APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXV, Issue 3956, 12 June 1913, Page 5

APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS.

POWERS OF THE SCHOOL COM-

MITTEES.

SUPREME COURT RULING

INVOKED

[BT TELEGRAPH —SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT] AUCKLAND, June 11. Many have been the protests entered from time to time by the City School Committee regarding the appointment of teachers by the ’Board of Education. So confident is the schools committee that powers are being taken away from it that the Supreme Court is to be moved for a ruling to do this. It has been found necessary to take a test case against the Board of Education. The matter was referred to by the chairman (Mr F. E. N. Gaudin) at the first meeting of the newly-elected Auckland City City .Schools Committee. _ He explained that it was the practice of the Board of Education to send only one candidate’s name and Qualifications to the committee with the intimation that that one stood highest on the list in qualifications, etc. The names of the'other applicants Were-sent without their qualifications, which meant that the Committee had no voice in the selection of a teacher for the schools under its charge. As protests had no effect, the old Committee decided to go to the Supreme Court and get a judgment as to whether the Board of Education was acting within its rights An ignoring the Committee. The case was worth testing, as under the Act the Board of Education was compelled to consult the school committee when making an appointment. To send along the qualifications of only one candidate was not consulting the Committee. The Committee felt that it was not the intention of the Act. Section 55 stated the Board should send not less than four names to the Comtimtee. The Board took that t-o mean only two, three or four, but not more than four. Another clause in the Act read : “Provided that if applications have been invited the Board shall send all the names of all who applied, together with their applications and qualifications. 5 Iho Board sent along the name of the applicant who stood highest on the list, but there might he others among the applicants who stood equally high and the Committee would know nothing about their qualifications. They simply got the one name and had no choice, yet the Act stated definitely “no appointment, suspension, or dismissal shall take place until the Committee has been consulted.” The Committee resolved, unanimously to support- the decision of their predecessors.