PREFATORY NOTE TO THE TWENTY-FOURTH VOLUME.
The Contents of this Volume are of an unusual character. Not only
does it contain the records of the Educational events of the years 1871-1872,
but also a voluminous Correspondence, greatly condensed, of a very per-
emptory, and thinly veiled, censorious character, which took place in the
latter year, between leading Members of the Government, the Council of
Public Instruction and the Chief Superintendent of Education.
In that Correspondence the proceedings of the Council of Public
Instruction were called in question, and the "Statutory Authority" of its
Acts and Regulations demanded and insisted upon. In more than one
instance were these Acts and Regulations disallowed by Order of the Lieu-
tenant-Governor-in-Council; but, what was entirely unusual in Govern-
ment affairs, the directions and recommendation to School Trustees, of the
Chief Superintendent of Education were treated in the same manner.
So strong was the feeling of irritation caused by this unusual and
arbitrary course on the part of the Government, that the Council of Public
Instruction decided to petition the Legislature against the injustic of such
proceedings, and claimed that the explanatory defence of its Acts and
Regulations, which it had made to individual Members of the Government
should be laid before the House of Assembly, and thus made public. The
Chief Superintendent also sought permission; under the authority of the
School Law, to submit the question of the legality of his proceedings to a
Judge of one of the Superior Courts of Law. This right was denied him,
as had been the request to make public the defence of the Council of Public
Instruction.
Thus, while the Government of the day allowed neither the Chief
Superintendent of Education, nor the Council of Public Instruction any
freedom, or discretion, in framing Instructions and Regulations in carry-
ing out the provisions of the comprehensive School Law of 1871, it per-
sistently refused to allow either party thus treated an opportunity to put
the public in possession of the facts of the case from their standpoint.
The object of such an arbitrary proceeding on the part of the Govern-
ment does not appear, but it was felt at the time to indicate a clear case
of "want of confidence" in both the Chief Superintendent of Education and
the Council of Public Instruction.