from Singapore or Australia) they cannot get Chinese employment without a fair knowledge of
Dr Eitel admits being pleased with two and even three of the Chinese Assistants as teachers of English. If Cheung Tzoi, Lo Cheung Shun and Wong Fan had not sought employment elsewhere for increased salary, I feel confident that he would have admitted six out of ten were equally capable. The rest have been rapidly promoted during the last eighteen months on account of the transfer to other departments of the above three.
In Minute C.D.E.F. of my N° 89 I have dealt with many of the questions raised in this paragraph.
Chinese boys have always for the last thirty years had several years of education before coming to the Victoria College.
The disparity of age is a matter not under the Head Master's control. Surely Dr Eitel does not seriously propose to classify boys by age instead of attainments. If so, boys who have not learnt the alphabet would be sitting in the Upper School, and youngsters at the top of the school would be sent below. I can only refer to my letter N° 91 of 1892 which His Excellency forwarded to the Secretary of State on the grotesque exaggeration of teaching A B C to the upper classes over again.
Dr Eitel merely states that "the elementary English and the elementary Chinese teaching of the school are unsatisfactory" but gives no proof or any intimation on what this is based. In Minute B of my letter I have shown conclusively that elementary education is fostered and promoted.
The Local Examinations were introduced in December 1886, since when in his Annual Reports published 1887, 88, 89, 90 (Vide Enclosure B in my letter N° 91/92 to the Secretary of State) Dr Eitel continued to praise the organization and method of this College. As he fails to point out what recent alteration has made Local Examinations more injurious during the last three years than in the previous five, I cannot be expected to provide an elaborate defence of a system which is approved and encouraged in most British Colonies.
Dr Eitel is pleased to admire the pertinacity with which the Head Master continues to work on "in the face of manifest failure, and in the old traditional groove." "Manifest failure" is an unsupported statement; how it can be considered appropriately applied to an Institution which provides all the best Chinese clerks, compradores, besides men in the Colony supplying the Colonial and Chinese Imperial Service is a question I am unable to answer. I do not "adhere slavishly to" the old traditional groove but I must see the distinct advantage of any new theoretical scheme before I can honestly recommend its adoption. My motto has always been "Onward." In 1889 Dr Eitel wrote in his report that Govt Central School "is developing its educational resources steadily from year to year.