HC Deb 02 February 1891 vol 349 cc1522-3
MR. CALDWELL (Glasgow, St Rollox)

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether it is the case, as stated by the School Board of Ardchattan and Muckairn, that on 26th January last there were only 19 children on the roll of the Episcopal school, and only 13 in actual attendance that day, four of these being the children of the teacher recently appointed, who came to the district about a month ago, whilst the School Board had been informed that one of the 19 had gone to the Board school; and upon what authority was the statement made in the communication by the Secretary of the Scotch Education Department to the School Board of 22nd ult., that "there are 38 children on the school register of the Episcopal school?"

MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSON

The School Board of Ardchattan and Muckairn, in a letter of 27 January, state the attendance at the Episcopal School as it is given in the question of the hon. Member. My Lords have no further information in regard to this; but I may point out that the decision of the Department to recognise the school was based upon the statements before them at the time when that decision was arrived at. In May, 1890, the promoters of the school stated that there were 38 on the registers; and in July of the same year the School Board returned the number as 40. The letter of the Secretary of the Scotch Education Department of 22 January did not make the statement referred to in the question. The words of the letter are as follows:— It was distinctly asserted—and in regard to this the extract from the minutes of your Board proves the existence of a discrepancy which ought easily to be cleared up—that there are 38 children on the school registers of the Episcopal School instead of the 16 named by your Board. The hon. Member has thus, I presume through inadvertence, omitted the substantive part of the sentence from which he quotes, and his question thus seems to ascribe to the Secretary of the Department an assertion which, on the face of that sentence, was not made by him, but was cited by him as showing the existence of a discrepancy which ought easily to be cleared up.

Forward to