I. J. \Y. WHITE,

29

1.—13 a.

have one Inspector in Blenheim. If the Hoard were at Nelson not only would at least six days a month of the members and Inspectors' lime he taken up, but the expenses would have to be paid by the Department. The members would have to travel a good deal over the country to get even a smattering of information in regard to the outlying localities, and even then the efficiency of the present system could not be maintained. Nelson as the centre would be quite impracticable as to the time occupied in getting there and back as well as the question of expense. As 1 have said, it will always lie necessary to have al least one Inspector in Blenheim, but/, if a week out of every month is taken up by going to Nelson, more than one Inspector would be wanted for the Marl borough work. The cost of inspection and administration would be much increased if the Board was abolished, and the efficiency of tin- work impaired. The natural features of the country suggest that the west coast, with its railways from the Otira mountains to Nelson, should either be worked from Nelson or a centre on thai coast, while ihe limits of the district containing the cast coast ami Sounds should not cross the dividing range separating Marlborough from Nelson. I can discover no other purpose in the change than ihai of giving teachers a greater scope for promotion. This our Board recognises is essential to the efficiency of education ; but by giving the Genera] Council, or the Minister on the Council's advice, the appointment of teachers, after reference to the Committees, the object would be completely attained instead of only partially as under the Bill as it now stands. Our teachers do not go to Nelson for promotion, but two of our Inspectors have come from Nelson. Most of our teachers come from the North Island, but that is not reciprocated. 3. Does not your information come from your Inspectors?—No, not entirely from the Inspector. The Inspector has over one hundred schools to visit, and we rely to a great extent upon ihe Board members. 4. Mr. Poland.] Your Board is unanimous in objecting to the abolition of 'he present Board?— Yes, quite unanimous. 5. Mr. Hainan.] Can you tell me how many children are attending your High School? — One hundred and twenty. 6. And how many teachers? —The principal, Dr. Innes, ami four others. None of them are below the grade of M.A.. and one M.A.. M.Sc. 7. What is the cost of running the High School.'—About £1,414, exclusive of expenditure on buildings. 8. Would it follow that if your Board is wiped out the small schools would be closed?—No, but their efficiency would be very much impaired, and that is most important. 9. In what way would the efficiency of the- school suffer by reason of the Board being abolished?— Because a Board al such a great distance away as Nelson or Wellington would not get sufficient information. 10. What kind of information? —The information relating to the small schools and tinlocalities. 11. Could not this informal ion you refer lo be obtained through tin- Inspector.' Yes, Inn it would not lie obtained it would be done wit hunt. to the detriment of education. 12. How often do the members of the Board visit those localities?-—! do not know. One of our prominent members has a residence in the Sounds, and he is up and down Queen Charlotte Sound very frequently. 13. What is the special information regarding a school which is necessary for its administration which cannot be obtained from the Inspector? -There is very little except that the Inspector could not be there as often as the members of the Board. You would require two Inspectors instead of one. I he Inspector visits each country school twice a year, and only on urgent matters could he make an additional visit. He would not have time with the means of travelling available. 14. Would you not prefer that your district be associated with Canterbury.' No. I think it would be absurd. 15. You prefer Nelson; —No, 1 think that would lie preposterous. 16. Would you prefer Wellington?—lf it were necessary. If the Marlborough Disti ; et were abolished it would be leSs detrimental to our small schools to attach us to Wellington fnan to either Nelson or Canterbury. 17. In the event of a change or alteration, what is your choice so far as being associated with any particular Board is concerned?— Certainly Wellington. It is not open to question. IS. If that is so. how comes it that you make such a strong point about the supervision of your schools when yon really desire a Board at a greater distance than Nelson to supervise you ?— It is not the distance —it is the time it takes to get there and back : it is the accessibility. 19. What is the objection to Canterbury? —That it is too far off. You would have to go to Wellington and then take the steamer to Lyttelton. 20. In what way is the education of tin- children of your district going to suffer if the change is made!—By all Ihe circumstances that have been detailed. Ami many of the schools arc difficult to get to and from, as well as expensive. 21. You recognise that your cost of administration per cent, is pretty high?— Yes. but the cause of that is that there are so many little schools. There are forty-two grade () schools and 190 children attending them. 22. And the average is what?— 4.4. 23. What large schools have you in your electorate?— Our largest school is at Blenheim, and the average attendance is over 500. The next is Picton, with an attendance of 239. 24. How many schools have you in your district with an average attendance of over 200?— Two—Picton and Blenheim. 25. Are you satisfied with the boundaries as they are?— Yes.