It is therefore considered that for the present no formal provision should be made for exactly defining either the mode of appointing local committees, or their functions and powers when appointed, but that until this can be done in a manner calculated to secure good results, a certain discretion should be left to the Central Board, in the organization of local bodies, on the single condition that they are so constituted as most effectually to represent local interest.

On this view of the case it will suffice shortly to mention one or two general principles, which, as appears to the Commission, should govern this preliminary organization, and which should at the same time lead naturally to the development of some more complete and more definite system to be eventually established by law.

In the first place the persons composing the local committee should not only be interested generally in the welfare of the locality, but also specially in the efficiency of the school. No better means of effecting this object appears to present itself than to make the selection of the local committee, more especially the work of the parents whose children attend school, at least to give a certain exceptional weight and influence to these, without however excluding the voice of the general public. It is a question worth consideration whether it would not be practicable to disqualify altogether persons of notoriously immoral character.

The experience of systems which afford any test of the matter seems to shew that the supervision and control of a school requires special tastes and aptitudes, and that bodies perfectly competent to manage ordinary matters are not necessarily capable of giving beneficial assistance in this work.

In South Australia, for instance, where the district councils appointed for general purposes of the locality discharge, together with their other duties, that of supervising the local schools, the plan seems in this latter respect to have failed very conspicuously in the opinion of those most competent to form a correct judgment. In Canada also, and in some of the American States, where the local oversight of schools is entrusted to the municipal authorities, the same result seems to have followed.

Immediately on the establishment of a new school, it should follow as a matter of course that the whole power over it should be at once transferred to the local committee, subject only to such necessary and clearly prescribed control by the Central Board as should prevent confusion or abuse.

The appointment of masters, for instance, should vest in the local committee, but the choice should be restricted to persons holding a certificate of competency from the Board.

With a view of placing the master in a proper position of independence, and in order to guard against his being made the victim of party strife, the sanction of the Board should be obtained to his dismissal, or to any alteration of salary once fixed. All money available for the school should be administered by the local committee, who on their part should be bound to furnish proper vouchers for the expenditure.

The local committee would have the absolute control of the school site and school buildings. They would fix the rate of fees, and generally have the whole management as well as moral control of the school.

For the present it would appear sufficient that on the establishment of a new school the Board should make the best arrangements in its power, either by means of a public meeting or otherwise, for effecting the appointment of some local organization possessing the general confidence of the locality, to whom it could at once delegate the power of deciding any of the numerous questions of detail which must necessarily arise, in accordance with the views of those most interested in the school.

On the opening of every new school a question of this sort would in many cases be almost certain to arise—that, namely, whether the building should be used on Sundays for the purposes of Divine service; if so, under what conditions? Should it be open to all denominations, or should this advantage be only afforded to one? If to more than one, then what part of the day should be allotted to each respectively? It would be very inexpedient that the Board should mix itself up in discussions of this nature, or that any uniform rule should be laid down in the matter. One course might be best in one locality, the opposite course in another. There seems to be no objection in principle to either. Moreover, there is another objection to the Board deciding in this particular case. It is rather a religious than an educational question, and, as already stated, no element should be introduced into the system which should in any way conflict with the purely secular character of the Board. As a purely secular body, the only consistent course the Board could take, if called upon to come to a decision, would be to forbid the use of the building for purposes not forming part of the direct work of the school.

III.—FINANCE.

In considering the financial arrangements, the first question which presents itself is: By what rule is the amount of the expenditure to be determined at any given time? It is obvious that the department of education is one which, in order to provide for the wants of a population so rapidly on the increase as that of this province, must expand and develop itself with far greater rapidity than any other department of the public service. The actual experience of the expenditure in this province will give a general idea of the rate at which the wants increase.

It appears that the whole expenditure during the five years ending 31st March last was £25,862, and of this more than half was expended in the last two years, and more than a third during the last year. For the first of these years the expenditure was £3850, for the last it was £8400. During that time the sum received in the shape of fees rose from £1350 to £2950, the remainder being supplied by the Government grant.