a public school, such average daily attendance to be computed in manner proscribed by regulations.'

"The regulations to be made under subsection (2) can only define how this average daily attendance is to be computed. It makes no provision for either fixing the age or the standard the child has reached as a test of payment.

"The Act makes two provisions regarding the age of pupils. (1.) the school-age, under section 83, is defined as being between five and fifteen; and I submit that the obvious meaning of the Act was that all children were to be admitted free who were between those ages. (2.) The other provision of the Act dealing with school-age or attendance is that called the compulsory clauses. In these—89 and 90—there is provision that the children must attend between seven and thirteen. Their parents or guardians may apply for exemption, inter alia, if the child has passed a certain standard; but there is nothing compelling a guardian or parent to do so, and I am of opinion that, if the exemption were not asked, a parent or guardian would be bound to send the children between these ages. If the new regulation is carried out sections 83 and 89 of the Act would be altered or modified. Of course the Government may expect School Committees and Boards to receive children in the schools for which there is to be no capitation-allowance. But surely this would be a positive alteration page 14 of the Act. I am of opinion that regulations for defining the principle for calculating the average daily attendance cannot declare that children of school-age are not to be deemed to be enrolled, and that the regulation is ultra vires of the Governor in Council.

"I mention these points, and I assume that, though the Governor in Council has, on the advice of his Ministers, made a regulation, the Parliament will be asked to validate it by amending the Education Act. If the Act is not altered, and the proposals are attempted to be carried out, then they will be given effect to without the sanction of the law, and I should hardly think such a step will be taken by any Education Department.

"Obedicnce to the law is the important thing to be observed in a country with institutions like ours; and a Department of Education, whose duties are onerous and important, will be the last to disregard the law and set an example that cannot help being baneful.

"1. The position of the Board regarding teachers.—I am of opinion that the Board have no power, without the consent of the teacher, to lower any teacher's salary unless three months' notice of the intention to do so is given. The teachers are practically three-monthly servants, and their salary cannot be lowered at a week's or a month's notice.

"2. The engagements entered into by the Board with Normal School students are binding on the Board. They have been made under the sanction of the Act and of the regulations approved by the Minister under the Act, and I do not see how the Board can refuse to carry them out. It may be said if the Board are sued they have no funds. That would mean, however, that all the assets are exhausted; and that cannot well be said. If the true position of matters was pointed out to the Minister I cannot believe that he or the Parliament will ask the Board to repudiate contracts solemnly and legally entered into, unless indeed it is thought desirable to destroy the education system altogether. I cannot believe this is desired, and I am of opinion that the alterations have been proposed without a knowledge of the position in which the Education Board are placed.—Robert Stout."

It was true that the attendance of children under seven or over thirteen could not be made compulsory; but, if the parents chose to send them, had not the Board legal power to claim from the Government capitation in respect of them? The Government had told them that the Crown Law Officers were of opinion that the Boards had no legal remedy in such circumstances; but, seeing the opinion given by a gentleman of such standing in the legal profession as Sir Robert Stout, it was only right the Committee should have the fullest and most certain information possible on the subject. While the general rule against the production of the opinions of the Law Officers might be a good one, he thought the Committee should be told what clauses the Law Officers had relied on as to the power to issue the Order in Council. On that point he wished to have clearly defined what the position of the Government was and what was the position of the Education Boards. Unless the matter was cleared up there might be a lot of money wasted in litigation. If there was any doubt as to the power of the Government, would they, if the House decided that the school-age should be raised, bring in a Bill to give effect to the wish of the House?

We ought to allow our children to play in "healthful fields" a little longer. It might be said that these were sentimental reasons; but there was a good deal of truth and philosophy in sentiment sometimes; and, apart from that aspect of the question, any one who knew [unclear: any] thing of the matter would know that there would be a good deal of saving by raising the school-age as had been proposed: and every [unclear: ou] must know, too, that the colony was not [unclear: in] position to any longer keep baby-farms. For these reasons he should be compelled to vote against the Minister if he allowed the school-age to remain as it was at the present time.

Mr. Fish regretted to say that he found himself in a most unfortunate position. During the whole of this session every measure which the Government had brought forward up to the present time he had felt it his duty to oppose and now, when a matter came up on which has could heartily support them, he found that [unclear: th] Ministry were weakly ready to accept a compromise. If there was anything good in [unclear: th] proposals of the Government as laid before [unclear: th] House by the Minister that morning it was with regard to this question of the reduction of the capitation-grant, paying upon a [unclear: sti] page 15 average instead of a working average, the abolition of the training-schools, and the increase of the school-age. The last, to his mind, was the most important of all; and yet that was the proposal which the Minister was willing to give up! He felt so strongly upon this point that he should divide the House upon it and take a vote against the withdrawal of this proposal if he had no one to follow him in the lobby. None of the proposals which the Minister had brought forward could have so much commended itself to the good sense of the House and the country as that one. He agreed with the last speaker, who said that children should not be sent to school who were under the age of six years. Parents who had any sense of responsibility as to the future welfare of their children would not send their children to school at so early an age. It was only those who were desirous of getting rid of the responsibility of looking after their children who were so anxious to send them to school between the ages of five and six years. He was therefore very sorry, after the excellent reasoning which had been given to the House by the Minister of Education—and he could heartily compliment the honourable gentleman on the very clear manner in which he had put his statement to honourable members—that he should recede now from the most tenable grounds that he had for the position he had taken up. If they were to have retrenchment, if this was not an idle cry, in what better way could they retrench than by taking something from the people which was of no value to them? One argument that he admitted to be reasonable against the proposition of the Government was, that it might be injurious to the country schools; but, when the Minister of Education met that objection in the very fair manner in which he did by saying that under no circumstances should a school be closed on account of this increase of school-age, he (Mr. Pish) thought all objections to the proposition should be withdrawn. The propositions were practically of a tentative character. It was an experiment that was being made; and the experiment ought to be proceeded with, because it was worth trying, and, if in the course of a year or two it was found that it did not work well, it could very easily be abandoned. He was afraid that the Minister of Education had not had sufficient time at his disposal since accepting office to go thoroughly into the questions which related to his department; nor did he (Mr. Fish) intend to raise those questions in their broader aspect at this period of the session. He hoped that by next session the honourable gentleman would have grasped the whole question in relation not only to primary education but also to secondary education. The Minister should approach that subject with a view to seeing whether, in his opinion, a secondary system was necessary at all in this colony; and, if he found that it was, he should I go still further into the matter, and see that it was conducted in a way that would lead to a great improvement in the relations between the primary and secondary systems. He should sec that there should be no such loss of teaching-power as there was at the present time, owing to the absence of relationship between the two systems. The honourable member had cursorily said that it was a scandalous thing that secondary education should cost £24 per head in New Zealand, while in New South Wales it cost only £10. There was no doubt that was a scandal, and it was a subject well worth the consideration of the Government and the House. The House had too long neglected this very important question, and it had been neglected owing to the local feeling which had been engendered in consequence of the endowments which had been made in one place and another for educational purposes. The Province of Otago had most weakly and, he was justified in saying, most shamefully wasted money derived from these reserves, mainly owing to a fear that the reserves would be wrested from them at some time or other. It was so in other parts of the colony, he had no doubt the people in the localities where the reserves were situated would not grapple with the question for fear of losing something that they at present possessed. So things were going on from day to day, and the evil was increasing. It was time that that feeling was given up, and that the House should attempt to deal practically and seriously with the whole question of education, both from a primary and a secondary point of view. With regard to the reduction of the capitation by 4s., he thought that that ought to be carried by the House unanimously he was not inclined to argue out the details and show how it would affect this one or that one; but he wished to say this: that, from his experience of local bodies, which had been considerable, he knew that when any reform of this sort was raised there was always an outcry that this, that, or the other would be injured, and that the local body could never get on; but, when the reform was carried out in spite of all protests, it was found that things worked very well, and that people then came to wonder how it was that they had not carried out the reform long before. So it would be in this matter. If the House said to the Boards that they must get on without this 4s., it would soon be found that the system worked very well, and that the Boards carried on very well notwithstanding the loss. Whilst on this question he should like to say he should be glad if the Minister would consider the question of doing away with Education Boards altogether. If there was one department more than another of government action in connection with which it was possible to centralise, it was this matter of education. It was a matter which essentially concerned the whole colony, and he had no doubt that, whatever Ministry came into office, no matter to which party they belonged, they would deal fairly and justly with the whole colony he did not say for a moment that the Education Board of Otago had not done good work; but, judging by what he had seen of that Board, he had no doubt that all over the colony there was a good deal of money being wasted by these Boards; thou- page 16 sands of pounds annually could be saved to the colony if these Boards were dispensed with. Look at the officers they employed, look at the paraphernalia employed and the expense incurred,—which could be got rid of if the whole thing were centred in the Government. In connection with this question they saw, in Otago, that the Committee of one of the largest suburban schools were anxious to retain the services of a teacher whose conduct and service they considered satisfactory, as did also a large majority of the inhabitants of the district, as expressed in a public meeting; and yet they found the Education Board arbitrarily dismissing the teacher notwithstanding these emphatic protests! Such a thing showed that there was something wrong with the machinery, and that it should be altered in some way. He was certain that, if the various district Committees had larger powers given to them, and the Boards were done away with, great good would be done to the cause of education generally. Then, there should be no hesitation in doing away with the extra capitation-grant. That strict average should be taken also appeared to him a good suggestion. That might affect the question of teachers' salaries, but the Minister should deal with that point also, and he had promised that the subject should engage his attention. The better equalisation of salaries of various teachers was desirable. In Otago the teacher who had been fortunate enough to get a large school would be receiving a salary of £550 or £560 a year, whilst other men, who were equally competent but who had small schools, would only receive £130 or £150; and this difference, he thought, was too great. He was not quite sure as to the wisdom of abolishing the training-schools. In Otago that school worked remarkably well, and it enabled the children of poor people, if they passed a certain examination, as a matter of right to become trained as school-teachers; whereas without such an institution it might be only those who could bring influence to bear that would get appointed pupil-teachers in the schools. The statement by the Minister, that the average age at which children passed the First Standard was nine years, had come upon him as a surprise. He should have thought it was nearer seven or eight years.

Mr. Fisher said the Education Report of 1887, Table F, showed—"Average age at which children pass the standards—Standard I., age 8.8"—that was eight and four-fifths.

Mr. Fish said even if that were only approximately correct it showed distinctly that there was no necessity to send children to school between the ages of five and six. He hoped the Minister would adhere to his proposal, and take a vote on the question of raising the school-age. Regarding the Seventh Standard, the Minister showed clearly, by the return produced, that there were only 1,600 children in the Seventh Standard; and these cost the country £7,000! He held that that money was thrown away. The standards, he thought, should be reduced to five, and the system of scholarships extended, so that by that means bright boys and girls whose parents desired that they should go further could obtain the advantages of secondary education. He thought it was a mistaken idea that it was necessary to give the bulk of the community, nine-tenths of them, an education beyond the Fifth Standard, and that in doing so they unfitted the childred for those avocations of life which they were necessarily compelled to follow. He would strongly advocate giving every boy and girl in the colony a good sound education; but he [unclear: di] not think it necessary to give all who would follow various trades and farming and artisan employments education beyond the Fifth Standard. Besides that, at the present time they were taking boys and girls away from useful occupations at which they would be much bitter employed than they were in going to school He said this in the interest of those [unclear: whom] mainly represented—the working-classes. [unclear: T] honourable gentleman had made a remark [unclear: t] the effect that, as the Roman Catholics were non-participants in the State [unclear: education], should restrict our expenditure upon [unclear: it] far as possible. That argument seemed [unclear: fa] enough; but he should like the honourable gentleman to consider whether it was [unclear: n] right that the Roman Catholics should have some assistance from the State, as [unclear: well] the members of other religious denominations. Why should not that body of our follow-colonists receive some aid towards teaching their children? We saved an enormous [unclear: st] owing to the fact that the Roman Catholics did not send their children to the State schools and it would pay better to give them a capitation-allowance than to induce them to [unclear: sec] their children to the schools, for if they attended the State schools the accommodation would have to be enlarged, and a large additional expenditure incurred. This question was perhaps not in the line of the present discussion; but it was one that must engage the attention of the House, and, on the ground of fairness, sooner or later the claim of they Roman Catholics would have to be satisfied He hoped the Minister would take a vote upon the question of raising the school-age, and he should be happy to go with him into the lobby on that matter.

Sir J. Yogel was at a loss to know [unclear: how] deal with this subject, as it came before them in such a strange fashion. To begin [unclear: with] honourable gentleman in charge of the estimates had given a positive assurance, [unclear: whe] being elected, that he would neither alter they standards nor the school-age until he [unclear: h] absorbed the endowments into the general pool. Therefore it seemed to him that this proposal to alter the school-ago, and to [unclear: so] extent to alter the standards, by only educating up to the Sixth Standard, would be they forerunner of the absorption of the endowments. But, putting that on one [unclear: side], thought the House was placed in a [unclear: m] absurd position. The education system of [unclear: ti] colony was one of its most cherished institutions—one of its most important institutions—and large changes had practically [unclear: be] page 17 made by the Government without the authority of law, and the House was now asked to express an opinion on the subject by a vote of £5. Where would be the record? He was not even aware that a Hansard report was being taken in Committee; it was not generally done. Where would be the record of honourable members' opinions on the question, voting whether a sum should be £5 more or less? This was placing the House in a most absurd and unfair position. He contended that the Government had no right to go the length they had gone in the way of making a public announcement to the various Boards, and in that way stimulating those Boards to give notices and make changes, without having previously taken the authority of the House. He contended, further, the taking a vote in Supply as to whether or not the amount should be reduced by £5 was not giving the House a right and fair opportunity of recording its opinions. There were many opinions upon this subject, and these could not find any means of utterance on the question of simply £5 more or less. There appeared to be no doubt whatever that the changes proposed could not be legally made without the authority of an Act. He held in his hand the opinion of Sir Robert Stout upon the subject; and he did not think any one who read that opinion, so clearly and concisely expressed, could have any doubt whatever as to the meaning of the Act which was at present in force, or that it was not going beyond the law for the Minister of Education to have instituted such changes, or to institute such changes in the future without special authority of law. It was clear that the Minister of Education had not power to issue regulations altering the school-age for children, and the Minister was now asking the Committee to concur in an illegality. He now came to the various points of the proposals, and he would first take the question of the reduction of the subsidy by 4s., and the statement that the country schools would not suffer. It was clear that the honourable gentleman was somewhat mistaken as to the conditions under which these subsidies were paid. If they were given in such a manner that the amounts to the country schools as against the town schools were ear-marked, it would be possible to say that the reduction in the subsidies would not affect the country schools; but, as a matter of fact, the Boards had the whole revenue in their hands, and the result was that the country schools received the surplus after the town schools were provided for. Therefore, if the school-ago were reduced, and also the amount of subsidies paid, the result would be that the country schools would be in a worse position than they were in now. There was no logical manner in which such a proposition could be carried out under the present law. No doubt it was worthy of consideration whether the scheme of capitation should not be so altered as to allow of different amounts being paid to town schools and to country schools; but the figures lately quoted by the honourable gentleman—and which he

(Sir J. Vogel) might say were compiled at his request before he left office—showing the average cost of schools of different sizes, proved the fallacy of the idea that the country schools could be kept intact while reducing the amount of capitation. He believed that at the present time, in the case of schools with an attendance of over a hundred, the average expenditure was over £3 per head; in schools with an attendance of from fifty to a hundred, it was over £4 per head; and in the case of schools under fifty it was nearly £6 per head. It was clear, therefore, that striking off children under six years of age, and taking the exact numbers attending at country schools, would not regulate the amount which those schools would receive from the Boards. The late Government proposed that the reduction should be at the rate of 1s. a year, and he could see no reason why the House should increase that rate of reduction. He was content that 1s. should be reduced for the present year, and another shilling for next year, and so on; but how he was to propose such a thing he did not know, under the proposition that there should be only a general reduction of £5. The mode in which the question was placed before the Committee was preposterous, and only showed the way in which it was sought to fetter the discretion and liberty of the House. As to the reduction in the school-age, he thought, himself, that it was not desirable that children should be sent to school before they were seven years of age; but that was only his individual opinion; and they knew that the practice obtained amongst parents of sending their children to school at as early an age as five years, and, under our boasted free system of education, we should not prevent parents carrying out their ideas in that respect. There was no doubt that a great many parents were in the position that when their children grew to a certain age they required their services, some at twelve years of age, and some at fourteen; and if the age at which those children could be sent to school was raised it would be putting it out of the power of those parents to give their children a proper education. The proposition of the Government was a retrograde step, and one that was opposed to our liberal system of education; and it was not in harmony with the condition of these institutions before the General Government absorbed them from the Provincial Governments. He was decidedly against increasing the school-age unless a very specific intimation were given by the House that it should be done. Moreover, it was a question which should be decided by Act, and not merely by resolution in Committee or even in the House. He had heard it said that some members of the Opposition and some of those who supported the Government had agreed to a compromise; but he was no party to anything of the kind, and had only heard of it when mentioned by the honourable gentleman in charge of the estimates. He would strongly urge upon those who considered themselves members of the Opposition not to be led into any arrangement whatever, even if they approved of these page 18 alterations, because an offence would be committed against the law if any action were taken without the sanction of the House by Act. Further, he said that, even if honourable members had agreed to the proposals, they had no right to allow them to be carried out under a vote of a reduction of £5, more or less, but that they should insist upon their being given effect to in a constitutional manner. With regard to the general question, they knew what the effect would be of taking from the revenues of the Boards. The Minister of Education proposed to take some £60,000 or £70,000 from the Boards. He could not say that the honourable gentleman had not authority to do that, and he was disposed to agree with the honourable gentleman in regard to gradually doing away with the training-schools, because he did not think the State had any more right to educate persons to be schoolmasters or schoolmistresses than it had to educate persons to be doctors or lawyers. Therefore he was favourable to doing away with those schools, provided it was done in a legal manner. But let the Committee look at the effect of taking away £60,000 or £70,000 from the revenue of the Boards, and it must be seen at once that that meant a reduction in the salaries of teachers to the extent of 15 per cent. And he would ask, if it was justifiable to force upon school-teachers such a reduction, why should it not be made to apply to the Civil Service generally? As far as he could see, there was not the slightest intention on the part of the Government to do that. The late Government proposed a pro ratâ reduction; but he would not discuss that now, and would only ask, why should they, without any notice, force on school-teachers this large pro ratâ reduction? If there was any way in which an honourable member could enable him to vote in favour of 1s. reduction this year and another shilling next year, and so on, he would support such a proposition. Otherwise, he took it that, if they voted for the proposition as it now stood, to take off 4s., it would be open to the Government to propose a reduction of another shilling next year. He hoped the House would not sanction the raising of the school-age to six years; and, if it were sanctioned in this irregular manner, he trusted the question would afterwards be tried by law; and the Government would then learn that they could not override the laws of the country without taking the proper constitutional mode of doing so.

Mr. Fisher desired to take advantage of the earliest opportunity to say that the agreement to which he had referred earlier in the day, which was intended to give effect to the wishes of many members on both sides of the House, had proved unsatisfactory to both sides; and therefore he would ask the Committee to vote upon the proposals in the form in which he had submitted them that morning. He wished also to say that if the proposals as a whole were carried the Government would still adhere to the understanding that the country schools should receive full assistance.

Mr. Peacock, confining himself in the meantime to the point before the Committee, thought the position taken up by the honourable member for Christchurch North was certainly inconsistent, and could not be justified. The honourable gentleman said very decidedly that in his opinion seven years was young enough to send children to school; and yet he even objected to the age being made six years. The honourable gentleman should not refrain from carrying out his decided opinion merely for party purposes.

Sir J. Vogel explained that what he said was in regard to his own children; but other parents had a right to their own opinions with regard to their children.

Mr. Peacock thought it might at all events be asserted that those who advocated the raising of the school-age to six years as a means of economy in the education system might claim to be as good friends to that system as those who objected to the change being made. The matter might be viewed from two standpoints—first, the question of precedent for the adoption of that age; and, second, considering our own circumstances in this colony, was there any valid reason against the proposed change? With regard to the question of precedent, he hold in his hand the general report of the School Commissioners of Scotland, in which it was stated that practically the age was six years there. In the United States also the general school-age was six years. And the same applied to Germany. He was, of course, aware that there were some arrangements in the latter country with regard to infant instruction; but, speaking as to the primary schools, the school-age was practically six years. Then there was the other question. It was stated by those who were opposed to raising the school-age that children would be running about in the gutter, and that certain evils would befall them by so doing. He should ask the Committee what it really meant. He presumed honourable members would not dispute that, so far as bodily health was concerned, it was far better for a child at that ago to be breathing the fresh air and developing itself physically than to be cooped up in the close atmosphere of a schoolroom for five hours a day. Surely there could be little difference of opinion upon that point. Very well, what was the evil to be apprehended in case the children were allowed to remain outside between the ages of five and six years? Was it moral contamination! Then, he put it whether the proposition did not refute itself. From whom would they receive evil example or learn bad language? Surely it would be from children older than them-selves. But these children would be in school, and therefore he maintained that the objection had no force. There was thus a decided advantage in receiving physical outdoor exercise at an early age; and contamination from children older than themselves could not take place, because the older children would be in school at the time. He was very glad to hear the Minister of Education say that he would adhere to this point, and that the Committee page 19 would take a vote upon it. He thought that considerable advantage would result in the shape of economy by the adoption of the Government's proposition, especially as they were assured that precautions would be taken so that country schools would not suffer if such a plan were carried out.

Mr. Ormond was glad the Minister of Education had decided to adhere to his proposition, and for this reason: that he knew from practical experience that the amount he asked was sufficient, if it were properly administered, to provide everything that was wanted in the district schools of the colony. He (Mr. Ormond) rose for the purpose of quoting the expenditure that took place in the district he came from, and there the expenditure was kept within the amount given under the Act and the 4s. allowance; and, besides being kept within that amount for several years, a large sum had been placed to the credit of the building account after providing for the cost of education. The district he came from was called the Hawke's Bay District, and it was a very large and scattered one. It extended from the East Cape down to Woodville. It included as large and as scattered a population as there was in the colony, and had a very large proportion of small schools. Therefore it laboured under the greatest disadvantages that any district could labour under. As a rule, the salaries paid by the Board would compare with those of other districts, excepting in one particular: that the same large salaries were not paid in schools that had very small averages of attendance; and he entirely agreed with the honourable gentleman that those schools should be provided for by employing certificated female teachers instead of male teachers, and, of course, at a smaller salary. He had been looking to sec how it was that in other districts they could not do as they did in Hawke's Bay—provide for their schools with the amount placed at their disposal; and the reasons were: first, that there was a great difference in the proportionate cost of administration—the Boards were more extravagant with their officers. That was one cause. The other cause was that to which he had referred—it was that they paid in the small schools in the country districts salaries out of proportion to the work to be done, and which could be done more economically. He might give the figures, showing what was done last year in the district which he wished to put as an example before the House. In that district, extending from the East Cape to Woodville, there were 4,198 attendances, which, at £4 a head, gave £16,792. The allowance for inspection was £300; consequently the total income last year was £17,092. The following was the expenditure: Salaries, including the Board, inspection, and everything, £900; incidental, £200; teachers' salaries, £10,774; bonus on tuition of pupil-teachers, £330; bonus on average results, £1,000; and School Committees, £1,600. That totalled up £14,804 for the last year; so that there was left, out of the moneys allowed by Parliament, a balance of £2,288. That showed, at any rate, that education was carried out as efficiently in his district as anywhere else; and he believed a reference to the Inspector-General would elicit from that gentleman the opinion that the schools there were as efficiently taught and as well equipped as any schools in the colony. They endeavoured to supply small country schools with female teachers, when these could be got, or by giving salaries according to the work; and where good men were wanted they paid them higher wages than were paid in any other part of the colony. He had worked out what would be the position of that district under the allowance of £3 15s., and supposing children between five and six years were excluded from the schools; and he found that then, with some 500 children deducted from the average attendance, instead of having 4,000 odd attending there would be 3,619; and that number, at £3 15s., would give a revenue of £14,116. They would be able to pay every salary exactly the same to all the principal teachers, pay the same bonuses, give the same allowance to School Committees—do everything except provide for the tuition of these 500 children, which would be a very small sum, because they did not cost, on an average, the same sum as older children. He was able to show that in that district they could provide the whole education at £3 15s. with no reduction of salaries, the same allowance to School Committees, and the same average results upon the work of the teachers, and do it for the money the Government proposed; and he saw no reason why that could not be done in other parts of the colony. The question, then, was, Could they assist the Minister in arriving throughout the colony at such a result? It appeared to him that one of the things required to be done was that there should be established one fixed scale on which all teachers should be put in proportion to the attendance at their schools. If that were done, they could at once do something which would establish an average expenditure all over the colony. No part of the colony could then complain, and the teachers would put themselves on a better basis than they were on at this moment. If that were done, they would do away with the anomaly referred to by the Minister when he opened the subject to the Committee. He (Mr. Ormond) took a liberal scale of salaries all through, and payments according to work and results. He would not have the anomaly which the honourable member for Dunedin South had pointed out, that of a man having a school for which he was getting a large salary, and a master alongside getting a much smaller salary, although they had each equal claims. If teachers were paid according to the work done, according to attendance and results, and if a proportionate limit were placed on the cost of administration, and the system assimilated all over the colony, the cost of education would be enormously reduced, and they would be able to carry out what the Minister proposed—provide education at the diminished cost he proposed. He had shown that in one district it was absolutely possible to give effect to the Minister's proposals; and page 20 he challenged any honourable gentleman who disagreed with him to get the opinion of the Inspector-General so as to obtain that gentleman's opinion as to the condition of the schools he was referring to he ventured to say that the Inspector-General would state that the schools of Hawke's Bay were as well provided with teaching-power and in every other respect as any other schools in the colony. If he had succeeded in showing this, he thought he had done something towards establishing the principle which the Government were contending for. A word now as to what had been said against raising the school-age to six. It was contended that, if they did this, they would injure the country schools. Those who said this did not remember that in the case of country schools, infinitely more than town schools, children between five and six were in a great number of cases unable to go to the schools. The schools were so isolated, and the children had to travel such long distances, that a large proportion of the children between five and six did not attend these schools. In fact, the number of these children as compared with those of older ages was comparatively small. It was a question open to controversy as to the benefits which children between five and six derived from attending town schools. All sorts of opinions could be got from specialists on that subject, but, as far as he had been able to read and instruct himself, the general belief was that a child under six years of age could get no real benefit from the teaching. That the child got some benefit from having a little order or regularity put into his life was the most that could be contended; but it was all that could be sought by those who were in favour of that principle. But they were obliged to do at the present time what their means enabled them to do; and parents of children of that young age must be told that the country could not provide nurseries for them. Therefore he hoped this limit of the age to five would not be insisted on, but that they would raise the age to six. He would be one of the first to raise his voice against the minimum age being raised to seven, because it would be taking away one of the years when children were beginning to benefit by education, and robbing them, in many cases, of one of the few years during which they could remain at school. He had therefore dealt with the school-age, and with the reduction of the capitation to £3 15s. With regard to the strict average, he was bound to say to the Committee that, if the other reductions were made, that could be allowed, because he had only been able to show to the House that, in the district he came from, they were able to provide everything on the present scale on the ordinary average attendance, and the Minister told them that the difference between ordinary and strict average would he a sum of £8,000 over the whole colony. Therefore he was unable to contend from his experience that that could be done without making some reductions in the scale of the salaries and the other moneys paid to the teachers. Wishing, as he did, to see the full system maintained, he ddi not see that they could agree to the further reduction proposed. As to disallowing capitation on those who had passed the Sixth Standard, that, he thought, was an illiberal proposal. The parents of 1,670 children, and the children themselves, chose to avail themselves of a privilege now given them of getting further education after they had passed the Sixth Standard, and he did not think they should be deprived of that privilege which the law allowed them now. He hoped that next session they would consider how the primary schools should connect and be merged with the secondary system, and, if proper proposals on that subject were made, he should agree with those who would do away with the Sixth Standard. Then, there should be a system of scholarships, which would give every child in the colony the possibility of getting higher education under the secondary system: the benefits of the secondary system should be open to all alike, even the poorest, which they certainly were not now. However, that was a large subject, which there was not now time to discuss. He agreed with those who thought the Committee was bound to take into consideration the position of that section of the community who did not derive any benefit from our education system—he meant the Roman Catholics. In considering proposals of this kind on the part of the Government it was their bounden duty to remember that section of the community; and, remembering that they did not derive any benefit from our system, it was more the duty of the House than it otherwise would be to make the charge for education press as lightly as possible on the taxpayers, so that the Catholics might feel it as lightly as possible. He went further and said that that section of the community were entitled to some assistance from the colony in the education of their own children: but the present was not the time to discuss that question. He hoped the House would agree to the proposals of the Government; and if they were passed he was sure the Boards would be able to bring down their expenditure to more reasonable limits without in any way affecting their capability of giving a good education to the children of the colony.

Mr. Barron hoped the Committee would not agree to the proposals of the Government. He did not know who those honourable members were who had suggested a compromise to the Government, but he did not agree with any of the proposals. Hero they wore, with only two or three days more to consider a large amount of important business, hurrying through a discussion on such an important question as this, which merited exhaustive consideration and discussion. Early in the session the House appointed a Select Committee to inquire into the whole education question, and that Committee had taken a great deal of evidence, but found that the evidence offered was so voluminous, and the subject itself so large, that it was utterly impossible for it to come to any mature conclusion and make a report of any value during the time at its disposal; and they page 21 had therefore recommended that the inquiry should be postponed till next session, and that in the meantime no material changes should be made. Now, he believed it would be very unwise to make now any changes such as those proposed, because they might be making some changes hurriedly that they would afterwards find there was cause to regret. He thought that honourable members would be perfectly justified in saying to the Government, "We have had a useful preliminary discussion, we know exactly the opinions of the Government, but we do not think that any material changes should be made before the subject can be fully considered, and therefore it would be well to let the whole matter stand over till next session, when we shall be able to deal with it and perhaps to dispose of it." Many honourable members had spoken of the great cost of the system. Well, whose money was it? It was the money of the great mass of the people. A glance at the list of our chief sources of revenue showed that it was the great mass of the people who provided the greatest portion of the revenue; and this was one of the most important of the few inadequate returns they got for the heavy contributions they made to the cost of the public administration. No doubt there were extravagances in our present education system, and economics might be possible without affecting the efficiency of the system; but changes should be approached in the most careful manner, and they had not sufficient evidence to warrant them now in making those changes. The Minister of Education was only new to his portfolio, and he could not be supposed to have had time to give that exhaustive consideration to the subject that he otherwise would, and therefore, for the sake of his own reputation, he should hesitate to lay a finger on the system until he was more fully possessed of information than he possibly could be now as to the direction in which reforms should go. If the Minister would make up his mind to leave the system this session as it was, and to make an exhaustive inquiry throughout the colony during the recess, it would be a very good thing. He would benefit by the general and local knowledge so acquired, and he would find that reforms were called for in one part of the colony which might be undesirable in others. For instance, there were the normal schools, which had apparently been a failure in some districts, while in Otago they had evidently been a great success. There were many differences of that kind, which the Minister should carefully consider before proposing any such radical changes as these now before the Committee. He (Mr. Barron) should not support any of the changes now proposed, although he should be very glad the next session, after getting full information, and giving the subject long and careful consideration, to consider each proposal on its merits, and possibly to support some of them.

Mr. Skddon would remind the Minister that he had not answered a question put by him (Mr. Seddon) some time before with reference to the legal power of the Government to raise the school-age except by amending the Education Act. It was most undesirable to give any possibility for wasting public money in litigation over such a matter. He would ask the Minister to decide that the school-age should not be raised in the country districts, and that capitation payments on working average should continue, the capitation not being decreased. He would show that the proposals of the Minister would have the effect of closing schools in the country districts, and therefore that the reductions should certainly not apply to country districts. That was the only fair way of meeting the contingencies that were bound to arise. Those who had passed the Sixth Standard should not be excluded from the schools in districts where there were no means of secondary education; because to allow them to continue at the primary schools was the only way by which they could prepare for the Civil Service examinations. It would be grossly unfair to withdraw the capitation in such cases in districts in which there were no means of secondary education. He had been connected for twenty years with the working of education in Now Zealand. Before the general system was started, and when means for schools had to be obtained in the best way available, he had taken a part in it, and since the system was established in 1877 he had been closely and intimately connected with its working; and he would state to the Committee how his experience caused him to regard the present proposals. It would be less unfair to the Westland District if the Government raised the school-age and did not persist in their other proposals than vice versâ. There were, say, seventy children under six attending school in the Westland District, and the Board would reccive as capitation for them about £270, and therefore to exclude them would mean so much loss of revenue. But the effect of adopting the other three proposals of the Government would be a loss to the Board of £900 a year, the two sums together being just one-fifth of the Board's present yearly revenue. It would therefore be preferable for that district that the school-age should be raised to six, and that the Government's other proposals should be negatived. Now, to bring the expenditure of the Board within the reduced revenue, the Board would have to reduce the salaries of its teachers. The total amount paid away by the Board was £6,000, of which £4,238 was paid to teachers, so that if the revenue were reduced by one-fifth there must be a reduction of teachers' salaries. But already the teachers in Westland were paid less than they were in any other part of the colony, and if they were further reduced the result would be that the best of the teachers would be lost to the district, and a great blow would be struck at education in that part of the colony. And he might say, in reply to a remark which had been made by the Minister of Education, that in the Westland District the value of the residences was taken into account when the teachers' page 22 salaries were fixed, and so were the payments of bonuses for teaching pupil-teachers. Then, lot the House look at the figures as to the salaries paid to teachers in different education districts. In Taranaki there were forty-one teachers receiving £100 a year; in Westland there were thirty-five receiving under £100; in Taranaki there were twenty who received between £100 and £200; in Westland there were twenty receiving between £200 and £300, in Taranaki one, in Westland five. In Hawke's Bay sixty-five teachers received under £100, thirty-nine received between £100 and £200, nine between £200 and £300, two between £300 and £400, and one over £400. In Westland there were none over £300. These proved that the salaries now paid in Westland were very small; and how was it possible for the Board to further reduce them? Then, as to the attendance. Table J of the Education Report of 1886 showed that the average attendance in Hawke's Bay was 95 7 per cent., whilst in Westland it was 68.9 per cent., and in North Canterbury it was 70 4 per cent. That would show how much would be lost by Westland if the strict average were to be taken. Owing to an adverse climate, and the distances pupils had to travel in Westland, the attendance was very likely to be interfered with, and what would not be felt in Hawke's Bay would be very seriously felt in Westland. The honourable member for Napier should have remembered that when he was speaking; and it was owing to those influences that, while Westland would lose £280 or £300 if the school-age were raised, it would lose £900 if the capitation were reduced, and if the strict average were taken instead of the working average. As to the size of the schools, Westland showed very poorly by comparison with others. In Westland there were five schools where there were under 20 pupils, two in which there were less than 25, six in which there were less than 50, three in which there were less than 100, one only where there were 150, two where there were 250, and only one where there were more than 300. Whereas in Hawke's Bay there were five having 15 pupils; one from 15 to 20; two, 20 to 25; cloven, 25 to 50; four, 50 to 75; four, 75 to 100; five, 100 to 150; six, 150 to 300; seven, 300 to 500. Of course, where there were so many of these largo schools, it was possible to make reductions to meet a reduced capitation-grant, and, so far as Hawke's Bay was concerned, he indorsed everything that had been said by the member for Napier in reference to the possibility of reducing expenditure; but it was not possible to do that in districts like Westland, where there were so many small schools. This all went to prove that the whole thing should be in the hands of one central department, so as to secure equality in the payment of teachers. If they looked at the cost of administration they would see that the charges in Westland were very low as compared with those in other places. The cost of inspection in Hawke's Bay stood at 3s. 9d., whilst in Westland it was only 2s. 10d.

Mr. Ormond.—Take the whole cost of the executive staff.

Mr. Seddon said the number of schools in Hawke's Bay was 39; Westland, 22; Taranaki, 62. The average attendance was—in Taranaki, 1,611; Hawke's Bay, 3,264; West-land, 1,467. And the cost of management pet head was: Taranaki,4s. 11d.; Hawke's Bay, 2s. 3d.; Westland, 4s. 3¼d.

Mr. Ormond.—Hear, hear.

Mr. Seddon said, if the honourable gentleman would take the average daily attendance into consideration, he would sec that really the cost of management in Hawke's Bay was just three times what it was in Westland, for of course the large number of pupils reduced the rateable amount in Hawke's Bay. Taking the cost of inspection, it was—in Hawke's Bay, 3s. 9¼d.; in Westland, 2s. 10¾d.; while in Taranaki it was 5s. 3d. That showed that the cost of inspection in Westland was much less than in Hawke's Bay, and was only one-half of that expended by Taranaki. As to maintenance, the cost in Westland was £3 8s. 10d., and in Hawke's Bay it was £3 13s. 8d. In this matter, again, the Westland Board was managing more cheaply than that of Hawke's Bay. Now, the totals showed as follow: Hawke's Bay, £3 19s. 8½d.; Taranaki, £4 8s. 1d.; Westland, £3 16s. 1d. It could not be said that they were extravagant in regard to inspection, management, or payment of teachers. Then, coming to the current expenditure on buildings in Westland, it was only £4 11s. 2d., and in Hawke's Bay £5 11s. 4d.; so that Hawke's Bay again was favoured considerably more than other districts. He had forgotten to mention that in Taranaki the total was £4 5s. 4d., as against £3 16s. 1d. in Westland. He put this table before the Committee to show that the carrying of these proposals meant the stopping of the whole system in districts like Westland, Greymouth, and Taranaki, unless they took the profits from the more favourably situated districts, like Hawke's Bay, and applied them to the other districts. Then, as to the children attending the school after they had passed the Sixth Standard, was no credit to be given to districts like Westland and Greymouth, where, labouring under the difficulties he had pointed out, the pupils passed the standards at a very much earlier age than in other parts of the colony? He would undertake to say that that was the case, and that children going from the Auckland District to Westland were always put back a standard. What were they to do with their boys who passed the Sixth Standard at twelve years of age? Were they to be refused permission to attend the school any longer? There were no scholarships for them. It was a crying shame that in the whole Education District of Westland there were only two scholarships—he believed now only one scholarship. That being so, there was no chance for the boys to enter the professions, to become teachers, or to pass the Civil Service examination, unless they were allowed to attend school after passing the Sixth Standard, for there was neither high school nor university on the West page 23 Coast. Why should they in one session say that the Civil Service of the colony should be open to all the people of the colony—to the child of the poor as well as to the child of the rich—and then in the next session render the law a dead-letter and say they would reduce the standards, or not grant the capitation for any child who had passed the Sixth Standard? The Minister of Education had had to admit that in Westland children passed the Sixth Standard at the age of thirteen; and if a boy passed the standard at that age, and there was no scholarship open to him and no secondary school he could attend, how was he to pass the Civil Service examination, or have a chance of becoming a teacher? This was, he thought, one of the worst proposals made by the Government. Then, to take the proposals made by the Minister. He had told them that he expected to save £26,000 by raising the school-age, £16,000 by reducing the capitation grant, £8,000 by paying on the strict average instead of the working average, and £7,000 by doing away with the subsidy upon pupils attending the school after they had passed the Sixth Standard. Taking the promise which the Minister of Education had definitely made, that no country school should be closed owing to these proposals, he thought that only one-half of that amount would be saved; that, instead of the total saving being £57,000, it would not be more than £27,000 or £28,000. If that were so, would it be worth while disturbing the existing system to effect that paltry saving? He contended that it would be far better for the Government to allow this question to stand over till next session, and then to deal with the master in a comprehensive way, sweeping away the Boards of Education entirely, making the wealthier districts of the colony contribute to the cost of education in the more sparsely populated districts, and having a general system of inspection, so that there could be no difference in the standards, and a comparison could be instituted between the different districts. In some districts the standards were much below—a full standard below—what they were in other districts. It was also necessary that there should be greater equality in the payment of teachers. He could say unhesitatingly that teachers who were producing results that were unequalled in any other part of the colony, who were giving every satisfaction, and were performing their duties in an heroic and patriotic manner, were getting smaller salaries than others who were not doing anything like such good work; and the sooner this phase of the question was faced by the Minister of Education and dealt with the better. Then, the proposals before them plainly meant the closing of the schools to 6,500 children. What would the parents think of the Parliament, or of the representatives, who would close the schools on such a large number of children who were at present being educated in them? No provision whatever had been made, no warning given; but these 6,500 i children were to be turned adrift. He thought this would cause much bad feeling, and that the people of the colony would rebel against such a high-handed proceeding. They should bear in mind that the mass of the people paid through the Customs something like £1,500,000 per annum, and that all they got for that large amount was simply the amount recouped to them by way of education, which was less than £500,000. He could prove conclusively that in Westland they could pass the children through the six standards between the ages of five and twelve; and that those standards, as the papers would show, were higher than the standards in any other part of the colony. These children had a chance for the Civil Service, the professions, and scholarships, if they were kept at school two or three years more, between the ages of twelve and fifteen; and they should not be deprived of that chance. The children were passed through the standards without any injury to them physically, as could be seen by any one who would pay a visit to any of the State schools on the West Coast. You could go to the galleries of the schools on the West Coast and hear the children between five and six years of age singing their little ditties, learning three or four verses and singing them to music, saying their alphabet from A to Z, and showing such memory as many members of the House could not show. Then, they were brought under discipline in marching and in their classes. It was absurd to say that these things should be taken away from them because it was doing them an injury. You could not keep them away from the schools, and to compel them to stay away would be doing them an injury in after-life. The bulk of the people were paying a million and a half every year through the Customs, and all they got in return was this education. Having established the system it should not be swept away, as was proposed to be done under the Government proposals, for they meant sapping the whole system. If it were put to the people of the colony, they would rather pay this paltry £28,000 which it was proposed to save than have their education system interfered with. Before now the people of Westland had paid £1 a head, and even the miners who had no children paid it willingly rather than have the education system destroyed. What did property contribute to the revenue? A paltry £300,000. Yet property, and the Government, which represented property, were trying to prevent the education of the masses by sapping the present system of education. The Civil Service was now thrown open to competition, and the children of poor people had a chance of getting into it, and it would be grossly unfair for the House to shut that door to them. Those who were in favour of the Government proposals were those who wanted to keep the Civil Service and the professions to themselves, and to keep the poorer classes down as hewers of wood and drawers of water. He, for one, must resist any such proposal. Let the Government carry their proposals in toto, with a pledge that the country schools should not suffer; and he would prefer that to the compro- page 24 mise proposed by the honourable member for St. Albans and other honourable members. He was glad to think that there were only some five or six persons who had joined in that compromise, because it was purely in the interests of the rich and against the education of the poorer classes. He would like the Minister of Education to give a distinct pledge to the Committee that during the recess he would consider the question of having the whole thing centralised, and making the wealthier parts of the colony pay for the poorer; also of equalising the payment of teachers, and making education more generally equal.

Mr. W. P. Reeves moved, That the vote be reduced by £5. He would have liked to discuss the whole question at length; but, owing to the action of the Government in putting this the most important question of the session off to so late a period, and taking it in Committee, instead of having a full discussion in the House, he felt that the Committee did not desire a long discussion, as it was anxious to bring business to a conclusion. He hoped, however, that before the discussion was over some honourable member would reply to the speech of the honourable member for Napier, which was really the only good speech in favour of the Government proposals. Of course every one knew the difference between Hawke's Bay and Canterbury, and no doubt Canterbury could run its education system as cheaply as Hawke's Bay, if it chose to reduce the salaries of its teachers; but the people in the country there thought that £120 a year was quite as little as ought to be paid to teachers, and therefore a reduction could not be made. He understood that if his motion were carried it would be taken by the Government as an indication that the school-age should be raised.

Mr. Fitzherbert thought the remarks of the honourable member for Hawke's Bay showed that if School Committees husbanded their funds and dealt with other matters in a businesslike way there need not be the enormous expenditure which at present was incurred for education. The honourable gentleman had shown that in his district, after paying their teachers good salaries and meeting all other expenses, they could make a saving; whereas the honourable member for Kumara put an entirely different aspect on the question in regard to his district. No doubt there was a waste of money in some districts, and if they looked at the report of the Inspector-General for the year 1886-87 they would find that, although the Education Board for Hawke's Bay had made the most of their funds, that had not been the universal practice in New Zealand. By that report it would be seen that there were eighty-six buildings not belonging to the Government in which school was held, and that meant that buildings would have to be erected for those schools. Therefore some Education Boards did not spend their money on school-buildings. Then, there were 271 teachers' residences not built—not in Hawke's Bay, but in other parts of the country. Again, it would be found from the report that there were a number of School Committees who were over head and ears in debt, which showred that they had not made the [unclear: mo] of the funds at their disposal. Then, they were told by the honourable member [unclear: f] Napier that there was plenty of school-account modation; but that was absolutely incorrect as far as the rest of the colony was concerns According to the report there were 46,000 children of school-age who were not attending schools, and those attending school had absolutely only six square feet allotted to each them. Out of the 46,000 children not attending the schools, 22,000 were Roman Catholics and, as the honourable member for Dunedin South had pointed out, if the Roman Catholic had chosen to take advantage of the State schools it would have been necessary to expend £100,000 to accommodate them. Therefore, notwithstanding what the honourable member for Napier had said on one side [unclear: a] the honourable member for Kumara had [unclear: sa] on another, the fact remained that the [unclear: fur] at disposal were not sufficient to meet [unclear: th] liabilities and to give every child in the colonel an opportunity of getting education. So [unclear: th] something must be done, and the question was In what direction should it be done? He [unclear: w] glad the Government were going to make as education, for he had always told his constituents that there must be a reduction; [unclear: as] he thought it was right to leave it to Minister to say where it could be made. In towns was right that the minimum age [unclear: should] six instead of five; but he thought in country districts the five-years age should be retained. But, with regard to the remark of [unclear: th] honourable member for Kumara that children, as a rule, in his district passed at each age, he thought they would find that [unclear: that] depended on the master who had charge [unclear: of] school. Some masters placed children [unclear: at] very early age in the First Standard; other would not put them there until they [unclear: we] older. He thought the test was the tercentenary of children who passed the different standardly If the honourable member for Kumara would look at the statistics on the subject he would see that his district was one of the last. [unclear: H] district showed only 10.5 per cent, of passage whereas Auckland showed 14. The only dioptrical below the honourable member for Kuman showed 9.6; but, so far as passing was our corned, his district was a long way behind other districts, and was only the second worst in the colony. The honourable gentleman [unclear: need] tell them about the intellectual ability of [unclear: th] parents and children, for, apparently, [unclear: th] ability was not equal to that of [unclear: parents] children in other parts of the colony. [unclear: It] necessary that something should be [unclear: done], he (Mr. Fitzherbert) must support this redaction of 4s. of capitation. What he should have preferred to see was, that children [unclear: should] for teaching in the Fifth and Sixth Standard According to the last statistics, if these children paid 1s. 6d. a week each the sum of £52,000 would be derived from that source. The children page 25 in the Fifth and Sixth Standards were, generally speaking, children of well-to-do people. The children of the labouring people were generally taken away, after they had passed the Fourth Standard, to assist their fathers and mothers in their daily labour. Those who could keep their children in the Fifth and Sixth Standards should be made to pay 1s. 6d. a week, which was not a great sum for the education they would receive in those standards. Therefore he should have liked to see the Minister of Education frame his reductions in that form. He should vote for the proposed reduction of 4s., because he thought it was a step in the right direction. He should also vote for making the minimum age six instead of five years, because he thought a child of ordinary intelligence could get through the remaining standards in the time placed at its disposal. There were some children whom all the education in the world would not make clever. If they were made to pay in the Fifth and Sixth Standards, they should then give a number of good scholarships, so that the children of the poorer people should have every opportunity of getting the best education the State could give them. Such a system would be beneficial to the children and their parents, and would be a great saving to the country, because the parents would know that their children would not be kept in idleness in the schools at the cost of the colony. He should vote for the reduction, and was only sorry to say that the proposals of the Government did not go far enough.

Mr. Izard would have great pleasure in; supporting the raising of the school-age if the Government had made provision for kindergarten schools, or provided for the education of young children in some other way; but, inasmuch as no provision was made in this direction, the Committee should not agree to the proposal of the Government. He had consulted with the chief of the Education Department and with several others who had to with schools, and the almost unanimous conclusion was that, unless children were sent early to school, they ran about the streets and contracted habits that were afterwards fatal to them. The universal opinion of those connected with education was, that this was the inevitable result of children being allowed to run about in that way. The same argument did not apply to country schools as much as it did to town schools, because in the country the children did not get into the same habits as they did in the large cities of the colony. In the towns they did not get into habits of obedience or discipline, and it was very hard indeed to keep them in order at all. There was another objection to this proposal, which was this: that the Education Act distinctly stated that the school-age should be from five to fifteen; and nothing could be plainer than that. Now the Government proposed to raise the school-age from five to six; or, in other words, they proposed to do by vote what could only be done by statute. They said they would not give capitation to children between five and six, and the result would be that the provisions of the Act would not be complied with. This would practically repeal the clause in the Act, which was binding on the Government. Moreover, there was this further difficulty in the matter: He doubted very much whether the Government would save anything at all in the way they proposed to do it. According to the report of the Minister of Education, there were 21,025 between the ages of five and seven attending school. There were no means of finding out how many there were between five and six; but, assuming that 10,500 was the number, the 10,500 would be deprived of education, and the saving would be £3 15s. on 10,500, or about £39,000. The Government pledged themselves that no school should be allowed to stop for want of funds. There were 1,054 primary schools in the colony. How many of these were in the towns and how many were in the country he could not say. The returns did not enable one to arrive at any distinct conclusion on that point; but he would suppose there were two-thirds in the country and one-third in the towns. It amounted to saying this on the part of the Government: that, at any rate, they would undertake that two-thirds of these 1,054 schools should be practically—he would not say maintained, but—supplemented by the Government; or, in other words, that 800 schools should receive an additional payment from the Government. How much such payment amounted to they were not told. The Government did not say how much they proposed to give this or that school. But he could sec it was not at all a large estimate to imagine that they would have an average to pay £50 for each school. If that were the case, the saving effected by raising the school-age vanished or almost entirely vanished; and they had 10,500 children absolutely deprived of that education which the Legislature distinctly said they were entitled to have. Although he was opposed to this first item in the Government programme, yet he thought the Committee should agree with the Government on the other items. He thought it was quite right that they should make a reduction of 4s. a head. He was perfectly well aware that in some districts there was great difficulty as to the capitation allowance. The schools in the towns might be worked very easily for less than the capitation, and the balance saved devoted to schools in the country; and this fact came in aid of his argument that the saving effected would be very little indeed. With regard to the normal schools, he should like to say that there were only four of them in the colony, and they cost £8,000 a year. The Wellington Normal or Training School was kept up last year for the sole benefit and instruction of seventeen students. In 1886 the number of students attending the Wellington Normal School was two males and fifteen females, a total of seventeen, for which the whole machinery and teaching staff of a normal school were kept in operation. They might page 26 very well do without the normal schools at all, and other and more economical arrangements could be made in the secondary schools by which those who desired to become teachers could receive necessary instruction, while the machinery of the University might be used for examining them. He therefore agreed with the proposal of the Government to abolish the normal schools. He would express his agreement with a great deal that had fallen from the honourable member for the Hutt. He presumed that a great many honourable members, while willing to support the maintenance of the education system, would be willing that a small fee should be charged for pupils in the Fifth and Sixth Standards. He believed that idea had taken considerable root in the public mind, and he knew that during the late election it was much discussed in this part of the colony, at any rate; and he thought the opinion generally arrived at was that the parents of children in those standards should be asked to contribute a small fee towards the cost of the education system. There were 11,333 children in those standards, and a very small payment for each would very considerably reduce the cost of education to the Colonial Exchequer. He was in favour of the abolition of Education Boards. There were thirteen of those bodies in the colony, each with its separate staff, and the total cost of these Boards was £10,000 a year. He thought their functions might very well be conducted by the Minister of Education, with the assistance of a small staff; and he would very much like to see that change carried out. He believed there would be no opening for him in accordance with the forms of the House to move an amendment in that direction, and therefore he had to content himself with expressing his opinion. He should support the proposals of the Government.

Mr. Loughrey said that in common with many other members of the House he was pledged to retrenchment; but at the same time he was also pledged to [unclear: support] present education system, and to use his best endeavours to prevent the school-age as at present fixed, and the curriculum of the [unclear: Ste] schools, from being interfered with; [unclear: th] from one end of the colony to the other the mass of the people had stated in the plains possible manner that the ages at which [unclear: th] children should be permitted to attend [unclear: th] State schools should not be altered, and [unclear: th] a large majority of the members in the House were pledged to support the present Education Act to that extent. It was one of the [unclear: bur] questions during the late election, whether [unclear: th] present education system should be present in its entirety, so that its efficiency should [unclear: n] be interfered with; and he believed there [unclear: w] not one candidate who, when questioned, had not replied that, though in favour of retrenchement, he would support the education system as it stood. The people generally were produced of the system and of the results it had produced, and he thought any interference with it would be most injudicious, and would be objected to throughout the colony. It was [unclear: th] mass of the people who contributed the cost of the system; and it was the mass of the people who had questioned candidates during the [unclear: la] election and made them pledge [unclear: themselves] support the system in its integrity; [unclear: and] was quite sure that if any candidate [unclear: h] ventured to say he would interfere with [unclear: th] efficiency of the system he would have [unclear: had] chance whatever of being elected. He [unclear: w] surprised, seeing how strong the expression of opinion on this question had been all over [unclear: th] country during the election, to find so [unclear: may] honourable members in favour of altering [unclear: th] system materially. A good deal had been said page 27 as to the physical disadvantages which would result from children under six years of age attending school. He had had considerable Experience in the management and working of State schools, and he had never been able to see any physical disadvantages follow from children of that age being taught in these schools. The opinion of one medical man had been quoted to show that it was very disadvantageous indeed for children to have education forced on them at an early age; but, notwithstanding this opinion, he thought the best judges of whether attending school at an early age was physically injurious were the parents themselves, and he ventured to say that, if you travelled the country over, not a single parent would be found to say that a child had been known to suffer physical injury from attending school too young. On the contrary, the evidence of parents would be that young children attending school and being made subject to discipline and receiving the elements of education made them brighter and smarter; and the experience of teachers and Inspectors was the same. Erectly these young children began to attend school, and mixed with the older scholars and with each other, they began to pick up all kinds of information unconsciously, just as they had learned to speak unconsciously from listening to those who spoke near them; while if they kept away from school till they were seven, or eight, or nine years of ago before learning anything in this way, it would be much more difficult for them to begin to acquire the rudiments of knowledge. It was surprising to find how much information children could acquire before they were seven—they learned to read pell, to write fairly, and got some knowledge of prithmetic; and by that time they were strong tough, mentally and physically, to continue at school, and to go on to more advanced work without any strain. There was no real strain on children up to fourteen or fifteen in going through the primary-school course. Those honourable members who could remember their own schooldays would know that they had felt no strain in those times; and that it was only when they became adults and had to face the struggles, difficulties, and problems of life that they began to feel conscious of any strain. Very few, if any, children in the State schools were strained, either mentally or physically, even those in the highest classes; Sand he thought it would be the greatest misfortune to raise the school-age. He entirely agreed, too, that those who had passed the Sixth Standard, and who had not reached the limit of school-age, should be allowed to remain at school if they chose. Many children passed that standard by the time they were twelve, They might not be able to get employment; and why should they be turned into the streets, where there was a great probability of their acquiring very undesirable knowledge? the law said that these children might attend school till they were fifteen, and he thought, in those circumstances, those whose parents wished them to be more thoroughly grounded in the higher parts of the subjects they had studied should be allowed to remain at school. It was at that very time that children were likely to derive the most advantage from attending school, and, so far from excluding them, he thought they should be encouraged to remain after they had passed the Sixth Standard; but, as honourable members knew, in many cases, owing to the position of the parents, it was not possible for them to remain even till they had reached the Sixth Standard. He believed our system had been copied from the Victorian, and he knew that there the children, after reaching a certain standard—after being well grounded, in fact, in the three Rs—might leave school; but, notwithstanding such children had received a certificate showing that they had passed the standard required by the Education Act in that colony, they were not only permitted but even encouraged to remain in the schools until they had attained the age of fifteen years. Many passed the compulsory standard at eleven years of ago, and they could then leave school if their parents wished; but many of these children, unfortunately, were compelled to leave school at an early age, in order to assist their parents to obtain the means of living. It was seen even in this colony that parents were often in such straitened circumstances that whatever could be earned by their children was of great assistance in helping to supply the wants of the family; and for this reason children of tender years were often found at work who should be attending the State schools. He therefore thought that every inducement should be given to encourage the children being kept at school as long as possible, and every effort made to secure that they should, while at school, be given a suitable education. It was unnecessary for him to say anything in favour of the State system of education. People of all classes who had inquired into it carefully believed that it was doing a great amount of good, that education of a most thorough character was being imparted, and that a youth who had passed through the various standards of a State school in this colony was so thoroughly grounded in the rudiments of an ordinary English education that he could, if he were studious and desirous of proceeding with his studies after leaving school, be able to obtain the highest honours that could be conferred by the universities. He believed it was a fact that those pupils who had taken the highest positions at the universities were those who had been primarily educated at the State schools. He felt very strongly on the subject, and was sure that no greater mistake could be made than to increase the school-age, or to exclude children, as had been proposed by Ministers. With reference to the next question, that of reducing the capitation by 4s., he was, as he had said at the commencement of his remarks, in favour of retrenchment, and, if the Ministry thought that they could get the children educated for £3 15s. per head with as much efficiency as at present, he would give his hearty support to their proposal. With regard to the substitution of strict average for working average, he could not agree to that. So far as page 28 his knowledge went—and it was some time since he had anything to do with State schools—the allotment of staff was made in accordance with the average attendance at the schools, and that average was made up by dividing the total attendance by the number of days on which the school was open, after deducting the number of days on which the attendance had fallen below a certain number, and upon the result so obtained teachers were allotted to the school; but under strict average the total number would be divided by the actual number of schooldays, making no allowance for the attendance having fallen owing to sickness or from any other cause. If the basis suggested by the Minister of Education were adopted it would lead to an inadequate staff being employed, and to the teachers' salaries being reduced. There might be many wet days in the year, and epidemics sometimes very materially interfered with the attendance; and he feared that evil results would follow from making the allotment of teachers to the schools on strict average instead of working average. He would therefore be unable to support that proposal. With regard to training teachers, he was wholly in favour of training-institutions being carried on by the Government; but in his opinion there were too many of these institutions in the colony. One for each Island would be quite sufficient. In Victoria the practice was that, after children had passed a certain standard or a certain examination, they received appointments as pupil-teachers, going through a course of three, or four, or five years. They were then sent to a training-institution, and remained there for two years; and while there they were taught by professors—university men—and they were also given practical experience in the State schools, receiving the salaries usually paid to assistants, to help in their support. He believed that there should be some system of that kind by which the State could train its teachers; but he thought there might be substantial reductions in the expenditure now incurred in this direction. With regard to the reduction of expenditure in the State-school system, he thought considerable retrenchment might be made without touching the school-ago, without interfering with the working average, or without materially interfering with the training-institutions; and it might be made by abolishing the Boards. It would have been seen, by what had fallen from several honourable members in the course of the debate, that some Boards were not conducting their affairs upon economical principles. The honourable member for Napier had shown that some Boards were not worked cheaply, and that, in fact, where Boards were disposed to be economical, they could make considerable savings. In the honourable gentleman's own district, he understood, they had saved £2,000 out of the allotment during the past year, which had been put by for building purposes, though the honourable member did not say that it was required for that purpose. He (Mr. Loughrey) was in favour, therefore, of abolishing the Boards. Each of these bodies had a staff consisting of Inspectors, a secretary, clerks, et cetera, which to [unclear: a] extent might be done without if the system were worked from one centre. If the [unclear: B] were dispensed with the teachers would appointed in a proper manner; they [unclear: w] be more independent, and not be at [unclear: the] and-call of the Committees of the district which they might be situated, and for this person they would do their duty better [unclear: and] efficiently. The Minister had already [unclear: st] that, though he proposed to increase the school-age, he would sec that the country [unclear: school] not interfered with; but he should like to the honourable gentleman what average intended to take on which to keep the [unclear: cos] schools open. He believed that they [unclear: we] present kept open when there was an [unclear: av] of twenty. If that average should be [unclear: re] in consequence of the exclusion of the child mentioned by the Minister, what [unclear: adva] would be gained? The same [unclear: expenses] be incurred in working the school, [unclear: not] standing the reduced attendance; and [unclear: the] advantage—if it were an advantage—would that a number of children would be [unclear: depria] the means of being educated. It was [unclear: no] trouble to teach twenty than it was [unclear: to] twelve. The teacher had a certain [unclear: ne] of classes to instruct, and it [unclear: would] no difference to him whether [unclear: there] five or six children in a class, or [unclear: tw] three. In conclusion, he had to say [unclear: th] was prepared to support the second [unclear: por] of Ministers—that was, to reduce the caption-allowance—he had no doubt it [unclear: had] carefully considered—and he could supper reduction of the grant in aid of [unclear: tram] colleges; but he was not prepared to [unclear: sw] the other proposals.

Mr. Walker felt sorry that the [unclear: Mini] had not adopted the same course with this [unclear: ject] that they had adopted with other [unclear: of] estimates—that was, to state to the [unclear: House] inability to make definite proposals, and seek from the House confidence that [unclear: they] do their best to effect economy [unclear: where] could. It would have been asking a [unclear: good] from the House, but he believed that the [unclear: H] was prepared to grant them that confident He was sorry that in this the most import part of our expenditure, a matter [unclear: which] quired the most complete knowledge and most delicate treatment, they should [unclear: have] so precipitate as to rush in where angels [unclear: f] to tread, and to propose to do something [unclear: w] might seriously affect the excellence [unclear: and] working of the education system. It [unclear: would] been much more wise if Ministers had [unclear: been] radical in their proposals, and more caution the reductions which they proposed [unclear: to] Although pledged and persuaded that [unclear: the] sent education system must be [unclear: supported] entirety, that was, so far as work was [unclear: conca] he was not averse from economy: in fact was prepared to follow Ministers or anywhere else where it could be shown that [unclear: eocc] could be secured without a sacrifice of [unclear: ciency]. But what he felt was that it had yet been shown that economy [unclear: could] page 29 be effected in the direction proposed by Ministers. The fact had already been referred to by the honourable member for Caversham that a Committee was appointed at the beginning of the session to consider this matter; and he regretted that that Committee had not been trusted so far as to have effect given to its report. That Committee stated generally that it had not had time to complete its investigations, and candidly confessed its inability to brings down any report that could exhaustively and thoroughly deal with the question. Why, then, should the Minister, unless he was prepared to say that he had more information than that Committee—which he could not have after but one fortnight of office—come down and say that he saw his way to alter the whole system? It would have been infinitely more creditable to say candidly that he was unable to recommend at the present time any specific reduction, but that, if the House would leave the Matter in his hands, it might safely trust him—declaring that he valued the system too much to injure it, but, at the same time, he would endeavour to effect such reductions as were possible by next session. If the honourable gentleman had said that, the House would have extended to him its confidence.

An Hon. Member.—What would the Opposition have said?

Mr. Walker said the Opposition never refused reasonable advice from any Minister, nor refused to extend to any Minister reasonable confidence. So much for the general question, He was sorry indeed that the Government had altered their tactics on this particular point of their policy, because he considered it would; Have been much wiser not to have done so. So far as the House had heard from the Minister, the only specific point he really brought up that required serious consideration was that which had been also dealt with by the honourable member for Napier, which was that there was a good deal of difference of administration in different districts. That was the most important point that had been laid before the House that day. And what did it prove? Not that any particular part of the system should be reduced all over the colony, but that the administration should be improved where it was faulty. The Minister, however, had not shown exactly how it was to be improved, even in districts where he thought there had been a lack of good administration. The whole circumstances only pointed to this: that more mature deliberation and consideration of the whole subject was, in the first place, necessary before the Minister could presume to guide the House in this most important matter. He trusted the Minister would take into consideration all he had heard that day upon the subject, and endeavour, next session, to lay before the House better and more matured recommendations. He ventured to doubt whether, at present, the Minister had any data upon which to found his proposals; and the fact that he was prepared to accept a compromise showed that he was acting upon insufficient data. The exact nature of the compromise he (Mr. Walker) did not know; but the fact that the Minister was willing to accept a compromise showed that he was not quite clear himself, for if he had seriously considered the matter he would have been the last person to accept a compromise. He did not sec how the Committee could arrive at any distinct issue on any one of the matters submitted to it. They were really working in the dark, and the Minister would not be fully assured as to what the real opinion of the House was upon any one of the four points. However, he trusted that before the debate closed the Ministry would gather the opinions of a good many of the members. As to the first question, the school-age, the Committee which had been appointed at the beginning of the session was able to gather some evidence, and he was not astonished that the evidence which was procurable was certainly not of a character to support the Government proposals. When the Committee was appointed some members, during the course of the light debate that took place on the question, said that they would not send their children to school before the age of seven. That was exactly a point upon which there was much misconception. It was all very well for honourable members who had nurseries and governesses not to send their children to school at the age of five years; but, then, their children were under governesses, receiving most important training and discipline, though, nominally, they were not going to school. Then, there was this point he wished to emphasize: that the younger children who went to school were receiving most valuable instruction and discipline in habits and manners. At the same time that they were not subjected to anything which could hinder their physical development, as regarded their mental development they were receiving most perfect training, which would enable them, when the proper time came, to learn the different subjects which would come before them. The evidence placed before the Committee was most conclusive on that point. The evidence of Mr. Habens certainly went to show that in his opinion it was a fallacy to suppose that the education in the lower classes in the public schools did anything more than train the children in habits of discipline and obedience: it also showed that, more than that, the training they had to undergo was absolutely pleasant and agreeable, and had all the advantages that the kindergarten system possessed. Then, as regarded the inclusion of these children in the schools, that affected in the most prodigious manner the cost of the whole system. It was by these children being included that they were enabled to support so many country schools. The education of the children in the infant schools did not cost more than £15s. or £1 10s. per annum, and the money that was saved by their capitation enabled the Boards to keep up the country schools. As against that, the Minister proposed that, if these children were kept out of the schools, not a single country school should be shut up; but, as had been shown by the honourable member for Wellington Suburbs, page 30 the saving thus proposed to be effected would be merely nominal: the money that would have to be sent to keep up the country schools would be precisely the same amount as that saved, and, in addition, the children would be turned from the other schools into the streets. He thought they should get the children into the schools as soon as possible. It would do them no harm, but good; and under the present system the country would not be a penny the better for the proposed change, while the education of the country would be a great deal worse. For these reasons, he maintained that, so far as the question of school-age was concerned, the Minister of Education had not made out a case, and he would be prepared to vote for the retention of the school-ago as at present. Regarding the children who had passed the standards before they arrived at the other limit of the school-age, if clever, hard-working children did that he should be very sorry to see them excluded. At the same time, he admitted that this was one of the branches of the subject which showed the necessity for exhaustive consideration, not only with regard to primary but also with regard to secondary education. He therefore desired that the Minister, who was evidently desirous of making good the old proverb about a now broom, should look into this matter during the recess, and endeavour to show what he could do with regard to the whole system. If he could bring down to the House a system which would save all overlapping, and enable every link in the chain to be well welded and to do its work efficiently—primary education doing its work, and secondary education not overlapping, but also doing its work—he, for one, should be exceedingly glad: and he trusted the Minister would devote his energies to this during the recess. Then, with regard to the normal schools, the Minister laid a great deal of stress on the fact that two of our normal schools were not doing good work. The honourable gentleman admitted that the Otago Training-school was doing good work, and he said nothing about the North Canterbury school; therefore it was to be presumed that silence gave consent, and that it also was doing good work. He should be very sorry to see all these normal schools done away with. He admitted that, in the interests of economy, there might be only one for the South Island and one for the North Island; but it was wrong to suppose that any economy or assistance would come to education by doing away with them altogether. He therefore could not agree with that proposal. One of the arguments of the Minister of Education was that some of the districts which had no normal schools did very well without them; but what happened in those districts? Simply that they got the teachers they wanted to fill important positions from the districts which had normal schools. That certainly did not show that normal schools were not necessary to the colony. With regard to the averages, he was not sufficiently acquainted with the working of the system to say whether the proposal of the Minister was right or wrong; but he learned enough from the speech of the honourable member for Linwood to know that it [unclear: w] work very unfairly in some instances, and [unclear: th] fore he would urge on the Minister [unclear: to] that back for further consideration. As [unclear: gards] the capitation, he would not be [unclear: a] from its being reduced to the statutory [unclear: am] because if they had learned one thing [unclear: du] the debate it was this: that there [unclear: had] a great deal of difference in the administration by different Boards, and that [unclear: some] ducted their education system for [unclear: much] than others. His own experience in [unclear: Canter] had been that the Board had for [unclear: some] been managing their affairs in an [unclear: exceed] extravagant manner. They had [unclear: been] in putting up school-buildings in [unclear: places] they were not wanted, and the style of building they had erected was much more [unclear: palatial] the circumstances of the [unclear: neighbourhood] quired. They had not even considered [unclear: wh] the district was one that was likely to be imminently settled, or one which was [unclear: m] stuffed with little children for the moment so enabled to appeal to the Education Board a school. He therefore thought that [unclear: a] enforced economy in their case and [unclear: in] cases would have a salutary effect. He listened with a great deal of pleasure [unclear: to] of the remarks of the honourable member Napier, which tended in the direction of [unclear: ing] that some of the Education Boards administered their affairs with a great [unclear: de] economy, and without any bad effects to cause of education. For these reasons would vote for the reduction of the [unclear: capi] to the statutory amount. It had also hinted that Boards were an expense and upon the system. Why that should [unclear: be] did not know. The members of those [unclear: B] were certainly gentlemen who [unclear: devoted] selves to the work for no other cause [unclear: tha] they loved it and wished to do their best [unclear: S] The expenses of these Boards were [unclear: not] great, and it would not be fair to do away them all over the colony. That [unclear: would] the central expense in Wellington at least times as great as it was now. He wool sorry to see that change effected, [unclear: because] would be nothing that would tend may destroy the sense of self-reliance of the [unclear: p] than to have to apply for [unclear: everything] central office in Wellington. [unclear: Proper] ministered, the district Boards [unclear: ought] valuable adjuncts to the cause of education and valuable advisers to the central [unclear: off] Wellington. In conclusion, he would upon the Minister, if only for the [unclear: sake] own reputation, to pause a little [unclear: longer] he pressed these radical changes on [unclear: the] try. If the honourable gentleman would take three months to consider he would bably bring down a scheme [unclear: which] more advantageous to the colony, and conservative of the good parts of the system now had. He believed in the [unclear: prudence] delay, because the system of [unclear: education] immense advantage to the future, [unclear: and] children of the colony; and it [unclear: was] page 31 which every taxpayer of the colony paid, and every taxpayer had a right to get his full value from it.

Mr. Allen must commence by saying a few words on the general question, so that the attitude he took up might not be misunderstood. He yielded to no man in his desire to see the whole population educated in the very best possible manner, and he said that because he believed the danger of the future, the danger of competition, was not from pauper labour, but lay in the competition which would take place between us and highly-educated labour elsewhere. At the same time, knowing the position we were in, it behoved us also to see that our education, while being as efficient as it was now, was managed economically. That was a question which was prominently before the electors during the recent electioneering campaign,—and, in connection with that, he might answer one argument brought forward by the honourable member for Linwood, who said that every candidate was pledged to support the school-age at five years—

Mr. Loughrey had not said anything of the kind.

Then he was pressed minutely on this point, and he said he thought that under any circumstances a child would be better in the open air enjoying any healthful form of recreation, and that his opinion was based on experience and observation. That evidence came from a gentleman who was not only a medical man, but also Chairman of an Education Board, and one who took a great interest in the work; and some weight ought to attach to his opinion. What, then, was there in favour of raising the school-age? They should also take into consideration what was done in other countries which were in the van of progress in regard to education. In Switzerland, which was in the very front rank in educational progress, the children were bound to go to school at seven years, and could go at six; in France the compulsory ago was from six to thirteen; in Hamburg the children could not enter the schools before they were six; and in America the legal minimum age was six: the compulsory age was from eight to fourteen. He would admit that there were variations in the school-ago in America, and that the average was from five to six years; but in nearly all of the countries of Europe the lowest age at which a child might enter a school was six years. He thought that, taken with what he had mentioned before, should also have some weight with the Committee. It would be seen, then, from what he had said that he was quite prepared to vote for the raising of the school-ago from five to six years; but he should have been qui to prepared to' accept the report which came down from the Education Committee, not because he personally wanted much more evidence in favour of the raising of the school-ago, but because he thought it wise, when a largo reform was being made, to take time to consider it. If, however, a division were called for he was pledged to vote for the raising of the age to six. Then, with regard to the reduction by 4s. of the capitation-grant, he was also quite prepared to vote for that; and, as far as he could gather from the speeches in the Committee, most members were prepared to vote for the 4s. reduction. At any rate, he should vote for it himself; and he was not afraid to say that he saw no reason why the salaries of the more highly paid school-teachers should not be reduced. The late Government proposed reductions in the Civil Service, but none in the salaries of highly-paid school-teachers; and the late Colonial Treasurer based his argument for the reduction of the salaries of Civil servants on the fact, as he said, that the purchasing-power of money was far greater than it was a few years ago. If that argument had any weight with regard to Civil servants, certainly it had the same weight with regard to highly-paid school-teachers. Oil that ground alone he should be prepared to vote for the reduction of the 4s.

Mr. Seddon.—What is your definition of a highly-paid school-teacher?

Mr. Allen.—£500 a year.

Mr. Levestam.—How many of those have you in the colony? Only three or four.

Mr. Allen said there were several. He must candidly confess that not sufficient evidence had been adduced to enable him to make up his mind on the third proposal of the Government, relating to strict average, and he should therefore prefer that that question be left over until next session. With regard to the normal schools or training-colleges, he felt that it would be advisable to leave the question open until next session. He knew from the evidence that had been brought before the Committee that in some cases the training-colleges had proved more or less failures; but he was not prepared to accept that judgment in regard to the normal schools in the district from which he page 31 came. He thought everybody coming from that part of the colony would admit that they had been to a very great extent a success. But it involved a very largo question of policy. The training of school-teachers was a large question they could hardly make up their minds upon in one day or evening. He should prefer it to be left over until next session, when they might discuss it under more favourable conditions. An honourable member made a remark that afternoon that in Hawke's Bay they had got no training-college, and yet got on quite as well without it. Now, that might be quite true; but, from the evidence he had before him, Hawke's Bay had been drawing her teachers from the Otago training-colleges. He had before him a letter to Mr. James Fulton, M.H.R., from Dr. Stuart, a gentleman who, he supposed, was known to everybody in the House. Dr. Stuart said,—

"I have had the opinion that our Normal School does good work. Its trained men are in demand in South Canterbury, Hawke's Bay, and Taranaki, and in such demand that at this moment there is only one trained man who is not in a situation. When its students go up to the University they take a full share of the honours."

Well, with evidence of that kind before him, he could not make up his mind to vote for doing away with normal schools and training-colleges, and he hoped that question might be held over till next session. Of course the whole question was a large one. He supposed they all very much regretted being obliged to make any reductions whatever in the education system; but they had to admit that the time had now come when they were sorely pressed for funds, and, if it were possible to make economies in the education system without impairing its efficiency, why, then, it was their duty to do so. However, he would not go into the whole question now. He supposed that next session the question would crop up again, and they would then have the full evidence of the Education Committee before them, and perhaps those who had been unable yet to come to any conclusion would then be able to make up their minds more readily.

Dr. Fitchett had a good deal to say on his subject, but would mercifullly refrain from saying most of it, because the matter had already been pretty exhaustively argued. But he could not content himself without saying something, because he thought that, from every point of view, this was the most important matter they had had to discuss this session. Now, he was a very loyal friend of the [unclear: prese] system of education, and, as far as [unclear: possible], would allow nothing to touch it that, [unclear: in] judgment, would injure it. It was [unclear: because] was so loyal a friend of the system [unclear: that] would cordially assist every effort to intelligent economize. There were enemies on all side and the friends of education could best [unclear: sust] it by showing no vulnerable point of [unclear: attac] Therefore he was strenuously in favour of [unclear: ev] attempt to economize the education system But he was not going to economize at [unclear: the] pense of the system, and he was very sorry [unclear: to] that, so far as three out of these four proposer went, he was emphatically against [unclear: them]. thought the Ministry had been [unclear: altogether] mature in this matter. They appointed a Committee, and voluminous evidence was taker and yet the House was now asked to deal [unclear: r] this great question while honourable member generally were in a state of ignorance as to [unclear: t] evidence adduced and the result of the [unclear: labou] of the Committee! Ignoring the labours [unclear: of] Committee, the Government came down [unclear: w] a series of isolated lines on which they proposed to pursue their retrenchment. [unclear: Inde] the interim report presented by the Committee was directly in the teeth of the Government proposals. He thought this was a mistake would be noticed that in the discussion, [unclear: tho] every speaker had urged retrenchment, [unclear: th] were by no means in accord with the Government. One honourable gentleman [unclear: decl] that Boards should be abolished, [unclear: another] the standards should be revised, another [unclear: th] the high schools should be [unclear: abolished]. these things went to show that the Government were premature in endeavouring [unclear: to] trench before they knew where to retreat and therein lay the danger which the system ran at the hands of the Government. [unclear: He] tested against tinkering with so important question as the education system of the [unclear: colo] He thought they should have time [unclear: during] recess to exhaustively analyse the whole [unclear: aff] and at the beginning of next session [unclear: co] down with a complete and exhaustive [unclear: sch] of retrenchment. In that he would [unclear: assist], he believed that not only would the [unclear: loss] sequent on the delay be very trifling, but believed retrenchment to the extent of nearly £100,000 could be achieved, and [unclear: that], without injuring the system—in fact, it might heighten the efficiency of the system. During with the Government proposals, and taking first the school-age, the onus lay on the Government to establish the advisability of change. The Government had pledged the selves to do nothing to injure the efficiencies the system. The onus rested on them to system that raising the school-age would not [unclear: injure] system. That view had not been suffices urged on the Committee. What [unclear: evidence] adduced in support of the proposed [unclear: cha] The Minister of Education told the Committee that, of thirty-nine reports or answers, [unclear: nine] wore in favour of raising the school-[unclear: age], teen were against it, and four were [unclear: silent] (Dr. Fitchett) took it that the four [unclear: who] page 33 silent were really in favour of the present state of things; so that, from the Minister's own figures, there were nineteen in favour of the change and twenty against it. Thus the balance of evidence was against the Minister. That, however, was perhaps a narrow way of looking at it. Honourable members had not before them the evidence given before the Committee, but he would briefly refer to one or two points that had already been touched on. The Minister of Education laid emphasis on the evidence in favour of raising the school-age given by Dr. Brown, and therein he was followed by the honourable member for Dunedin East. Now, in considering that evidence they must remember one thing: that Dr. Brown was not a specialist in education at all. He had no practical knowledge of it. He was a specialist as a medical man, but not as an educationalist. But his evidence did not support the contention of the Minister of Education, or of the honourable member for Dunedin East, who carefully omitted an answer given by Dr. Brown that put his evidence in an altogether different light. He would read the question and answer:—

"You say that you think the children are sent too early to school. Does not that depend upon the sort of instruction they get and the sort of accommodation that exists?—Yes; but, assuming the instruction to be intelligent and the accommodation fit, I consider that at the present school-age children would get no harm from attendance at school and the form of instruction they get there—supposing the hours are not too long. I lay great stress on that point. I put special emphasis on this point so far as it relates to the school-hours. I think they are at present too long for infants. I fail to see what benefit is derived from an [attendance of four hours—two hours in the forenoon and two hours in the afternoon—for very young children."

That was a matter on which each honourable gentleman could form a judgment. He (Dr. Fitchett) submitted that it was far better that a child should be kept in a well-regulated school Shan be allowed to run about in the back-lanes of a city. Then, the Minister asked, "You think that under any circumstances the child would be better in the open air enjoying any healthful form of recreation?" Dr. Brown answered, "I do." The doctor was under the delusion that if a child was not at school it would of necessity be enjoying healthy recreation outside. Now, had young children, particularly the children of poor people, who formed the mass of the population in cities, any opportunity of enjoying healthful recreation outside? They had not.

Mr. Fisher.—Why necessarily in the gutters?

Yet the Government actually proposed to reduce the capitation-allowance. He would not appeal further to authorities, but he would appeal to the common-sense of the Committee as to whether it was not reasonable and right to let children go to school at the age of five. As it had been well put by one honourable member, raising the school-age would, paradoxical as it seemed, be imposing a page 34 tax to keep the children out of school. The country schools would suffer from the decreased capitation, and would have to get assistance from the Government to keep open; so it would be really imposing a tax to keep children from the schools. It had been said that children between five and six were too young to undergo a steady course of instruction—that they were physically and mentally too weak, and that therefore they should not be permitted to go to school. But honourable members could see, and the evidence would show, that these young children were not instructed in the sense spoken of at all, but that they were kept at school subject to discipline, where they learned habits of order and attention, and unconsciously absorbed, through their pores, as it were, a large amount of information. They acquired a habit of noticing things, and in all these ways they fitted themselves for learning more quickly later on. The evidence went to show that children who attended school at an early age learned faster, relatively, than children who had not attended school at an early ago. As to the proposed reduction of capitation, it seemed to him that it would be entirely inoperative. Under the present system the Government gave the money to the Education Boards. The Boards gave a sufficiency to the town schools, and the country schools got what was left. It was like pouring water into a cup; the cup was filled, and then what more was poured ran over. Here the money was poured into the cup of the town schools, and what was over ran to the country schools. If the quantity poured was decreased the cup would still have to be filled before any could run over, and of course it would be the overflow that would be so much less to the country schools, and the country schools would have to come to the Government for enough more to keep them alive. It was as clear as a syllogism. There would be no real saving: the towns would be first supplied, and would absorb all the funds. The country schools would come to the Government for more, and would get it; for the Government were pledged to keep open the country schools. As to the strict-average proposal, the honourable member for Linwood had put that quite out of court. By having the strict average instead of the working average an indefinite punishment would be inflicted on the teacher—it would be making his salary dependent on the weather: salaries would go up and down with the barometer. Anything more absurd could not be conceived. The Minister could not have considered what would be the effect of such a change or he would never have suggested it. The master would have to do the same amount of work at all times, for it was just as easy to teach six as lour; but, as he had said, the man would get a fluctuating salary, and, literally, it would depend on the weather. Reverting for a moment to the raising of the school-age, he would like to point out that the honourable member for Napier seemed to miss the point of what had been urged in favour of the present order of things. The argument was that, as the town schools did not cost so much per head to maintain as the country schools, if the allowance were decreased there would not be so much to go to the country schools by way of surplice from the town schools; that, therefore, [unclear: th] country schools would suffer most. The honourable gentleman said that in the country children under six years did not attend—[unclear: th] it was usually too far for them to go, and they were kept away by the weather; that there faces it would be the town schools more than [unclear: th] country schools that would suffer. On reflection the honourable gentleman would see [unclear: th] the surplus was chiefly created by the attendance in town schools of children under [unclear: s] As to closing the normal schools, that was new proposal not indicated in the [unclear: Financi] Statement, which gave the general lines of [unclear: th] proposed retrenchment. If it was [unclear: intended] abolish them, direct evidence on [unclear: that] should have been taken by the Education Committee. This was not done, but [unclear: sub] evidence as there was was entirely in [unclear: favour] the retention of the normal schools. [unclear: All] witnesses, both those who gave their evidence orally and those who did so in writing, [unclear: we] asked if they could make [unclear: suggestions] effecting economy, and not one had suggested abolishing the normal schools. That [unclear: w] really affirmative evidence in favour of retaining them. The Minister had quoted a Mr. Fidler as reflecting on the efficiency of the Auckland school; but when Mr. Fidler came to give evidence before the Committee he did not [unclear: sa] anything on that subject. But, [unclear: because] school was inefficient, that was no argument for abolishing the entire system; it only [unclear: pro] that one school wanted improving. In Canterbury and Otago the training-schools has done most excellent work, and had given full value to the country for its money in [unclear: th] teachers they had turned out.

Mr. Fisher.—Canterbury?

Dr. Fitchett could speak from his [unclear: ow] knowledge of the Canterbury school [unclear: and] those conducting it. That school had turned out teachers worth the whole vote to the colon Besides the actual work of training teacher the normal schools also served a most valuable purpose as nurseries to the university. Our system of education encouraged teachers [unclear: to] through the University. There was great [unclear: ber] fit in that. Those going through the training colleges simply would probably acquire [unclear: ca] enough to suit their immediate purpose and enable them to pass the necessary examinations, while those passing through the University acquired a larger and broader knowledge They knew all round the subjects they [unclear: taug] and so were better teachers. The system normal schools was a good one. They [unclear: to] the cream of the scholars and made [unclear: th] teachers. Abolish them, and the supply trained teachers must be imported [unclear: from] side. He hoped they would be [unclear: allowed] remain till next session at all events, [unclear: when] whole subject could receive mature consideration. Indeed, he hoped the whole of the proposals would be allowed to stand over [unclear: till] page 35 session. He knew that savings could be made in the administration of the primary system and in the cost of higher education; savings could be made in the standards, and savings could be made by lessening the number of Education Boards. There could be also large sums saved and greater efficiency attained in the system of inspection. Not one of these things was embodied in the proposals of the Government. He knew this matter had been discussed apart from party consideration, and he hoped all honourable members would be guided without prejudice in coming to a decision on the different proposals submitted. He was satisfied that, though possibly the reducing of the capitation might not do much harm, yet the raising of the school-age and the abolishing of the normal schools were organic changes of a most disastrous kind—changes that hereafter would be bitterly regretted.

Mr. Peacock would not say much now on the question of school-age, as he had spoken on it before; but, after what had been said and quoted by the honourable member for Dunedin Central, he could not refrain from giving a quotation bearing on this point. The honourable member had referred somewhat disparagingly to the evidence of Dr. Brown, given before the Education Committee, because it happened to be against his own views, and stated it was overridden by that of the Rev. Mr. Habens. He wished to read a few lines from the evidence of perhaps the highest expert on the subject in the world. Mr. Arnold, Inspector-General of Schools in Great Britain, when being examined before the Royal Commission on Education, referred as follows to Germany, a country in the front rank of the nations as regarded education:" In Germany they tell you that it is settled by all the medical authorities that children have no business to begin to learn before they are six years old."

Mr. Duncan said the Committee had heard a great deal of argument from the town point of view, and he would now say a few words on the country side of the question. There were twenty-one or twenty-two schools in his electorate, mostly small ones: in fact, in about seven of them there was attendance about enough to let the teachers be fairly paid; while, as to the rest, if the Government proposals were 'carried there could be no doubt that further assistance would be wanted to keep them alive. He supposed that the average for seven of those schools would be about 120, and that the average attendance at the others would be about forty, while some of them had as few as twenty-five pupils, so that it would mean that, if this plan were carried out, a number of those teachers would have to come to the Government for assistance—that they would actually have to beg for an existence. That deserved consideration; and another matter which deserved consideration was that nothing should Be done which would reduce educational advantages to the children of those people who Went into the remote parts of the country to carry on the work of colonisation. He did not believe that the Minister of Education had sufficiently thought the matter out. He had no doubt that the honourable gentleman was sincere in stating that he would not allow country schools to be shut up; but there were so many of them that were at starving-point already that any reductions must have the effect of shutting them up. It had been stated that there would be a saving of £26,000 by raising the school-age. He did not know how that was arrived at; but he did not think that it would be so large. At any rate, he did not suppose that raising the ago would very much affect the small country schools, because children under the age of six could not walk any distance to the schools. But reducing the capitation-allowance would affect them to a very large extent, especially where there were a good many small schools in a district. The Boards did not seem to be able to give these schools much for maintenance now, and they would then be compelled to give them less; and he feared that it would come to this: that the cost of maintenance would be thrown upon the people in the neighbourhood of these schools; and they could not afford it. As to the alteration in the average, that would have a very serious effect, because the children in wet weather, when the roads were bad and the creeks were flooded, could not attend. Many of the children had seven or eight miles to travel, and it was certain that there must be many causes to prevent regular attendance which were not to be found in connection with the schools in town. He therefore hoped that the country members would endeavour to see that this change in the average should not be made in the case of the country schools, for, to secure an average sufficient to keep the schools open, the children would have to go in weather and under circumstances that might bring on illness that would do them more harm than remaining from school for a week or two during the year. He did not agree with the proposal made by the honourable member for Napier, if he understood him aright, that female teachers should be appointed to the small country schools. There were lots of grown-up boys, say, of eight or nine or ten years old, who were sent to these schools when they knew little or nothing; and he should like to know what power a female teacher would have of controlling half a dozen boys such as those, especially if, as might often happen, they had never been to school previously, and had not learned any discipline. For another thing, it would not be easy to get females to go into these out-of-the-way places. They must necessarily have parents or some one to protect them. He thought it should be male teachers who should be sent to these out-of-the-way places. Then, it was said that there was no need to have as high-grade or highly-trained teachers for these country schools as for the town schools. But he held a different opinion. If they were to have a national system, then the outlying schools should really have better teachers than were to be found in the town schools, or, at any rate, as good. The primary page 36 schools in the country districts were the only schools that the children brought up there would have the benefit of, whereas in the towns the children would have the high schools to go to. That led him to another point, and that was that it was not right, especially in the outlying districts, where there were no high schools, to stop the teaching after the Sixth Standard had been passed, or to call upon the parents to pay for it. There were not many of the pupils who stayed after they had passed the Fourth or the Fifth Standard; and if there were any who could stay till they could pass the Seventh or the Eighth Standard—if there was such a standard—they should be allowed to stay, especially seeing that they could be educated at the cost of £3 15s. per head, whereas in the high schools the education cost on an average £24 for each pupil. That showed the unfairness of the thing. He was unwilling to see the education system touched to any material extent. He did not say that there could be no savings effected, because he believed that there might be in some of the higher salaries, and in the reduction of the number of Inspectors, who, moreover, should be made to change districts occasionally. Referring to Otago, he knew that there were three Inspectors employed there; and he believed that they might very well take Southland as well as Otago. But, beyond that, he did not think there could be many changes, and he was quite against any interference with the standards and the school-age, or the alteration of the system of averages now in force. He had explained his views regarding these points very fully during the election, and had told his constituents that the people would be very foolish if they permitted any change in the education system: it was about the only thing that the bulk of the people got for the money they contributed towards meeting the expenditure of the colony. His opponent had expressed approval of raising the school-ago to six years, and had said that he would cut down unnecessary expenditure where he could, pointing to those things which the Government had now proposed. The result was that he (.Mr. Duncan) had been returned. With regard to the normal schools, that was one part of the system that should not be touched, and he would tell the House why. In his early days, in the North of Ireland, the young teachers went to a training-college in Dublin, and they went under a system that might be very well followed in this country. Every teacher commenced as a pupil-teacher, and when he had got to that stage of efficiency that he could take charge of a school he was given a small school, but he was allowed every year three months free to go to Dublin. A man was put in his place; and he was allowed three months' free education at Dublin College, and if he passed the necessary standards there he could go again for a fourth year. He thought that was a plan which might very well be followed hero. Three months' tuition at the normal school would give pupil-teachers a grasp of the subject which they could not get otherwise, and make them more efficiency teachers.

Mr. Fisher said experience had not proved that they were the best teachers.

Mr. Duncan said his experience was different. In his district they had had teachers from the normal school, and they had proved most excellent; but he believed practical trailing in the schools in the art of teaching andnormal-school tuition were both required, and that then they would get the best teachers. Best teachers were not the M.A.s, but men [unclear: wh] had a grasp of human nature, who could conduct a school mildly, intelligently, and strictly without harshness. If the normal schools were done away with the clever youths of [unclear: ou] poorer classes would be crowded out [unclear: fr] becoming teachers, because they wore [unclear: not] the same position as the rich to obtain out side tuition; and the schools of the colony would be the losers. With the [unclear: exceptions] had mentioned, he could not conscientiously support the proposals. Of course, all unnecessary expenditure should be done away wit and he had no doubt there was such expenditure. He hoped the present Minister of Education would find these things out during [unclear: th] recess, and come down with a comprehensive measure next session. It would be far better to do that, to remodel the whole Education Act, than to bring proposals down in the [unclear: fo] of resolutions at this late period of the session However, since economy was the order of [unclear: th] order of the day, he would not be [unclear: against] 4s. being taken off the capitation-grant, [unclear: to] if it could not be done without, as no great injury could be done by taking that away [unclear: for] year or two, at any rate.

Mr. Tanner said it was evidently the intention of members to discuss the whole [unclear: of] questions mentioned by the Minister of Education. Some honourable gentlemen oppose who had spoken had said that this subject should not have been brought on [unclear: at] late period of the session: but much valuable time had been wasted in useless [unclear: par] discussions, instead of being occupied [unclear: w] the consideration of the great question submitted by the Ministry; and for this did not think the Ministers were to [unclear: ble] When he heard the honourable [unclear: member] Dunedin Central he could not help thinking that he must be a bachelor, for he showed [unclear: sa] a want of knowledge of the habits of children That honourable gentleman seemed to [unclear: th] that of necessity if children were not at school they were in the gutters. He ventured to [unclear: th] that parents would resent such an imputation The children in New Zealand were [unclear: well] ducted, and when not at school were [unclear: by] means necessarily in the gutters or in [unclear: misch] In proof of this, he would ask honourable members to look at children during the vacating when there were no schools open. If [unclear: they] along the streets during the holidays [unclear: th] would not find the children in the [unclear: gut] but would find them behaving [unclear: respectably] quietly. The argument he had made [unclear: use] was certainly drawn not from facts, but [unclear: fu] page 37 imagination. When he heard the honourable member for Kumara descanting upon the merits of the children on the West Coast he could not help thinking that they must be very precocious there—perhaps living where there was a great deal of moisture caused them to spring up more rapidly; but, still, he thought that the children who had been heard singing their little ditties must have been between six and seven years of ago, and not between five and six.

Mr. Seddon.—No.

Mr. Tanner said of course he would accept that statement; but the children in that part of the colony must be very precocious. He would like to have brought on the floor of the House a child who was between the ages of five and six to show what infants such children were. He had found one of that age; but its mother would not let it out on exhibition. He asked the child's mother if it had Iearnt its A, B, C, and she replied that she thought the child should not begin to learn even its A, B, C before it was six years old. The honourable member for Napier had said that the question of the school-age would not affect the country schools so much, but only the town schools—with which he (Mr. Tanner) agreed. In his own district, he might say there were a large number of country schools, but only one of them would be affected by the alteration of the school-age; for the families whose children attended the other schools were so scattered that children between the ages of five and six could not attend the schools. But they might put that question on one side, for they had the assurance of the Minister of Education that the raising of the school-age should not interfere with any of the country schools. He regarded the raising of the school-ago to six as proper, and the saving that would be effected by it as a genuine saving, and in that respect different from the savings subsequently proposed. The school-age, he believed, should have been raised to seven. There were twenty thousand children between the ages of five and seven years receiving education at the present time, and it would have meant a saving of £80,000. That was a direction where the saving would have been real. Then, again, he thought the secondary-education reserves ought to be taken and used for the purposes of primary education. He would begin with the Auckland Girls' High School reserve. That reserve was originally dedicated to primary education, and was then taken for secondary education; and so he would like to make a beginning with it. He would like to see an Act brought in next session handing it back to the purpose for which it was originally dedicated. Excepting by way of scholarships—and scholarships were paid for out of primary-school funds—the children of the poorer classes could get no advantage from these secondary schools. Parents were required to pay fees amounting to £9 a year at these schools; the poorer classes could not do that, and therefore the secondary schools were not available for them. For this reason the reserves should be taken away from the secondary schools and handed over for the benefit of the primary-school system. He did not think the capitation should be reduced by 4s., as proposed, but that the saving should be effected by raising the school-age. The average age of children who passed the First Standard was very nearly nine years; and, as he was convinced that if they went to school at seven they would be able to pass the First Standard at nine, he thought the saving should be made by raising the school-age; but the reduction of the capitation-grant by £26,000 seemed to him to be in the wrong direction, and likely to injure the system. Many who had spoken in favour of the proposed reduction of the capitation had said that, above all things, the primary-school system should be supported in its efficiency; but the reduction of the capitation-grant would certainly go in the opposite direction. The complaint throughout the whole country was want of funds; and even in Hawke's Bay, where things were so well managed, when applications were sent down to the Board for more accommodation or appliances the answer had to be, "No funds;" and yet it was proposed to reduce the vote still further, and that in face of the fact that the population of the colony war, increasing! There were twenty thousand children who were receiving no education at the present time, and the School Committees could not put the compulsory clauses into force, because they had no accommodation; and yet honourable members spoke in favour of reducing the means of affording accommodation! He hoped honourable members would pause before they voted for that. In order to test the question, he would move, when the proper time came, that the vote be reduced by £5, and would press it to a division. There were some honourable members who said that they desired to see assistance given to that section of the community who carried on education at their own expense. He would ask how they proposed to give that assistance. By reducing the capitation-allowance? If assistance was to be given to that section of the community, the only way to do it was to make a saving on the general system by raising the school-age to seven, which would effect a saving of £80,000, and by appropriating the secondary-education reserves, which would give another £20,000; and then those claims could be met without increased expenditure. One word with regard to Education Boards. He was one of those who thought that a saving would be made by abolishing these Boards, and that if the business were left in the hands of the Inspectors and School Committees the work would be better done. There was no doubt that a great many Education Boards had gone to great expense in their management, and the fact that the Hawke's Bay Board had managed well was no test of the general management. The honourable member for Napier, who was Chairman of that Board, was a prudent man and a good administrator, and it had been mainly through his management that there had been no extravagance. It had page 38 been just; the same when that honourable member was Superintendent of Hawke's Bay, and that was almost the only province which, on the abolition of the provinces, showed a credit balance. He believed that savings could be made without cutting down the salaries of the teachers, and he agreed with the honourable member for Napier that the best plan would be to have a scale of salaries which would not be subject to any change. That would be the only way to got efficient teachers, because those who undertook the education of children would know that they would receive such an allowance as would warrant them in going to some expense in their own education. With regard to the Seventh Standard, which meant that those who had passed the Sixth Standard might remain at the schools afterwards, he thought they should be able to do so if their parents could spare them. Fourteen was the average age for passing the Sixth Standard, and the school-age terminated at fifteen; and he did not think it would be wise to drive these children away as long as their parents could allow them to stay.

Mr. J. McKenzie thought that most of the arguments of the honourable gentleman who had just sat down were scarcely worth answering; but there were one or two points he would like to touch upon. The honourable gentleman first of all deprecated the waste of time there had been this session, and blamed the Opposition for that waste: but that was scarcely fair. If they considered what had caused this subject to be kept so far back they could not help seeing that it was caused very much by the Government side of the House. The House was here for seven or eight weeks before it got the Government policy. He did not say that the Government were to blame for that, because they had a great deal to do before they could bring down their Bills, particularly as so many of them had to be so constructed that they would meet the wishes of the Government supporters. Then, again, the House was asked to do in two months work that ought to occupy Parliament for at least six months; and that was the reason why, at the last moment, honourable members were called upon to discuss such large questions as that of education without time for proper consideration. The honourable gentleman said it would be a right thing to increase the school-ago to seven, and that a saving of £80,000 would be made by that. That would be a very bad way to save money. No doubt it might suit the honourable gentleman and some others to reduce the taxation by £80,000; but the people of the colony would not have that justice done to them to which they were entitled if the school-age were raised. It would mean that the children of poor people—who had to leave school at ten years of age to help to support their families—could not get proper education, and would in many cases only be able to pass the Third Standard. Then, the honourable gentleman referred to the Education Boards; but his knowledge of Education Boards must be confined to that of Hawke's Bay, which no doubt the honourable gentleman thought perfect. However, it [unclear: wa] not necessary to follow the honourable gentleman further. Coming to the real question [unclear: a] issue, he believed that the proposals of the Government would seriously affect the education system of the colony; and, if there was an question on which the people at the last elections gave a decided voice, it was [unclear: on] question that the system of education should not be seriously interfered with. It was a [unclear: pity] that the House had not a better opportunity [unclear: o] expressing its opinion on this question, and [unclear: he] thought that the Minister of Education should have brought distinct resolutions before the House, and not brought on the discussion on a question of money, He could then have tests the opinion of the House on each subject separately. A large number of honourable members objected to a reduction in the vole and yet they were asked to vote for a reduction in order to enable the proposals to be carried out. He was sorry that the Government had not seen their way to leave the question over till next session, with the exception of the capitation-allowance. They might have asked the House to express an opinion on that point, and that would have compelled the Education Boards to review their expenses and the salaries they paid to their teachers; and then the House would be in a far better position next year to deal with the whole subject. He believed they could make a largo saving in the education expenditure without doing any injury to it, and he would be prepared to vote for the reduction of the capitation-allowance. Coming to the question of raising the school-age, he might say that he was opposed to that, because he thought it would do a great injury to country schools He was surprised to hear some honourable members talk on this subject. It appeared to him that they did not understand it. With regard to raising the school-age, it would mean that the Boards would be unable to derive the surplus funds which they now obtained from the large town schools to assist country schools and that the country schools must suffer to a very large extent. He did not know anything which induced people to go into the country and settle upon the land more than the fact that they were aware that, as soon as a number of children were in the district, schools would be established; but if they interfered with country schools they would put an end to this inducement. Of course the Minister had told the House that he would take case that no school was closed in the country by reason of this reduction. That might be right enough so far as existing schools were concerned, but when they came to consider the establishment of new schools it must seriously interfere with them. Then, as to the normal schools, it would be a serious matter to [unclear: d] away with thorn. Any one who knew anything of the subject must have come to the conclusion that a large number of the[unclear: presec] teachers could not possibly have been trained but for the normal schools. What was the face when the system was first established? [unclear: w] page 39 were unable to get teachers until such time as they had been trained in the normal schools, unless they were obtained from Victoria, whence the principal supply came; and it would be a poor thing to again have to depend on Victoria.

Mr. Fisher.—How does Victoria train her teachers?

Mr. J. McKenzie said they were trained there in the same way as they were trained here. There were 323 students trained in the Normal School, Dunedin, from its establishment up to the end of 1886; of whom no less than 227 remained as teachers in the employ of the colony, and the rest had done good service to the colony before they left the service. That was clear proof that the system had been a good one. There were now sixty-seven students in the Normal School at Dunedin, and about a hundred and fifty pupil-teachers, with whom they could not carry out their engagements unless they kept up the Normal School. If the Government reduced the vote they could not keep their engagements with the pupil-teachers and students. He thought it was a very bad thing to force the Education Board to close their normal schools. He was told they could aid those pupils by giving them scholarships—by teaching them in the college; but in the college they would have no chance of being trained for teaching. No doubt they would get a very good education in the college and be able to pass a degree—they might come out with high qualifications from a degree point of view, but they would be utterly ignorant of how to teach children. He hoped the Committee would seriously consider the subject before they did away with the normal schools. This reduction meant a reduction to the Otago Board of £14,000 a year. A committee of that Board considered how far they could retrench without seriously interfering with the system, and their proposition would be to reduce the expenditure by £7,000. The proposition of the Government now was to reduce it by £14,000. This reduction, if carried out, would very seriously interfere with the education system in that part of the country. As far as raising the school-age was concerned, and doing away with the normal schools, he would oppose the proposals of the Government, believing that those proposals would injure the education system.

Mr. McGregor had supported the Government up to this particular question; but now he said, "Hold! enough." The extraordinary proposals of the Government were to him quite staggering. The idea of at once cutting off £60,000 from the education vote, and still carrying on an extravagant expenditure in connection with defence and Native matters, was something which the people in his part of the country could not possibly understand. Another matter which struck him was that the Minister came down with a proposal, and was not prepared to state what would be the effect of it. They were aware that the number of children at the public schools between the ages of five and seven was 21,054. It was, of course, a question which was open to debate how many of these were between five and six. They had no statistics to guide them on that part of the subject. He had before him the last report of the Victorian Government, which he believed was the most reliable in the colonies, and one that was looked up not only in the colonies, but by the educational authorities at Home. There were no less than 2,809 children at the public schools of Victoria between the ages of three and four; 9,70ft between the ages of four and five; and 15,428 between the ages of five and six,—clearly giving an indication that in that Australian colony in which probably education was best managed they adhered to the idea of sending children to school at a much earlier ago than was here proposed. The educational system of Victoria was conducted by the Minister, who had a seat in Parliament, and was supported by a secretary and staff. There were no buffers like the Boards of Education in this country, which, in his opinion, was one great fault in our system, because these Boards were frequently the cause of deadlocks and trouble. The opinions of Dr. Brown and others, who were supposed to be experts, as to the in advisableness or otherwise of sending children to school when they were five years old differed very much on this particular question. Almost every member of that House was returned pledged, directly or indirectly, to support the present educational system. He was thoroughly and distinctly of opinion that the school-age ought to be kept exactly as it was; and he was also in favour of children being sent to school at an early age, so that they might undergo a certain amount of discipline, and be under control when they got older, and thus be more apt to profit by the system of education that was provided for them in the public schools. The passing through the schools of the cider children of a family at an early age would often enable the younger ones to go to school earlier than they otherwise would, because in some cases it was necessary to keep one or two at home. He was sure the Minister could not have thoroughly thought out the whole question, and it would be a very advisable thing for him to hold his hand now, and to devote his time and energies during the recess—to which Ministers had now become so fond of alluding—to thoroughly weighing, considering, and inquiring into the whole question. The honourable gentleman should think the whole thing thoroughly out, and in the meantime let the whole matter remain in abeyance. They knew that the honourable gentleman believed in good education—they had proof of it in the classical quotations with which he delighted the House, and which showed that the honourable gentleman sympathized with all that was great and noble in the matter of education. That being so, the honourable gentleman should during the recess devote all his leisure to education. Though great in higher education and classics, the honourable gentleman was rather weak in his decimals, as was shown that day, when he referred to children being, on an average, nearly nine before page 40 they passed the First Standard, whereas it was really only eight and a small decimal. As bearing on the question of expelling the children from the schools as soon as they had passed the Sixth Standard, no matter what age they were, he might mention that he had that day received a telegram saying a girl of his own, aged twelve years and a half, had passed the Sixth Standard with high honours, and under this proposal she would be compelled to leave the school, however much it might be desired she should stay on. As to making the reduction of 4s. in the capitation, that was a matter for fair consideration and argument; but he thought the whole subject should be left till next session. With that delicious vagueness of which he was so consummate a master, the Premier had said in the Financial Statement that the proposals of the Government would not involve the closing of any country schools. What did that really mean? Were all the small country schools to be made dame schools at £25 a year?

Mr. Fisher.—No, no.

Mr. McGregor said he should like to know distinctly what it did mean before giving his vote. He should like to see nothing at all done this session, but that next session they should give the subject exhaustive consideration, and then adopt the Victorian system. In a country like this, where the institutions were democratic, it was the duty of every citizen to see that his children were properly educated. They might well consider the benefit of the system they had in this country. Scotland was one of the poorest countries in the world, but a country in the front rank as to education. There they had a system of bursaries or scholarships which drew out the cleverest children in an admirable manner, and gave them a university education at no cost to their parents. That, he thought, was the most perfect and cheapest higher-education system devisable. As the twig was bent so did the tree incline, and he believed in children beginning to attend school young, and was against the proposal of the Government to raise the school-age. He should be compelled to vote against their other educational proposals.

Dr. Newman said he was very much surprised when he found it stated in the Financial Statement that the education estimates were to be reduced by £61,000, because he had been carefully through the expenditure, and failed to see how that could be done without seriously interfering with the salaries of teachers and with the efficiency of education. He was still more astonished when the Minister came down and said he would reduce the vote by £65,000. He was satisfied that, if the reductions were made as proposed, no Education Board would be able to carry on without incurring an overdraft or taxing the school-teachers' salaries in all directions. He was prepared to vote for a large reduction of the education vote, because he believed it was absolutely necessary; but to take £65,000 off one vote at one fell swoop was too much and too serious. If the Minister would kii.dly look at the items that made up the £381,000 he would see that there was plenty of room for retrenchment. He could take £2,000 off the library vote; £2,700 off the higher-education vote, which would be a great saving to the colony—

Mr. Fisher.—Take the Wellington portion?

Dr. Newman.—Certainly; take it [unclear: alc] with the rest. He did not wish to see the Wellington College exceptionally treated. The [unclear: v] for higher education in this colony [unclear: was] enormously large one. Then, there was the college for deaf-mutes—there was gross extravagance in connection with that. There in the college from thirty-seven to forty [unclear: pup] and they cost £3,250, or upwards of £80 pepupil. That seemed to be extravagant. [unclear: Th] if the Minister wished for reform, there was [unclear: th] Native Schools Department, where there [unclear: th] a very large expenditure. To go back to [unclear: th] reforms proposed by the Minister, he thought it was wise to raise the school-ago to six years To keep the children under six years out of [unclear: th] schools was a fair and wise proposal. If [unclear: th] Boards were dealt with in the ruthless fashion proposed, within six months every Board in [unclear: th] colony would be unable to carry on for [unclear: want] funds. He would urge upon the [unclear: Minister] adhere to the agreement which he had acceptation in the earlier part of the day. It was said [unclear: th] the young children were taught in the kindergarten fashion, and that the kindergarten children were taught for £1 10s. a [unclear: head]; he would call attention to the fact [unclear: that] children in the infant departments of [unclear: th] Wellington schools were taught at £1 10s, [unclear: pe] head, and that the difference between that and the capitation went to make up for the [unclear: cost] the higher-standard education. If they [unclear: took] from the lower they must put it on the higher education. With regard to the abolition of [unclear: th] normal schools, he might say the Wellingtion Board had zealously tried to do its best with the Normal School; but there [unclear: was] doubt that these four schools were not wanted and that if they tried they could [unclear: train] pupil-teachers at very much less [unclear: cost]. would, however, like to see this vote [unclear: kept] for one season longer. He would [unclear: tell] Minister how he might retrench, in [unclear: addition] the items he had already [unclear: mentioned]. might abolish some of the Education Boards There was no doubt that, with the [unclear: mean] communication that now existed, some of the Boards—half the Boards—could be done with out and half their cost saved; though [unclear: he] not think that if they did away with [unclear: all] Boards the saving would be so great [unclear: as] honourable members seemed to [unclear: imagine], cause in that case the expenditure [unclear: of] central department would have to [unclear: be] creased. The districts should be amalgamates Then, the Minister might, with the [unclear: aid] experts, revise the syllabus, and in [unclear: that] make the school lives of children [unclear: shorter], thus save a good deal of money, for there [unclear: w] a good many things that might with advantage be left out of the curriculum. The propositions of the Government were [unclear: ruthless] page 41 sweeping; and, though he would approve of the others if the school-age were retained, if the proposal affecting that question were carried he should feel bound to vote against all the other proposals. He spoke from a thorough knowledge of the question when he said that he was sure the Boards would not be able to carry on if these sweeping reductions were made.

Mr. O'Callaghan would not keep the Committee long, particularly as most of his views had been so well expressed by the honourable members for Linwood and Dunedin Central: in fact, perhaps the most effective speech he could make would be to quote those gentlemen and say he indorsed their opinions. He also approved of the suggestion of the honourable member for Thorndon for the amalgamation of education districts. There were also one or two other points he wished to take notice of. The Minister had, he thought, somewhat disingenuously quoted one particular Board in New Zealand, the name of which he had declined to give, which he said had this year a balance of over £9,000. Any person who heard that statement would naturally suppose that that Board had saved within the financial year a sum of over £9,000. If the honourable gentleman had looked at the figures he would have known that the Board he referred to—the North Canterbury Board—had commenced the year with a balance of somewhere about £9,000, and that the actual expenditure within the year had taken up the whole of the receipts. Surely it was not right for the honourable gentleman to make that statement; for it was misleading the Committee. He would not give way to the honourable gentleman, as he had been waiting to speak all the evening. He had been greatly struck with the statement the honourable gentleman had made, for he knew the figures perfectly well. In 1884 there was a balance of £9,062; in 1885, £9,741; and in 1886, £9,701. Well, it must be seen that the statement was not quite fair, and it must have been made in order to give the Committee the idea that certain Boards were putting by money.

Mr. Fisher.—I did not make any such Statement.

Mr. O'Callaghan said that was what the Committee must have decided was the object of the statement. As to the proposal affecting the normal schools, he thought the Minister would make a mistake in endeavouring to make such a sweeping reduction. He (Mr. O'Callaghan) looked upon the normal schools as one of the most important parts of the educational system. It was not because the Wellington Normal School had been a failure that it was to be gathered that all the normal schools had been failures, for certainly that was not the case in Otago or Canterbury. In Canterbury they had a number of excellent teachers from the normal school, and the effect of these teachers passing through the Training-College was to make the system more uniform than it would be otherwise. Though the Wellington Normal School had failed, yet the number of teachers in the State schools turned out of the normal schools of the colony was very respectable, the number being no smaller than 546 out of a total of 2,721. That proved that the system was not a failure, for the schools had been in existence only about ten or twelve years in the South and seven or eight years in the North Island. He thought it far better that this small expenditure of £8,000 should go on, and that they should obtain really well-trained teachers, than that they should revert to the old system, under which every man who had a smattering of education was foisted into the employment of the Boards.

Mr. Fisher said that, as the honourable gentleman had not had the grace to allow him to make an explanation, he wished to say that he had not referred to the North Canterbury Education Board, but to another Board, the credit-balance of which was £5,000, not £9,000.

Mr. Dodson thought it must be admitted that this discussion had been rather disappointing to any one who looked to the House for retrenchment. Honourable members had come pledged, and the Ministry had taken office, to effect retrenchment; but on no question of retrenchment that the Ministry had brought before the House had they been sufficiently backed up by the House. In no question had this been more apparent than in the present one. Throughout the discussion there had been a disinclination to do anything in the way of retrenchment. The Minister of Education had certainly received no encouragement to effect retrenchment at present, or to consider the question during the recess. The question of the school-age had been referred to, and he might say that ever since he had had a seat in the House he had always contended that the State had no right to pay for children until they were fit to acquire the education the State was willing to pay for, and he thought the ago of six was quite early enough for the State to pay for children. Previous to that they were far better at homo with their mothers. Any one going into any of our schools would see these little children set up on the forms like dolls on a shelf, and just about as usefully employed. He was glad the Minister was going to give the House an opportunity of recording their votes on this question, and he would certainly record his vote in favour of the age being raised to six years, for that was amply early for the State to commence paying for the education of a child. He was very much pleased to hear the honourable gentleman admit that there was one section of the community which had not been fairly dealt with, and he understood him to say that he would take the matter into consideration, and see what he could recommend next session. That section had not received anything approaching justice, and had a great claim upon the House; and he only regretted that so little reference had been made to it. However, now, whenever any reference was made to it, member after member echoed the feeling that justice had not been done; and page 42 that gave him hope that, when the question was fairly discussed next session, that section would receive the justice duo to it. The honourable member for Lincoln said that our system of education was one that we ought to be proud of; but he (Mr. Dodson) could not be proud of a system which shut out two-thirteenths of the population from sharing in the benefit of the State schools. Indeed, it was rather a scandal on this free country that we should so manage our schools as to shut out so large a number of the population from the benefits of education, while at the same time we paid for our education out of funds which were equally contributed by them. Various honourable members had referred to the Education Boards in their own districts, and he might be excused for referring to the Board of his district, which, although it was one of the smallest districts in the colony, would set an example to some of the extravagant Boards which they would do well to follow. If every Education Board in the colony managed its affairs as economically and carefully as the Marlborough Board had done there would be no necessity to do away with them. The Marlborough Board conducted its operations for some£200 a year in salaries and advertisements, and it maintained some thirty-three schools, with 1,200 pupils. And, more than that, the work done by the schools would compare favourably with the work done by any others in the colony. Its pupils were first or second in the various standards in which they could be compared with others. That being so, it was a great feather in their caps that they had been able to manage education so cheaply and well. The honourable member for Linwood had made a most interesting speech, and his sentiments were so well put that he should like to hear the honourable gentleman speak more frequently than he did. However, he must take issue with the honourable member on one or two points. The honourable gentleman said that parents were the best judges of the age at which their children should be sent to school. In that he entirely differed from the honourable member, for parents were only too anxious to press on their children and make them precocious, and these were not the children which succeeded best in life or passed through the higher standards most rapidly. Parents were not the best judges in this respect, for they always thought their own children were fit for anything, and it was well that other people should form an opinion for them. It was urged that children should be sent to school at five so that they might be able to pass the First Standard at nine; but, in his opinion, the child who was sent to school at six would pass the standard sooner, while the child who was kept at school between the ages of five and six was much more likely to have an injury done to it than any good. He could have wished that the Minister had given more particulars; but he thought each heading which the honourable member had mentioned the Committee could very well agree to without doing any injury to the system of education. He did not, himself, believe that the country schools would be injured if the school-age were raised to six, for very few schools would be closed [unclear: consequent] that, and a very small sum would compensate them for the children taken away; [unclear: and] supposed that was the idea which passed through the Minister's mind when saying that he would take care that they should [unclear: not] injured. He did not think the colony had any right to pay for any child after it had passed the Sixth Standard. If a child were so cleaved as the child of the honourable [unclear: member] Akaroa, and could pass that standard at thirteen years of age, of course there [unclear: should] facilities for its going on to acquire higher education, for which it was so eminently fitted But did any one imagine that the honourable member would keep his child from school because the State would not pay for that higher education? Of course not; and he would is mediately send it to a higher school; [unclear: and] only difference would be that he would [unclear: pay] it—and would feel a pride in paying [unclear: for]—instead of calling on the State to [unclear: pay]. parents could not afford to pay for their children at the higher schools—children who has shown a special aptitude by passing the [unclear: Sixi] Standard at an early age—of course provision should be made for cases of that kind. He [unclear: d] not wish to deprive any child of higher education; but he wanted to see some finality [unclear: in] matter, so that they might know [unclear: where] State was to commence and where it [unclear: was] leave off. In his opinion, when it commenced at six years of ago and educated the child up to the Sixth Standard, [unclear: nothing] was required of the State. So far [unclear: as] normal schools were concerned, he [unclear: was] to see that they were to be stopped. They system was only partial in its operation, any as usual, those who had these institute near them were all in favour of their continuance. He thought this was a [unclear: matter] which they might very well follow the example of Victoria and leave it to the question of demand and supply. If teachers were require they would come soon enough, and he was [unclear: gal] the Minister was going to do away with these institutions, and that the colony [unclear: would] longer have to pay so high a sum as £[unclear: 8,000] year for their maintenance. Again, the question of reserves for higher education [unclear: should] dealt with, and he hoped the Minister would turn his attention to it during the [unclear: recess]. these reserves were applied, as they ought to be to primary education it would be a very great relief to the taxpayer. He trusted the Minister would bring down a Bill next session dealing with the whole question, and providing [unclear: th] these reserves should be for the benefit of the colony as a whole, and not be allowed [unclear: to] main solely for the benefit of the province districts in which they had been set [unclear: apa] while other parts of the colony could [unclear: get] benefit from them simply because they [unclear: we] at a distance.

Mr. Wilson had a few figures which might be interesting to the Committee on the question of school-age. But he might say at [unclear: ca] page 43 that he was entirely in favour of raising the school-age to six years, and he did not think it would affect the country districts so much as some honourable members appeared to think. The following was a return of schools in the Otago Education District in charge of one teacher only, with particulars of attendance and ago of pupils in October, 1887: Total number of schools having from fourteen scholars to sixty-one, 106; total children on roll, 3,797; total under six years, 183. The Education Committee sent out to the various Boards and educational institutes asking them for their opinion, as well as to the various Inspectors. Naturally, the School Boards were entirely against any reduction in their votes, and nearly every one of them sent in a reply that it did not wish the school-age to be raised. The educational institutes did the same; but the Inspectors—who were the most impartial people to deal with this question, and were best able to judge the matter—were all, apparently, in favour of raising the school-age. That was a very important thing, and should not be forgotten in considering this question. He agreed very much with what the honourable member for Kumara had said regarding Boards. He (Mr. Wilson) thought the Legislature might very well abolish them altogether; but it ought, at the same time, to set up something in their place. He did not approve of the Minister of Education taking entire charge of the system. He should like to see a Council set up for the whole of New Zealand, composed of gentlemen well educated themselves, and who had opportunities of observing the state of education in New Zealand. The Minister should be the administrator of the system, and might have lender him the Inspectors, and might fix a scale of salaries applicable to the whole of New Zealand. Such a Council would not cost anything like the sum at present spent in management. With regard to the reduction of the capitation, he was certainly in favour of it. He did not understand the strict-average question, and would like a little more time to consider the subject. He should also be in favour of reducing the £5,000 for normal schools down to £4,000.

Mr. Levestam said there was no doubt the country was clamouring for retrenchment; but he did not believe the country wanted retrenchment in this direction, because the education of their children was about the only thing the poorer class of people got from the country. It was said that this raising of the school-age did not affect country schools as much as was represented. Now, the Education Board received the whole of the money paid in capitation, and doled it out to the country districts. It followed that, if the number of children attending town schools decreased, the funds of the Boards would decrease correspondingly. Therefore it was no argument in favour of the change proposed that country schools Would receive assistance to keep them open, because it followed the same amount would be paid to the country schools as was taken away from the town schools. With regard to Education Boards, he thought it would be far better for the colony as a whole if those Education Boards were abolished, because teachers were now treated very unfairly. In many instances teachers with similar qualifications to those possessed by others were receiving about one quarter of the salary those others received; and so it would be as long as each Board had the entire control of its own schools. If a vacancy occurred, an able man who might happen to be in a small district would have no chance of obtaining a mastership in a largo district, because he had no friends who would assist him into that position, no matter how good his qualifications might be. As to the raising of the school-ago, there was more embodied in the proposition than appeared at first sight. The proposal of the Government not only entailed the raising of the school-age, but also the withdrawal of the capitation-grant from every child who had passed the Sixth Standard, irrespective of age. When children passed the Sixth Standard at twelve, as many did, they would not be entitled to attend a public school any longer. That would be an injustice, to which he, for one, would never consent. It was said that some children were better at home with their mammas: but that depended upon the kind of mammas they had, and he was sure that in many cases it was far better that they should be at school. They were told that in other countries children were not admitted into public schools before they were six years old. That was true. But he know that in those countries most of the children before they wore that age were sent to private schools. Here, where that was not the case, the children should be admitted as soon as they were fit to go to school. It was a well-known fact that children sent to school at five passed the Sixth Standard much earlier than children who were sent later to school. The next proposal of the Government was to do away with the 4s. He should not oppose that; but he thought it was hardly fair to say that it would not inconvenience the various Boards, because it must be remembered that, in addition to the £26,000, there would be taken away the capitation for those who had passed the Sixth Standard. The present system of education, being purely secular, could be participated in by persons of all denominations. No one had a right to complain, as one might have if religion were taught in the public schools. The moment a grant in aid of one denomination was made, another could claim the same consideration with equal right, and therefore it would never do to interfere with the system in that direction. He thought the normal schools could be done away with altogether. He did not exactly know what was meant by the "strict average," but his chief objection to the proposals of the Government was to the taking-away of the capitation from children who had passed the Sixth Standard, irrespective of age. They were told that scholarships were open to them:but these scholarships would have to be obtained in the year following that in which they had passed the Sixth Standard. If the capitation were page 44 taken away as soon as the child had passed the Sixth Standard, he would not be able to go in for the scholarships. A child of twelve, though he might have passed the Sixth Standard, was generally quite unfit to go out and earn a living; and it was absolutely necessary they should be allowed to remain a few years longer—till they were fifteen. In that part of the Continent of Europe from which he came, boys were compelled to remain at school till they were fifteen and a half, and girls till they were fourteen and a half years old; and it was enforced in this way: Employers were not allowed to engage children till they were of that age, nor parents to employ them; so the inducement to parents to remove their children from school unduly early was removed entirely. There was no such thing as remaining stationary in this world—we must either go forward or go backward; and he regarded these proposals as going backward. He particularly protested against taking away capitation from children as soon as they passed the Sixth Standard, if they were within the limit of the school-age. If the Minister would assure him that that should not be done he would vote with him, but without such an assurance he must vote against the proposals of the Government; and he was sure the majority of the people of the country were not in favour of such retrenchment as was foreshadowed in these proposals.

Mr. Grimmond thought the proposals of the Government inopportune, coming at a time when the whole question had been submitted to a Committee, and inapplicable, because the Government were attempting to deal with questions which had been submitted for the consideration of that Committee, which, in the circumstances, could not report till next session. It had been stated that the raising of the school-age would not affect the status of education in the colony; but, if that were so, how was it that the school-age in other countries was less than here? He would give the following figures to show the school-ages in different countries: Great Britain, three to eighteen; New Zealand, five to fifteen; Victoria, three to sixteen; Queensland, five to fourteen; New South Wales, four to fourteen. So, in none of these cum tries did the grant-earning age start later than five.

Mr. Fisher.—What is the cost of different ages?

Enough had been said by other honourable members to show that raising the school-ago would have a bad effect on the educational status of the colony. As to reducing the capitation, it had been contended by some honourable members that the Boards would be able to carry on with the reduced sum, for they had got on fairly well with the present capitation; but he knew—speaking from some experience—that in Westland the Board had had very great difficulty in maintaining a high standard under the present capitation. The district was a very largo and sparsely-settled one, and was as long in one direction as the distance from Christchurch to Invercargill. If it was argued that, under the present capitation, some Boards had had more than enough money, that was an argument for the abolition of the Boards. He thought that was a right thing to do, because the excessive money now given to the Boards of thickly-populated districts would then be available for poor districts which wanted it badly—some Boards now had to endeavour to get through their money by going in for luxuries, while others could not provide the barest educational necessities. In his district, even with the present capitation, the people in the outlying districts had often to supplement it to pay the teachers decent wages, and had even to subscribe for the erection of school-buildings. The settlers in the outlying districts in that part of the colony already had to help to build school-houses by sawing the timber, &c.; and if the means at the disposal of the Board were still page 46 further reduced they would be able to get no schools at all. It was very unjust, too, to class the Boards on an equal footing, and such action showed that the time had come for the abolition of the Boards. No doubt they had done good service in the past in establishing schools, but they had now become very expensive distributing bodies, and the work which they did could be centralised with great advantage and cheapness to the colony. He said that as one who had been connected with Education Boards and Education Committees for a number of years. As to training schools, there were none in his part of the country, and he could say nothing about them; but he would say the non-payment of capitation for children above a certain age would also act very badly in the part of the colony he came from, where there were no high schools, because it would result in the children getting no higher education at all unless their parents were rich enough to send them away to places where there wore high schools. A child might pass the Sixth Standard at ten years old. What were the parents to do with it then? There was one other point which he wished to bring out, that had been omitted by the honourable member for Kumara—namely, that the percentage of passes was very high in Westland, the second highest in the colony. Marlborough came first, with 92.5 per cent, general average of passes; Westland came next, with 86 per cent.; Nelson came next, with 83 per cent.; and then came North Canterbury, with 73 per cent. With reference to strict average being substituted for working average, that also would be very injurious to the part of the colony he came from. The children had very long distances to travel, and the climate was not always good, and when it rained it did rain, and children could not attend school, so that the proposed alteration would weigh very heavily on the Board there. He might say that the Grey-mouth Board was so affected by the proposed reduction that it had, on receipt of intimation of the intention of the Government, given all its teachers three months' notice of dismissal, for it could not see its way to pay them. As to paying fees, that would raise an unpleasant line of demarcation between classes as to parents and children. For the reasons he had given, he should vote against the proposals of the Government.

Other equally good authorities stated the [unclear: c] to be from £1 to £1 5s. per head. He therefrom thought it was wrong to deprive these [unclear: lit] ones of the benefits of education when they only cost 6d. or 7d. per week. That [unclear: point] worthy of the consideration of the Minister Education. He thought the item of crepitating might be reduced; but reduction ought to be made gradually. In reference to the next its he agreed with the honourable members Linwood and Dunedin Central that it would be a very unjust thing to some of the school that a saving should be made by [unclear: taking] strict average instead of the working average As to the fourth item, the evidence to his [unclear: mis] clearly showed that we should [unclear: continue] maintain normal schools; but certainly [unclear: we] not require so many of them. On the which the conclusion he had arrived at was [unclear: th] the Minister had not had sufficient time thoroughly digest his proposals, and he hope that next session the honourable gentleman would come down with a better [unclear: plan]. (Mr. Grimmond) should not be able to [unclear: s] port the proposals as they stood; but he [unclear: m] especially objected to the one [unclear: affecting] welfare of the little people and the interested the poorer classes, who were chiefly benefit by the Act as it now stood.

Major Steward said that, as [unclear: ev] honourable member was speaking, he felt necessary to say in what direction he should vote. He regretted very much the shape which the proposals had come before the Committee, and thought it would have been better if the honourable gentleman at [unclear: the] of this department had seen his way to [unclear: br] down to the House—not to the Committee four distinct propositions upon which member could have voted. With regard to the [unclear: gen] proposal to reduce the cost of the education system, he took leave to say that [unclear: those] the wisest friends of the system who [unclear: w] take care to see that its cost did not [unclear: inc] to an amount that would raise an [unclear: ou] which might lead to an endeavour to [unclear: pel] page 47 down altogether. In addressing his constituents he had placed that phase of the question before them, and he had found a very general response. He believed that in the district which he represented the education system was as much valued as it was anywhere in the colony; but the people had very fully appreciated the fact that the cost of the system must be kept within such limits that there should not be a cry raised that the system was too expensive to be maintained. The proposal to reduce the capitation allowance was not new. It had previously been reduced by a shilling, and it was proposed that its reduction should be gradual. The reduction now proposed was sharper, but, in view of the circumstances of the colony, he could not think that the Minister was at all to blame for asking that the additional allowance Should be at once discontinued. He regretted that the Minister had not at once proposed to abolish the Education Boards. Although he had been for some years a member of an Education Board, he must agree that it was quite possible to dispense with those bodies altogether; and, if that were done, it would, be Something towards making up for the de-flciency now caused. For these reasons he should vote to reduce the capitation allowance to £3 15s. With regard to the school-age, there had been a proposal to raise the age to seven, and he thought the present proposal was a reasonable one under the circumstances, always provided—and he took it as a distinct pledge from the head of the department—that some special allowance should be made to the smaller schools that would enable them to parry on, so that they would not unduly suffer by this arrangement. On this point they had a distinct pledge, and he thought the House had right to exact a literal fulfilment of it. With regard to the proposal to take the strict average instead of the working average, he did not see his way to vote with the Government, because he thought it unreasonable to enforce a reduction in that way. Again, he did not see his way at present to vote to abolish the normal schools. These training institutions were a necessary part of our education system, and, though he admitted it might be possible to reduce their number, he did not think they should all be abolished. With regard to the children who had passed the Sixth Standard also, he thought the proposal was reasonable, and that capitation should not be paid beyond the Sixth Standard. He believed, further, that the time would come when it would be necessary to charge a small school-fee in the Fifth and Sixth Standards, at the same time providing abundant scholarships or other facilities for those children whose parents were unable to pay the fees, and who were yet qualified for education in the higher standards, so that the door of education should not be shut against any child however poor. Speaking from experience in his own district, he might say that felt sure that the parents of children who remained to the Fifth or Sixth Standard, certainly the majority of the parents, were able would be willing to pay school-fees. In this way he thought it quite possible to provide, year after year, for the necessarily-increasing cost of education owing to the growing number of children attending the schools. That being so, probably this would be the largest reduction that would have to be made. He should support the Government's proposals with regard to capitation and school-age, on condition that a special allowance was made to smaller schools, so that they would not be injuriously affected. He should, however, not vote for the substitution of strict average for working average, nor for the total abolition of the normal schools.

Mr. Hutchison had waited all day and all night for some good reason to enable him to support the Government on this vote; but he was sorry to say that, though he had waited so long, he had waited in vain. He was sorry that the Government had afforded its supporters, and those who might have been its supporters on this occasion, so little ground for inclining to their side. The Government had backed and filled in a way that rather inclined to shako conviction, even where conviction was more rooted than it was in his case. The reduction of £26,000 was arrived at in some haphazard way by calculating it at one-eighth of the whole sum; but why it was an eighth instead of a seventh or a sixth they did not know. Then, in connection with that amount, they were told that the country schools were not to be closed. Now, he would like to ask the Minister how he proposed to preserve the country schools. As he understood it, the capitation allowance was calculated upon a certain attendance for the preceding period, and was paid to the Education Boards in the various districts, to be distributed by them as they thought proper. He was not aware that the Minister had any control over the administration of these funds, so as to say what schools should be kept open and what should not; and, consequently, it seemed to him that this was a mere delusion, a snare, and a mockery, and that the House had really no control whatever, in accepting such a proposal as this, over the money it was asked to grant. That ill-favoured parliamentary property known as the red-herring was disagreeably high in connection with the false trail which was sought to be brought over this question; for it was really, after all, an attempt to legislate by resolution now, after first of all having been attempted by Order in Council; and it was just as vain for a Minister, by way of resolution, to attempt to alter the Act as it had been for him to attempt to do it by Order in Council. He thought the Minister was probably convinced now that he made a very great mistake in advising His Excellency to put his name to what must admittedly be withdrawn now as a mistake. He was not sure that the House was doing its duty in passing over in silence that attempt at legislation by Order in Council. The words ought to be remembered by members, for it was not, as the Premier and the Minister of Education had said, merely an intimation to the Boards as to the amount of funds that would be available for the future, for that could page 48 have been done by circular, but this was an Order in Council: the words were, "It shall not be lawful for any teacher to retain or place on any roll any child of a less age than six years." That was a distinct assumption of legislative power, and no explanation could get rid of it. The position taken up under the Order in Council by the Minister was untenable, and he must retire from it in the same way that he would have to retire from the position in reference to this resolution. He had said he would not have the country schools closed: but he could not keep them open. The vote must be at so much per head, and the administration of it must rest with the Education Boards. There was no safety, therefore, except in voting against the proposal of the Government.

Mr. Blake had listened to the various speakers, but it seemed to him that a great many had simply dealt with details. There was a foundation to be considered, and it required far more consideration than had been given to it—namely, the yearly increase in the expenditure which was continually kept up. In 1877 we had 41,700 children at the schools, and nine years later, in 1887, we had 83,500 or something over. The number of scholars increased from three to four thousand every year, and that meant a yearly increase in expenditure of from £16,000 to £20,000. That was the amount with which they ought to deal, and by doing that they would be much nearer doing good than by merely dealing with the question in this small detail manner. Even supposing that they succeeded in saving £50,000 now, the colony would be in just the same position again in three or four years' time. Therefore consideration must be given to something deeper than was now proposed to the House. Another proposition which was made was that payment should only be made to the Fourth Standard, and one honourable gentleman suggested that the parents should pay a fee of 1s. 6d a week for every child above that standard. He thought it would be better to pay for it through the Customs at the rate of seven-twelfths of a penny. If the Government could see their way to postpone this question till next session, it would be more satisfactory to the greater proportion of honourable members, and certainly it would be more satisfactory to the country. He could not shut his eyes to the necessity for retrenchment, and he was afraid that if they went on borrowing, as it was proposed to do, for the next two or three years, they would then have to put a sum on the estimates to pay for finding some of those persons who were going about the world lecturing on the lost ten tribes, for by that time we should have borrowed all the money that the known tribes would lend us, and if we could not find another tribe we should have to go to the wall. We should not be in any better position at the end of the three years, and we should have to pay another £150,000 a year for interest on our national debt. These small propositions with regard to education were simply playing with the question, and if something better could not be done it would be better to leave things as they were until [unclear: ne] session.

Mr. Moat would not have risen to speak but for the statement of the Minister of Education, and which was repeated by other honorable members, that the Auckland Training College was a failure. From that he [unclear: entir] dissented. The honourable gentleman [unclear: seem] to have taken, as his ground for making [unclear: th] statement, certain remarks of Mr. Inspector Fidler in his report. No doubt [unclear: th] gentleman thought that if he had been elected Principal of the Training College he would have obtained better results. However, [unclear: th] was not the question. It must be remembered that the students of that college [unclear: w] not always allowed to remain there [unclear: for] years before being sent to country school Some of them only remained for a few monthly and those who had only been there [unclear: for] short time were not likely to turn [unclear: out] good teachers as those who had had the benefit of the full course. There was no [unclear: don] also, that better results might have been maintained if there had been proper [unclear: supervis] over the Training College; but it must be [unclear: bor] in mind that members of Education [unclear: Boa] were not, as a rule, qualified to supervise institutions of that kind, and it would be better if greater supervision were exorcised over [unclear: the] by the central department in Wellington There was no doubt that sufficient time [unclear: v] not devoted in these training colleges training students to teach, and it was rather [unclear: sp] in imparting higher education to them, [unclear: th] consequence being that they acted as [unclear: feed] to the colleges, and very successful they [unclear: we] in that respect. But the operations of [unclear: f] Auckland Training College were not confidant to training the twenty pupils of that [unclear: college] whom reference had been made. For [unclear: th] days in the week the pupil-teachers within reach attended classes at the Training College and were instructed in their duties, [unclear: and] Saturdays all the uncertificated teachers [unclear: with] reach attended it, and no less than 170 [unclear: pup] attended those classes. Therefore he thought it would be very hard for any one to say that had not done satisfactory work. And [unclear: not] that, but through all the country [unclear: schools] there were uncertificated teachers [unclear: working] to pass their examinations they were [unclear: oblig] to correspond with the Principal of the Training College, and he corresponded with till and returned the papers they [unclear: forwarded] him, after having examined and corrected them. That had been very beneficial [unclear: in] results. If that college were done away [unclear: wi] where were they to get their teachers from There were no less than 450 teachers [unclear: who] not passed their examination at present [unclear: e] ployed in the schools of the colony, and these, no fewer than ninety were in the [unclear: Av] land District; and unless there was some [unclear: mod] of training them he did not know what [unclear: th] should do for teachers. The Minister [unclear: said] Government would take care that no [unclear: cou] schools were closed, but that [unclear: uncertificated] women would be sent to teach in these school page 49 and to that he, as representing a country district, most strongly objected. Instead of doing away with the colleges, they should try and assimilate the instruction with that given at the Training College in Dunedin. That would be a much better course to adopt than to abolish them altogether. The general question bad been pretty well threshed out; but, as to the school-age part of it, it was interesting to find that the question engaged the attention of the ancient Greeks as many as two thousand years ago, and opinions on the subject differed then as much as they do now. As Professor Mahaffey justly said in his work on "Old Greek Education,"—

"The disputants never seem to take into consideration the fact that all children are not equally apt, and, while there are many whose education might with advantage commence at five, there are others whom it would be advisable to keep from school till they were a year or two older."

He believed it would be cruel to keep children from school who were in a position to receive education when they were five years old, particularly in country districts, where their services would be required by their parents as soon as they were able to work. He therefore could not consent to the Government proposal to raise the age from five to six. With reference to the strict-average question, he thought it would act very adversely indeed to the country districts, because wet weather and long distances prevented children from attending the country schools regularly. He could not support that proposal, but he could see his way to support the Government in reducing the capitation grant by 4s.

That statement was verified by the fact that thirty-five teachers out of fifty voted with it, page 50 even although they knew that voting that way meant to them a pecuniary loss. He found that there were 17,800 children between the ages of five and six, and 17,089 between the ages of six and seven, and certainly a considerable saving would be effected if those of the 17,800 who were attending the primary schools were kept out of them; but he thought their first duty was to reduce everywhere but in education, and as soon as reductions had been made to the fullest extent in other directions, but not till then, would he be willing to reduce the education vote. He was not prepared to go with the Minister, and those who were favourable to raising the school-age, and would therefore vote against it. As to the reduction of the capitation, he felt satisfied that £3 15s. would answer all purposes. Then, as to the abolition of Education Boards, he thought those who advocated that made a very serious mistake. If they abolished the Boards they could not do away with the clerks and others employed in that department, because correspondence would have to be answered, and other office-work attended to. If they abolished Boards, they must increase the work in Wellington, and they could not do it as effectively as it was at present performed. There was always a cry for decentralisation and local self-government; and the administration by Education Boards was local self-government of the best kind, because it was administration without local taxation—in all our other local government there was local taxation with it. It would be a very serious mistake to do away with Education Boards, because if they did their work properly they did very good work, and it would be no saving to abolish them. The work was done well, because a number of the School Committees came in contact with members of the Board with their grievances, and had them immediately redressed, whereas if they had to do everything by correspondence with Wellington they would not get their business done or their grievances remedied nearly so quickly or so effectually as at present. The idea that there would be a saving by abolition was a great mistake. He thought it would be wrong to take away capitation as soon as children had passed the Sixth Standard, because many who passed that standard were still very young, and he did not think they could be shut out from the schools legally till they were fifteen. In Auckland, however, there were far more pupil-teachers offering than were wanted—there were sometimes nearly a hundred waiting for engagements; and, to prevent themselves from rusting while waiting, they continued to attend the schools, so that they might be quite fresh for their work when employment came. He did not support the payment of capitation on that class: if they had passed both the Sixth Standard and the age of fifteen, and still wished to attend school, they should pay for themselves. It had been said by some honourable members that one-seventh of the community were suffering great hardship under the present system because their children could not attend our schools, and that an effort should [unclear: b] made to give them some assistance. [unclear: But] believed that, as a matter of fact, that evil [unclear: w] less by a half than it was said to be, for he [unclear: w] convinced that about ten thousand [unclear: children] Roman Catholic parents were attending [unclear: th] State schools. He arrived at that in this way Of the rest of the community the [unclear: children] tending school were 22.73 per cent., while of the Roman Catholics only 10 45 per cent, [unclear: were] tending their own schools; so that, [unclear: assumi] that the proportion of children to [unclear: adults] the same with Catholics as with Protestant the rest attended the State schools, and [unclear: th] would be at least ten thousand. He [unclear: knew] school in the Auckland District in which nearly all the children belonged to Roman [unclear: Cathol] parents, and therefore it could not be [unclear: tr] said that Catholic children were [unclear: being] out of our schools. If the Roman [unclear: Catho] were given capitation allowance they [unclear: would] be satisfied with that; for the New Zealand Tablet of the 11th November, 1887, says,—

"Mr. Pyke's Bill does not propose to [unclear: do] full justice, or place us on a footing of [unclear: equali] with the other taxpayers of the country. [unclear: T] Bill does not propose to give us building-graft or to allow our children to hold scholarship whilst attending Catholic schools. [unclear: These] serious defects."

This fact, and the fact that at least [unclear: half] Catholic children were now attending Government schools, should not be lost sight [unclear: of] considering this question. He would [unclear: ab] the training-colleges, and thought it a [unclear: abol] mistake that they had ever been established In Auckland the Board had been receiving £2,000 a year for the college; and last [unclear: w] the Board had decided to ask the Government no longer to pay the £2,000 a year, but to [unclear: p] £750 instead, to be used in another [unclear: way]. had been said that these colleges offered [unclear: falities] for the children of poor parents [unclear: to] more education; but that was not [unclear: the] perience in Auckland. Dr. [unclear: Macarthur], Principal, had stated that during six [unclear: years] had not received one young lady-pupil who [unclear: h] not passed the E examination and [unclear: who] not therefore already qualified to be a teacher Most of the pupils in the college were [unclear: yo] ladies, and the college drew to it some of [unclear: f] best of the young teachers who were already teaching, and gave them an amount of theoretical teaching which did not prove of [unclear: m] practical value. He had lately met in Wellington a lady who had passed [unclear: through] Auckland Training College, who told [unclear: him] after being there a year, and going back [unclear: to] school she had been at before, the headmaster told her she was very much worse than [unclear: be] leaving. It was all nonsense to say [unclear: that] college took the children of poor [unclear: parents] did them a great benefit: it simply [unclear: toc] number of young ladies and others [unclear: who] passed the E examination, and gave [unclear: them] their training, at a cost to the State [unclear: of] year each, in addition to the actual cost the instruction imparted. As he [unclear: had] they were nearly all ladies who passed [unclear: thr] page 51 the college, and if they received any advantage from attending the college the State got very little benefit from it, for they usually married in a year or two after leaving the college, and left the service. The colleges should certainly be abolished, and, as an argument for this, he might mention that it had been found that those sent from the Auckland College to take charge of schools had worse results than those who had simply been educated in the country schools. Although he believed in raising the school-age, he could not support it at present, because he had pledged himself to 'support retrenchment in every other direction before this; but as to the other proposals of the Government he should support them.

Mr. Moss said the real question before the Committee was, whether they should, under the pretext of altering the school-age, make some reduction in the amount voted for the education of the people. Though the Minister of Education had made a clear and interesting statement, going fully into the subject, it was manifest the honourable gentleman would have been more pleased if, instead of asking for authority to make a possibly small saving of a few thousand pounds in the education vote, he could have devoted himself to showing how the System could be improved—that would have been much more congenial to the honourable I gentleman. It was unfortunate that at the end of the session they should be hurriedly discussing the education system, not with the view of improving it and putting it on a more solid foundation, but merely with the view of finding a pretext whereby to cut £15,000 off the vote—that was all that would be saved during the remainder of this year. It would be much better to say at once that this sum must be cut off than to waste time in seeking for a pretext under which to do it. He should not vote for the reduction, and he considered the question too large to touch in this way. (There were those who had hoped that our education system would one day embrace free tuition not only in the primary schools but in the secondary schools. That was the object many had kept before them in the past, and it was with that object that the secondary-education reserves had been made. They wanted free education for all classes—there should be no talk of rich and poor in this House—first in the common schools, and afterwards in the secondary schools and the universities. Now that idea was going to be abandoned, not because the system of education was too expensive, not because it had proved to be inefficient, but because they had wasted the resources of the colony in other directions, and therefore they were called on to curtail on this pretext the work in which the colony was engaged.

Mr. Fisher.—Last session you said £100,000 or £150,000 could be saved on education.

Mr. Moss said, to the General Treasury,; but not so long as the House takes on itself the education of the whole colony. If they would continue that responsibility, they must find the money to do it properly, and if they found the money they should take control of the whole affair, and abolish the Boards. The present hybrid system was wholly wrong; but the present was not the time to go into that question. As to raising the school-age, some children could very well attend school at five—it depended on the constitution and temperament of the child. In the United States the commencing school-age was in some States four—from four to twenty, starting with the kindergarten and ending at the university—free secondary schools and free universities. There the system was truly national, and that was what we should aim at. It was our first duty to educate the people, and it was shameful to say that we could not afford to educate our people—tho first duty of a free State—when we could afford to borrow money for all kinds of luxuries. The training-schools had been said to be useless. If so, it was because we made an improper use of them. The use of these institutions was to train teachers to habits of patience, and to methods of teaching, rather than to impart knowledge. Training-schools were a necessity if we were to have good teaching. As to stopping at the Sixth Standard, he disagreed with that, for if we were to have a truly national system we must look forward to the secondary schools and universities being a continuation of the district schools. With much that the honourable member for Linwood had said he agreed—it was an excellent speech; but, when the honourable gentleman spoke of teachers appointed by the Government being free and independent of the School Committees, he made a mistake. A teacher who did not work with the School Committee would be so worried that he could not retain his position. The School Committees wore an essential part of the system. They were the only real element of local government in the whole system. The Boards he had not the same regard for; and if there was to be a central system they were altogether out of place. If consideration of the question were left over until next session, the Minister would have time to go into it fully, and be able to come down with some proposals of a larger character, making, he hoped, the system a really local system, and relieving the General Government of much of the responsibility which now rested upon them; making the School Committees a great fact, and the Education Boards living powers, instead of mere surplusage as they were in present arrangements. The real object of this debate was to enable the General Government to spend less money; and how much did they expect to save this year? £10,000 or £15,000. Was it worth while to derange the whole system for the sake of that sum? Was it worth while to take action which would injure the one great institution upon which the whole future of the country depended? Surely it was better to let the matter stand over till next session, when the Minister would, no doubt, be prepared to come down and make it a matter of larger local responsibility and control.

Mr. Marchant said that the general feeling of the country, as expressed at the last election, was that the cost of education was heavier than it could afford, and that the country did not get value for its money; and he contended that the evidence taken by the Committee which had sat on the subject bore out the impression which people generally had formed. He thought that the thanks of the country were duo to the Minister of Education for the proposals he had brought down. He could not say that he agreed with every one of the proposals, but he did approve of the economical spirit in which the proposals were framed. He was thoroughly in accord with the proposal to raise the school-age, especially in view of the pledge of the Minister that no country school should be closed. It was nothing but the dread of the country schools being closed that prevented the people from demanding that the school-age should be raised to seven years. As to reducing the capitation allowance by 4s., he had a little doubt as to whether it would be wise to make the reduction all at once. He should prefer to see it made in two instalments, believing that they could avoid embarrassing the Education Boards' finance in that way. He should be well pleased if the Minister of Education could see his way to modify his proposals in that matter. As to normal schools, he could not see why the teacher should be educated and trained at the expense of the State, any more than doctors, dentists, lawyers, or shoemakers. Therefore he was in accord with the proposal. But, as to the proposal to substitute strict average for working average, he must confess that he had some doubts as to its desirableness. He was afraid that in country districts where bad weather and bad roads formed a large factor in regulating the attendance it would have a very prejudicial effect upon the finances of the Board, especially where the Boards had but one borough within their boundaries, and many small schools—such a district as Taranaki, for instance. It would certainly lead to difficulty, and he should feel it to be his duty to vote against that proposal. With that exception he was thoroughly in accord with the proposals of the Minister. He did not think that there was the least fear that the cause of education would suffer by adopting them, and he maintained it was the real friends of education who were in favour of these reductions. He believed the time was not far distant when the Consolidated Fund would not be able to bear the whole of the charges that were cast upon it. Year by year they found the Government trying to relieve the Consolidated Fund. They saw the late Government relieving it of the charge of hospitals and charitable aid; and he found this year that the subsidies to local bodies were to be reduced, while other charges were also to be reduced, making a total reduction of £87,000—all at the expense of the road-making bodies. If the cost of education were not kept within moderate bounds, there would be soon an out-cry against the system all over the country, which would imperil its existence. [unclear: But] was not in regard to primary schools alone [unclear: ths] he would like to see a reduction effected, [unclear: b] also in regard to the higher schools. He maintained that these schools were nothing [unclear: b] class schools, and they ought not to be [unclear: key] up at the expense of the country. He [unclear: hope] the Minister would during the recess devote his attention to this matter of secondary schools, and sec whether he could not [unclear: devs] some plan for nationalising the reserves [unclear: th] were devoted to that purpose and putting [unclear: th] proceeds into a common fund; also for [unclear: alteri] the system in such a way that children living [unclear: i] the country should be placed on the same [unclear: foing] as children living in the towns—that [unclear: w] to say, that entrance to these schools shod be by scholarships.

Mr. R. H. J. Reeves agreed with [unclear: th] honourable member who had just sat [unclear: dov] more particularly in reference to what he [unclear: ho] said on the subject of secondary education He thought that, if they educated [unclear: children] to the Sixth Standard, that was all that [unclear: w] required to be done by the State. Children who showed an aptitude for the higher classic should receive extra tuition if their [unclear: parea] were able to afford it. He regretted that [unclear: th] honourable gentleman in charge of these estimates could not see his way to withdraw [unclear: th] vote under this head. It seemed to him a [unclear: far] to attempt to take off £60,000, when at [unclear: th] same time they heard of a sum being propose for defence amounting to £178,000, which [unclear: wa] wholly unnecessary. He should content [unclear: hir] self by simply stating that he should be [unclear: cr] polled—and he much regretted it—to [unclear: give] vote against the proposal.

Mr. Ross said this question had been [unclear: pre] well threshed out now, and he had been waring for the last six hours to hear the division bell. During the late election contest he [unclear: ha] occasion to address several meetings, at which there was an expression of opinion by the educators with regard to this subject. The which of the electors he met were in favour [unclear: of] reduction in the school-allowance, but [unclear: th] the schools should be kept as they [unclear: we] Many teachers with whom he had [unclear: come] contact were quite in favour of [unclear: reducing] capitation-allowance. He had read all [unclear: th] evidence taken on this subject by the Education Committee, and he had also read several publications on the subject. There was which had been published by the Education Institute of Otago, which was well worthy [unclear: th] attention of every member of the House; [unclear: bo] he would not detain the Committee by making any extracts from that work. He [unclear: suggested] Minister should agree to allow the matter [unclear: t] stand over till next session.

Mr. Fisher said that, late as was the [unclear: ho] and long as had been the discussion, he [unclear: felt] incumbent upon him to offer a few remark upon the speeches which had been [unclear: delivered] the course of the discussion. Many honourable members had been good enough to give [unclear: the] views upon what they believed to be the making of the Education Act and the [unclear: intentions] page 53 its framers. It had been his advantage to have had a good deal of communication with those who framed the Education Act, and with those who composed the Ministry that passed it. He was in a position to say, from what they told him, that the original intention was that the State should pay only upon the compulsory ages—namely, from seven to thirteen years. There was a further point he wished to mention, and that was this: that a great deal of credit was given to a gentleman in this colony who was very justly regarded as an educational enthusiast, but who was regarded as the champion of the common-school system of this colony. He thought this an appropriate occasion upon which to mention that the author and champion of our present education system was Mr. Charles Christopher Bowen, the introducer of the Education Act, who had to encounter a good deal of opposition from Mr. Stout, who was a member of the House when the Bill was introduced in 1877. He (Mr. Fisher) claimed, himself, to rank as one of the strongest friends to the common-school system. The honourable member for Dunedin Central said it was premature to propose anything this session. It was open to any one to say that of any proposal. Some honourable members were as tenacious of their own opinions in regard to the particular mode to be adopted as were certain theologians in regard to their particular tenets. They would never recede one step in the attitude they took up. The honourable member for Dunedin Central said it was possible to reduce the cost of the education system by £100,000; but he was careful not to mention how this could be done. That honourable member also made some disparaging remarks in regard to Dr. Brown, who, in addition to being a medical man, was Chairman of the Education Board of Otago. He was bound to say that that gentleman was one of the keenest, ablest, and most powerful reasoners upon this question that he ever had the pleasure of listening to. One honourable member went so far as to say that Dr. Brown was a medical man, it was true, but that he was not an educational expert, and therefore was not a reliable authority. He was a University man, and was Chairman of the Otago Education Board, and, if these two qualifications did not entitle him to express an authoritative opinion upon this question, it was hard to say what would entitle any man to express an opinion. Now, the honourable member for Hawke's Bay had given them a great deal of valuable information in regard to this question, and had shown clearly how the system could be improved there. The only weakness in his whole argument was the statement that he hoped the Seventh Standard would not be done away with. He (Mr. Fisher) would undertake to say that not one man in a thousand in the colony knew anything of the existence of a Seventh Standard. He was the more surprised at the statement of the honourable member for Napier when he remembered that in the Hawke's Bay District, when the return for 1886 was made up, there were only twelve pupils who were in the Seventh Standard; while under the Otago Education Board there were some 221 pupils in the Seventh Standard. He undertook to say that, if the great mass of the people of the colony who had to pay for the maintenance of this system were aware of the fact, strong as they were for the maintenance of the Fifth and Sixth Standards, they would have a very strong objection to pay for the maintenance of the Seventh Standard; for the common impression of the mass of the people was that the State wont far enough when it educated children as far as the Sixth Standard. He wished only to touch upon one or two points, notably those raised by the honourable members for Caver-sham and Dunedin East—of course the remark had been made by other honourable members, but he referred to those honourable gentlemen especially because they were aware of the evidence that had been given before the Committee. Both these honourable gentlemen said that the matter ought to be allowed to stand over till the next session. Now, he asked whether it was fair to the country that a matter like this, in which it was possible to effect great saving, should be allowed to stand over until next session, when three-fourths of the colony had spontaneously said that in this department it was possible for very considerable retrenchment to be made. The Provincial Districts of Auckland, Hawke's Bay, and Otago had said it was possible to carry on the education system, without impairing its efficiency, at a considerable reduction. The Education Board of Otago, before the proposals of the Government had assumed any definite shape, sent to the Government to say that they were prepared to effect reductions to the extent of £8,500 or £9,000. Were they to send back to these three Boards and say that they did not want the Boards to effect these reductions? He thought that to do that would be to put the Parliament, the Government, and the Education Department in a very ridiculous position. He should not reply to the remarks of the honourable member for Kumara. He was not surprised at a ripe and rare old Tory, such as the honourable gentleman was, making the remarks he had made with regard to the Seventh Standard, and the Civil Service being closed against the people. He did not think the Civil Service was a great goal to strive for, and he would take care that none of his boys, at all events, entered the Civil Service. The objection that if the children were not in school they would necessarily be in the gutters was a very strong and unwarrantable reflection upon the parents of the colony. He would not follow the discussion, but would say that, although it had been long, it had been legitimate and profitable. By "profitable," he meant that honourable members who had spoken had spoken with the legitimate object of contributing so far as they could to the stock of information upon the subject.

Mr. Taiwhanga meant to speak on this question if he stayed a month to do it, as it was a great and important question. He had been concerned over the education question since page 54 1876, when he gave a Bill to amend the Native School Act to Mr. Sheehan, who had probably put it under the table. He had even pleaded with the Governor himself about this question of education, which was the most important thing in the world, the foundation of all nations; but nothing had been done. The education of the Maoris was as nothing; but they should have the administration of their own land, and educate their own children. He did not blame the white people, but he blamed the Maoris themselves, for they had the matter in their own hands. They had the land, but if they let that slip they could do nothing. The Maoris did not get fair-play in this matter of education, and he would like to know what the result must be in fifty years. All the money that was being spent on Maori education was simply wasted. For twenty years money had been expended under the Native Schools Act, but no good had been done; the Maoris had not been educated—not so much as he had been—and he had only learned what he could himself.

Majority for, 6.

Motion agreed to. Therefore school-age not to be raised to six years.

The Committee divided on the question "That the sum be further reduced by £5."

Majority against, 36.

Motion negatived. Therefore [unclear: capitation] lowance of 4s. per head to be abolished.

The Committee divided on the question "That the vote be further reduced by £4."

Majority against, 3.

Motion negatived. Therefore "strict average" to be substituted for working average."

The Committee divided on the question, "That the vote be further reduced by £3."

Majority against, 24.

Motion negatived. Therefore training colleges to be abolished.

Mr. Guinness moved a reduction of £2, as an indication that no more sums were to be placed on the estimates for higher education.

Mr. Bruce regarded this as the most important motion that had been made that evening. It meant, if carried, that the colony was not prepared to continue this higher education of which so much had been heard. He felt strongly on this question, and he had given (expression to that feeling on several occasions during last Parliament, and he was entirely in accord with the motion moved by the honourable member for Greymouth. The honourable member for Parnell, who, he was sorry to notice, was not in his place, had referred to the question of higher education in America. Probably he (Mr. Bruce) knew about as much of the United States as any honourable member in the House, and he knew that American opinion was strongly in favour of primary education, and not of higher education; and the most thoughtful men in America were in favour of abolishing higher education. The honourable member for Dunedin West said "No;" but he would point to a very much higher authority than even his honourable friend—Professor Smith, who thought it necessary to call the attention of the British Association to the American opinion of higher education. He believed the value of education was very much overrated. He believed if they gave children an opportunity of being educated up to the Sixth Standard they placed the key of knowledge in their hands, and any position in the colony was open to them. Some honourable members in Committee had given their own experiences. Let him cite his experience. He was nine years of age when his English education was completed. That was most of the education he had had; and, still, one of the most important constituencies of the colony had thought he was sufficiently educated to represent them in that Chamber. He thought that if they educated their children up to the Sixth Standard they had done all they ought to do.

Dr. Fitchett asked that the question of higher education should be tested on its merits, which could not be done then, for they must have full information, and a reasonable time to consider it.

Mr. Levestam was surprised at the Minister of Education, who wanted to reduce the expenditure on education, but wished to take it from the poorer classes. If the reduction were to begin with higher education, he would have supported him. He should vote against State support of higher education, as he had always done.

Mr. McGregor moved to reduce the vote by £500.

Mr. Allen thought the Committee should pause before striking out this vote. He had been consistent in wishing for the reduction of expenditure; but, if they wished this colony to succeed, they must maintain the higher education. He was perfectly sure that the primary education would be perfectly useless in fitting the people of this colony for competition with the people of other nations, unless they had also the higher education. The tendency of public opinion in other countries was to make the higher as well as the primary education free; and, if we could afford it, he would be glad to see it free in this country also.

Mr. Duncan considered the honourable member for Dunedin East had been inconsistent in the votes he had given, because he had voted to reduce the primary education.

Mr. Tanner maintained that the education in the secondary schools, which consisted of instruction in the dead languages, statics, and hydrostatics, was not necessary to a boy who had to earn his livelihood by manual labour.

Mr. Levestam also thought the honourable member for Dunedin East very inconsistent. If they made higher education free to all, he would agree with him; but, as it was at page 56 present; administered, the system was simply a means of helping the rich at the expense of the poor.

Mr. Allen said he had voted in the manner he had done with respect to two of the questions affecting primary education in order to preserve the system, being afraid that public opinion would turn against the system and destroy it if it were too costly. He would be glad to see all education free, so that every child who had sufficient ability could obtain the higher education. It was by the education of the children of the poor—not pauper education, but a thorough education—that we should be enabled to maintain our position as a nation.

Major Steward said there would not be a single objection to this vote if the Minister proposed to devote it to scholarships obtainable by competition; and then the reproach, which now had a good deal of force, that money was voted to assist those who did not require it would be taken away.

Mr. Duncan thought that the honourable member for Dunedin East should endeavour to save higher education by reducing the expenditure upon it in the way he claimed to be defending the primary system from assault. The expenditure on secondary education was grossly extravagant, and would drag it down.

Mr. T. Mackenzie said there was the High School at Akaroa with ten children attending it, which cost £373 a year, or at the rate of £37 a head, although there was an excellent primary school in the neighbourhood. That was sufficient indication that they should put a stop to this system.

Mr. Marchant hoped that every Liberal member would vote for the reduction, not because there was any objection to higher education, but because of the way in which it was administered. These schools were simply class schools, and it was to that that the House and the country objected. If admission to them were by means of scholarships from the primary schools they would be welcome to everybody. If an opportunity were given of voting against the University system, he would vote in the same way as on this question, to show his disapproval of the administration.

Mr. Hislop could not allow any person to say that he would lower the range of public education, primary or otherwise. The vote on primary education was beside this question, because no person voted on that to take away the advantages of the system from any child. It would have been a sufficient objection to the reduction in the vote had it been proved that it would impair the system; but everybody knew very well that nothing had been raised so much as the cost of primary education above what it was years ago. With regard to secondary education, he could not agree with the honourable member for Rangitikei that the popular opinion was against it in America. Every thoughtful mind there was in favour of it, and the fact of such a number of schools being opened there showed that the people were alive to the advantages of education. Honourable gentlemen quoted Goldwin Smith; but it was not to him they should go, but to the [unclear: leaden] public opinion, who were advocating a [unclear: libe] movement in education. If they [unclear: read] books of Fisk and others of the same [unclear: clas] they would find that the chief way in Which the system had grown up was through [unclear: the] that higher education should be [unclear: spread] thoroughly among the people. As to [unclear: the] ministration of the high schools, he [unclear: could] suppose that, if honourable members [unclear: were] satisfied with the administration, they [unclear: mig] with reason change that system, but not taken away altogether. An honourable [unclear: gentle] gave as one reason for objecting to the schools that they were class schools. [unclear: Eev] they were, he would support them, because there could be nothing worse growing up [unclear: in] colony than an uneducated wealthy class.

Mr. Turnbull.—Let them pay for it

Mr. Hislop said they were the very [unclear: p] sons who would not pay for it; but it [unclear: was] absurdity to say that secondary-school education was class education. The fees paid [unclear: in] colony were about one-third of those [unclear: paid] Home; and honourable members [unclear: must] that by reducing the fees to a minimum the were opening the system to all classes, [unclear: bes] having a scholarship system which was large used. Let any one take the list of [unclear: those] obtained scholarships, and he would [unclear: find] three out of four of those who were [unclear: recei] secondary education were those who [unclear: could] receive it if they had to pay heavily for [unclear: it]. hoped the Committee would not strike [unclear: out] vote.

Mr. Leyestam was surprised at the [unclear: spee] just delivered. Did the honourable [unclear: gentle] call any one a Liberal who would tax the [unclear: ma] for the benefit of the few, [unclear: particularly] the many were poor and the few [unclear: rich]? honourable gentleman said the cost of [unclear: prim] education was higher than it was years [unclear: ago]; of course it would increase as the [unclear: number] children increased. As to the cost of seconded education being only one-third of that which was at Home, that was just what [unclear: they] plained of, inasmuch as those who sent ill children to those schools only paid [unclear: a] amount of the cost, and the poor people had pay the rest. Although the honourable member for Dunedin East said that the colony could not afford the cost of education, he [unclear: was] to vote for higher education and [unclear: against] education. And then he said his [unclear: district] not benefit by this vote as much as [unclear: others]! was surprised at the honourable gentleman.

Mr. R. Thompson thought that [unclear: this] the most sensible amendment [unclear: proposed] night, and was surprised at the Colonial Secondary saying that the wealthy people [unclear: of] colony would not pay for the education of the children. He thought better of them best felt satisfied, from the way in which high schools were conducted, that the primary education was injured by those schools. The [unclear: colo] was not in a position to carry on high school at present, and therefore he would vote [unclear: for] amendment.

Mr. Seddon said he found from the return that there were eighty-three children attending high schools under ten years of age, and 1,191 between the age of ten and fifteen, making 1,274 children under the present school-age attending the secondary schools, which were costing the colony something like £30,000 a year.

Mr. Bruce did not want to be misunderstood on this question. The colony could not afford to educate children in the way many would wish, and he believed that higher education was given almost entirely to the children of the wealthy classes, and it was given in the towns. To what extent could children of the poor in the country take advantage of these high schools in the towns? He thought that not more than one child in seven ever came to the towns for this education, and they were not the children of poor parents. The consequence was that they were giving the children of the wealthy high education, and the poor were paying for it.

Mr. Duncan said on every platform of the colony it had been stated that the higher-education system had been mismanaged. The district he came from furnished a good sample of the mismanagement of the system. The expense of higher education in that district was a shame to them. There was no doubt whatever that the whole thing would be swept away were some alteration not made.

Dr. Fitchett recognised a great deal of force in the charges levelled against the high schools. They were in a great measure class Schools, and children attended them who ought not to be there, but who should be in the primary schools. Did the Committee recognise Shis: that if it took away this grant it would absolutely shut out higher education from poor children? Let the system be looked into and reformed, but let it not be killed.

The Committee divided on the question, "That the vote, £360,624, be reduced by £2."

Majority for, 28.

Motion agreed to, as indicating the wish of the Committee that the cost of higher education should be reduced.

Mr. Fitzherbert moved, That the vote for Native schools be reduced by £1, to indicate the desire of the House that the children of both races should be put on an equal footing with regard to education. At present the cost of education in the case of a European child was £4, while a Maori child cost £10.

Major Atkinson said if these Native schools were to be swept away the Maori children would be deprived of education.

Mr. T. Mackenzie thought that economy might be exercised in the Native schools. In his own district it had cost £132 to educate six children at the Native school, of whom four had passed. There was a school at Riverton where the education of a child had cost £100.

Mr. Kelly hoped the motion would be withdrawn, and that it would be left to the Government to effect whatever economy they could in this department.

Mr. Buchanan said there were three Native schools carried on very successfully in his district, and the children of both races received instruction at these establishments. He hoped the motion would be withdrawn, and that the discussion would be accepted by the Government as an indication that economy should be effected in this and other directions.

Mr. Fish thought it would be quite impossible to put Maori and European children on exactly the same level in the matter of education.

If the money was spent now as it was then, the honourable member might be justified in saying that' it; was' thrown away; but he (Mr. Moat) 'thought the system had been entirely changed, and knew was; producing good results.

Mr. R. Thompson thought these Native schools should be placed under the Education Boards, and then the abuses would soon be got rid of, the abuses now being due to the central management.

Mr. Bruce would protest in the strongest manner possible against reducing the vote. All the reasons given for educating the youth of the European population applied with even greater force to the Natives. If the Native children were educated, in a few years they would be able to transact their own business, and not be in the future, as unfortunately they had been in the past, at the mercy of a few pakeha-Maoris, who had a monopoly of communication with them. However possible it might be theoretically to place both races on the same footing as to education, it was premature to do so now; but keeping on this vote would hasten the time. He looked forward to the day when all of both races would be placed on the same level; but in many districts now it was impossible to educate both races together, because there were no Europeans there, and therefore it was a matter of necessity to have purely Native schools. He hoped the vote would not be reduced by a penny.

Mr. Fitzherbert said his object was to give the Maoris a better education. The honourable member for the Eastern Maori District had told them that he had been working for it for years—that he wanted the Maoris to be placed on the same footing and to have as good an education as the Europeans, their present education being very bad. As it was now, the money was nearly all wasted. What he (Mr. Fitzherbert) wished was that the House should convey an intimation to the Government that the Maori children should get a better education at less cost, and that, as far as possible, the Maoris should be placed on the same footing in regard to education as the Europeans. Even in purely Native districts Maori schools could be worked on the same system as the schools for white children. He objected to the waste of money on the present system, and wished the House to show the Government that it desired the matter should be taken into Consideration during the recess, and prudently revised.

Major Atkinson said the honourable gentleman might have known from the promises of the Government that they would carefully deal with this department as with all others. At first the honourable gentleman told them he wanted to strike off the whole vote, but now he said he only wanted to [unclear: convey] intimation to the Government as to what [unclear: sho] be done hereafter.

Mr. Carroll hoped the proposal for education would not be carried. His [unclear: reason] wishing that was the same; as that of [unclear: the] poser for Wishing that' it should be carried That honourable gentleman said [unclear: the] should be put on the same footing as [unclear: Ed] peans. The only way to attain that [unclear: was] educating the Maoris. There were several[unclear: tricts] in the North Island in which [unclear: there] no European schools or-European, children and in such districts schools must be provided for the Native children. Of course the [unclear: hon] able gentleman was perfectly right in [unclear: spea] about the Hutt or Wellington, or any [unclear: pl] where the European population was in [unclear: exe] of the Native population. In all such [unclear: places] Native children would be much better education by going to the European schools, [unclear: which] did in many cases; and he knew [unclear: also] cases of European children going [unclear: to] schools, because there were localities [unclear: in] there were very few European children and large number of Natives, and there [unclear: that] the only means the European children [unclear: had] being educated. He did not think the [unclear: propo] reduction would bring about any [unclear: difference] all, but he would say that it was the [unclear: duty] the House to let the Maoris have as [unclear: m] education as they possibly could have, [unclear: consi] that the Natives had been very [unclear: unselfish] the past in the matter of providing for education. In nearly every district in the [unclear: N] Island there were large and valuable [unclear: reser] given years ago by the Maoris. How [unclear: they] been administered since was another question but the Maoris gave them solely for the propose of education, and now the House school act in the same spirit. He hoped the honorable gentleman would not press his [unclear: amement], but that the Government would [unclear: consi] the matter during the recess, as the [unclear: Preu] had promised.

Mr. Fitzherbert said that, at [unclear: the] quest of the representatives of the [unclear: Native] in whoso interests he had brought this [unclear: me] forward, he would withdraw the motion, [unclear: and] content with the assurance that the Government would consider it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Fitzherbert would like to [unclear: draw] attention of the Committee to the industry schools. They cost the country a [unclear: great] of money, and were not conducted in [unclear: a] per manner. The sentiment was that you criminals should not be sent to gaol, because they would herd with older criminals and [unclear: le] things which would make them worse [unclear: inst] of better. But, judging by the [unclear: Kohimar] institution, the schools were not [unclear: working] The children there were entirely [unclear: neglect] received little education and no [unclear: technical] cation whatever, and no control was [unclear: exerci] over them. The elder boys went without [unclear: le] about the streets of Auckland, picked [unclear: up] kinds of wickedness, and then went [unclear: back] made the younger children as bad as [unclear: the] page 59 selves. The last report of the Inspector showed that twenty-seven boys had been absent without leave, and no doubt they were in the worst dens in Auckland that could be found. The other day, when in Court here, he heard the Resident Magistrate send a couple of little girls and a boy to the industrial school. The children had been brought up respectably, and it Struck him what a pity it was to send them to such a place. At these schools the children learned nothing, and when they came out they were worth nothing to society.

Mr. O'Callaghan.—No.

Mr. Fitzherbert said he was speaking specially with reference to Kohimarama. The children there did not make their own beds or wash out their own things. They were kept in perfect idleness. It would be much better to devote a wing of the Central Prison to the purposes of a reformatory, and teach the boys trades. He moved, That the vote be reduced by £1

Mr. O'Callaghan said the honourable member for the Hutt was altogether unacquainted with the position of affairs. When he stated that the industrial schools were a failure he stated what everybody who had studied the subject knew to be thoroughly incorrect. Being well acquainted with the Burnham School and the school in Otago, he could way that no better work could be done than was done there. The children were restrained from vice, and were taught to be useful members of society. The honourable member was wholly misrepresenting the industrial schools.

Mr. Fitzherbert said he had been talking of the Kohimarama School, where he was two years ago.

Mr. Buchanan said that any honourable members who were acquainted with the facts of the case as regards these schools would be aware that the statements of the honourable member were very wide of the mark.

Mr. Marchant said that he had been told that destitute children, even if they were toot criminals, were sent to these schools to mix with those who had been sent there for their crimes or vice. If this was so he hoped the Government would look into the matter, and apply a remedy to such an undesirable state of affairs.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. Seddon asked the Minister of Education whether, now that the general average had been reduced to strict average for the purpose of computing capitation, the Government would carry out their pledge that no country school should be closed in consequence of the change. He said that the Premier gave them an assurance that if the proposals were carried there should not be a country school closed.

Mr. Fisher said the position was perfectly clear. The representation was that in consequence of raising the school-age there was a risk of some of the country schools being Ulosed. The school-age had not been raised, and therefore the Government was relieved of all responsibility in connection with the as surance.

Mr. Graham much regretted the statement of the honourable gentleman. It was distinctly understood that if the proposals of the Government were carried in globo no country schools should be closed, and on the strength of that promise he had voted in a direction in which he would not otherwise-have voted.

Mr. Marchant thought there would not be much risk of any country school being closed.

Mr. Seddon left it to the Committee to say whether the Minister of Education was keeping faith with them. The Minister gave the Committee the assurance that, no matter what might occur, no country school should be closed.

Mr. Fisher said he had stated nothing of the sort. What he had said was, that if the proposal of the Government were assented to by the Committee they would undertake that no country school should be closed. That proposal had been rejected, and of course that arrangement had been upset.

Mr. Fitzherbert said, after the first division on the four questions the Minister of Education in the lobby gave him an assurance that the country schools would not suffer.

Mr. Fisher hoped the House would not hold him responsible for the honourable member's romances.

Mr. Buchanan said he was as much interested in the question of country schools as anybody, and he was quite satisfied that the Government would not see the country schools suffer. The whole point was as to the management of the Education Boards, for the matter would be in the hands of the Boards; and, as a member of an Education Board, he could say that the Boards were in the hands of the country School Committees, for if they chose to exert their power they had the voting-power as against the towns, and in that case could enforce an equal division of the funds at the disposal of the Boards. This being the case, the argument that had been brought forward seemed to entirely fall to the ground.

Mr. Duncan said that the honourable member for the Wairarapa had just missed the point. In a district like the West Coast they might call all the schools country schools. It was quite different where there were big towns, like Wellington and Christchurch. A district like the West Coast would be very seriously affected by only having strict average, whereas it would not make much difference to the other districts.

Mr. Fisher was very sorry to find that the honourable member had voted under a misapprehension; but he would say this to the honourable gentleman: that in future divisions, if he wanted to understand what effect his vote would have, he should go to the Government and ask them that question.

Mr. Anderson thought it was the duty of the Minister in charge to inform him. It was not his place to run after such information.

Mr. Seddon said he could take the oppor- page 60 tunity of reviewing the vote by moving an amendment now, but he did not think that was the proper course. He would rely upon the Ministers considering the situation, and the manner in which the votes had been given. The understanding, even though it might have been a misunderstanding, upon which the votes bad been given ought to be considered by the Ministers, and a promise ought to be given that country schools should not suffer.

Mr. Fisher said the Government had given; up the reduction which would have affected the country schools.

Dr. Fitchett was very much surprised to hear this. He understood a pledge had been given to the Committee, and that that pledge was not now to be carried out. Was that so? It seemed to him a most extraordinary thing. When the Minister of Education brought down four specific proposals, he understood the Minister to state that, whatever the result might be, he gave an assurance that the country schools should not suffer.

Mr. Fisher.—The principal one has been defeated.

Dr. Fitchett said the Minister of Education gave no indication that No. 1 proposal was to be the principal one, or that the country schools depended on No. 1. Each stood on its own bottom.

Mr. T. Mackenzie said the Minister of Education was perfectly free to carry out what he had indicated. He proposed that £26,000 should be saved by raising the school-age from five to six years. A number of honourable members, had voted against that proposal, and now they seemed to be most solicitous that the country schools should not suffer. How could they expect that they would not suffer when the proposal to save that amount had been negatived? He understood the promise that they should not suffer to apply to this proposal, and that the understanding was that no schools should be closed in consequence of the raising of the school-age.

Mr. R. Thompson understood that, when the Minister of Education gave the pledge that the schools should not suffer, that pledge had reference to the raising of the school-age; and before voting on the question he had taken the precaution of asking the Minister whether, if he voted to increase the school-age, the Minister would undertake that the country schools should not suffer; and a distinct pledge was given on that.

Mr. Fergus said that all the reduction the Committee had made amounted to £34,000, and the Otago Education Board in a communication had shown that they would, without closing a single school or reducing the salary of a teacher, be able to strike off one-fourth of that amount.

Mr. Levestam quite understood that in large centres that could be done, but the case was different in the smaller districts.

Mr. Kelly thought they might leave this question to the Minister of Education. He would not be anxious to sec the schools closed, and they might vote at once on the question.

Mr. O'Callaghan would agree to [unclear: that], the Minister would assure them that he would endeavour to prevent any school being [unclear: closed]

Major Atkinson thought they might [unclear: tah] it for granted that the School Boards [unclear: would] their duty, as they had always done [unclear: hither]. He took it that, if they did not do their duty the Government would have to come to they House and provide some remedy. He [unclear: believ] the Committee had given the Boards [unclear: ampl] means to carry on all the services in connection with education; and, as he had [unclear: said], believed that the Boards would do their duty Honourable members should recollect [unclear: that] Government were quite as much [unclear: interested] the education system as wore any member of the House. They had made provision which experience told them would be ample, [unclear: and] thought they might very well close the [unclear: del] on the clear understanding that the [unclear: Boar] would do their duty. If they did not, it would of course, be for the Government to step in.

Dr. Fitchett could not understand [unclear: th] attitude taken up by the Government; [unclear: and], one, he must protest against it. [unclear: During] debate he had raised this objection to [unclear: each] the proposals of the Government: that, so [unclear: las] as human nature was human nature, [unclear: so] would the Boards supply the town school with everything that was requisite, leaving the country schools unprovided for, because the latter could rely on the Government. He ventured to say that few members of the [unclear: Commit] understood, when voting on the second or [unclear: thi] amendment, that the country [unclear: schools] imperilled in any way. He, for his part, [unclear: fu] understood that the Government were [unclear: pledg] that country schools should be maintain To say now that it was to be left to the [unclear: Ed] cation Boards was little better than a [unclear: brea] of faith.

Major Atkinson said it was general agreed that the Boards could effectually [unclear: car] on their duties with the votes which had been passed, the only exception being the honorable member for Kumara, who thought [unclear: that] would be better to reduce the school-age [unclear: th] to make an alteration in the average, as [unclear: th] would affect his district most. There [unclear: was] misunderstanding about the matter at [unclear: all]; he would point out that, when these resolution were reported to the House, there [unclear: would] another opportunity of dealing with [unclear: them]. Government were of opinion that the [unclear: capita] given to the Boards was ample to [unclear: maintain] schools; but, if it should turn out that [unclear: it] not so, it would be necessary to [unclear: take] other measures. And honourable members should consider the difference [unclear: between] position now and that when the [unclear: resolution] first brought before the Committee. If the had reduced the school-age the country [unclear: scho] no doubt would have lost, and the Government would have had to make up the [unclear: differe] But now the Education Boards had all [unclear: th] required to carry on their duties, and the [unclear: Ho] would take care that they managed their [unclear: arrai] properly.

Vote, £360,617, agreed to.