51
20
I
agree
MINUTE BY DR. EITEL.
REGI 24 NOV 23
with the leading ideas of the Draft Report of the Education Commission. but I have to make the following reservations :-----
1. To remove the misunderstanding which appears still to cling to the question of the five schools referred to in paragraphs 1, 2, and 5 of the above Report, I think it should be stated that what was originally proposed by myself, approved by the Members of the Legislative Council and sanctioned by Her Majesty's Government, was not the establish- ment of five new schools, but merely the erection of five new buildings for schools then and now existing, in lieu of the insanitary and educationally unsuitable buildings for which the Government pays high rent.
2. In the localities originally proposed for these five new buildings there is suitable building ground available without purchase, viz
at Shekt'ongtsui, where, close to the Shekt'ongtsui Market, there is vacant Crown
land, at present used for a rope walk by squatters,
at Saiyingp'ún, where, near to the present schools, close to the Civil Hospital, the foundations for a new school building were actually laid and still remain as they were when the building was stopped, and where, if this ground should be required for other purposes, there is another lot of vacant Crown land close by, equally suitable for the purpose, as also Inland Lot No. 688 near to the Diocesan School, in the same locality,
at Háwán, where the site of the Eastern Market is available.
at Yaumati, where the Government reserved a piece of ground expressly for the
purpose of a Government School, and finally
at Stanley, where there is abundance of vacant Crown land close to the village.
3. It should further be clearly stated that the erection of these five new buildings for schools already existing is demanded by sanitary and educational considerations entirely unconnected with the Central School, and that the connection into which the proposed erection of these five buildings has been brought with questions concerning the Central School, is not only forced and arbitrary, serving no good purpose, but negatived by the situation and nature of the schools for which these five buildings were intended.
4. I am of opinion that the existing schools, when supplied with new buildings, also with a properly trained staff, and after introducing English teaching in all of them,--mea- sures which require many years,--would usefully serve to relieve the purely preparatory classes of the Central School of the pressure now felt and likely to continue, but, in view of the evidence taken on the subject, it seems clear that they could not advantageonsly take the place of the Central School.
5. Apart from the erection of new buildings for schools already existing, I do not think it desirable to establish any new Government schools at all. I am clearly of opinion that there is at present no need for any such new schools to be established by the Govern- ment, as the Grant-in-Aid system is capable of supplying all such needs, though the existing Government schools require to be improved and in some of them English teaching may advantageously be introduced in future years when trained native Masters are available. 6. As regards the question of raising the Central School into a Collegiate Institution, with paragraph 3 of the Report, but I think it should be added that, though the time has not yet come for establishing a Collegiate Institution, it is probable that in future years it will be found desirable to extend the Central School in that direction; wherefore regard should be paid to such a contingency in drawing up the plans of the new Central School buildings in such a manner as not to obstruct such an extension at any future time.
I
agree