1878 — Page 222

sed principles, it is high time to alter those

ales and make them stricter throughout. If this done, there will then be no reason to reduce

e value of passes which otherwise would seem ir too high for the requirements of schools giving

ernncular tenching only.

There have been many complaints in the course

the year on the part of managers of higher hools, giving not merely vernacular teaching,

at a European Education with or without Chi- se teaching in addition, as to the comparatively nl value of passes in such expensive schools here English is taught in houses the rental of hich is very high, and where the teaching

arer has to be procured from England at great.

st. There is certainly a great disproportion in

e value of passes allotted to ordinary vernacular

to high class English schools, which might The whole Grunt-in-aid ll be remedied.

hrc, introduced but as a tentative measure, quires revision also with a view to enable those ntestant and Roman Catholic schools of the lony which at present find themselves prevent-

partaking of the benefits of this, in its leading inciples, excellent scheme. One great objection the requirement of 200 daily attendances of 4 ars ench at secular instruction. There are other objections to the Grant-in-aid stem. The greatest in my own mind, and ich I have never heard any one mention yet, this. that hitherto the Grant-in-aid system bas tirely failed to gain for itself the appreciation of native community. I know of 58 schools kept d paid by Chinese residents, and if we add the ht schools for English teaching, the number schools, all secular schools, kept by the Chinese mmunity will searcely be found to fall short of a mired. Nevertheless there is not one such wml, inanared by Chinese, uncler the Grant-in- scheme. The reason is not that the Chinese ject to take the money of the Government, nor ukl they object to take the money on the basis a strict examination by competent examiners the end of the year. What they object to is amount of official interference the scheine plies and the complicated set of conditions by ich it is hedgerk in, A scheme like the Inter-

dinte Education Act (Ireland) for 1878, which

also based on the principle of payment for ults in secular teaching, but has none of the cinus meddlesomeness of the Hongkong ee, would be far more likely, in my opinion, in the sympathy of all classes of the con- mity and stimulate education with true in- tiality and genuine liberality by enlisting der its banner in harmonious emulation the divided camps of secular and religious edu

ionists of the Colony, the native as well as the eign schools on the whole island.

I have the honour to be,

Sir,

Your most obedient Servant,

* Honourable W. H. MARSIL,

Colonial Secretary, So fer Sec.

+

E. J. EITEL,

Acting Inspector of Schools.

鐘須

文考實是太

門悅

書此人

文而不教英 點鐘之久

老所最不悅之事乃限定每學童在一年之 享此極妙之益者亦來同享焉彼咻咻不已 間須讀教門外之書,百日而每日又要四 此可比高壇楜幟使現在 別意欲位天主教耶穌教二教之書館 現未 七十六年埃國有中經書館之教例或是體貼甄別獎賞格致之法且無香港之法度管轄

歎只爲教華 原立甄別輔義學己法初欲試驗耳有 財該獎賞之 書咁受獎賞H法一律無異似此實有 木合 為此獎賞之法查其故非因華人不樂紫國家之恩賞亦非不悅歲秒時受諳練之人甄別其 之處故或可將甄別獎賞之法稍爲變易也 徒所不悅者乃此式內钊括官衙尅核事宜太多及許多瑣尾章程範圍此式也於一千八百

獎賞之項否

則不用減少 此上等之書館受獎賞與尋常只教華文之 歲嘖有鱗言似嫌獎賞之薄自1 書館請英 照歐洲教法增以教習華文者該館教師去 若如是而行 輔與義學中有上等書館不但教習華文乃 獎賞甄別輔翼館之式尙有別端爲其鄙論而其中至大之端乃照做監院意見又未嘗閱人 人教師教習英文而言彼實頗多費用而使 八間若加以夜館教習英文及教恪發之學者當有百間之數但書館若此之多亦無一間 說及者卽此獎賞輔翼館之圖未得本港華民知其貴重照蔽監院所知民間書館不下五十

之難此式或可合香港英民華民之心如此之法斷無偏視實以厚心鼓舞教訓學童之事因 對敵格致教門之二營即本港英民華民一切書館可以同在

幟下合爲一指和鼓舞突