LADY MOSTYN AND REV. MEURIG JONES. To the Editor of the Prestatyn Weekly." DEAR SIR,-My attention has been called r:to a mis-statement in Mr Meurig Jones' letter wherein he says "I understand that the trustees insist that two of these Sisters be appointed and acknowledged as head and as- sistant mistresses by the County Council before the school is handed back as a non- provided school." This is quite inaccurate. Miss Wood alone is undertaking the elemen- tary school, as Sister Teresa has engaged to teach several private families. The French ladies are absolutely incapable of teaching the school: They can't speak English. Again, The first duty of these teachers, I believe, is to their Church, and secondary to the State. Primary to saturate the minds of the children with the principles and in- fluences of Roman Catholicism (I don't say to proselyte them formally) secondary to give them secular education." This is .equally untrue. Their first duty in reference to the children committed to their care is to teach them as perfectly as they know how. To the Roman Catholics alone are they bound io give dogmatic instruction to the non- Catholics it would be an absolute breach of their conscience to bear any influence on their religious convictions, and entirely dis- honourable to the spirit of the conscience clause which Catholics are bound to loyally respect in obedience to their own superiors. Now as to the Order" which those un- acquainted with our affairs affect to believe confers the right of ministry on these ladies. Nothing can be more untrue. They have no power to administer the sacraments. What their Order strictly entails on them is ex- ceeding charity to their neighbour, the care of the sick and poor, and poverty of spirit and holiness of life in the highest degree. In any case the discussion of their private life and aims is in the worst possible taste. Much is spoken of the ratepayers building these three new schools. Take away Sir Pyers', The Colliery, and the Quarry rates, and I fear the total of the rest will not main- tain two schools in Gwespyr, not to speak of the salaries of the other five schools. The rights of the majority of the parents and 81 children in Gwespyr are unthought of in all this futile agitation. Where would these children be if the Talacre doors were closed ? Certainly not in the Gwespyr School, where there is no accommodation for them.-Yours faithfully, ANNA M. MOSTYN.
GWESPYR SCHOOL: A REJOINDER. To the Editor of the" Prestatyn Weekly." SIR, —Mr W.Bulcock feels it his duty to make a "few observations" in the Prestatyn Weekly for last week on my letter which appeared in the previous issue. He describes the letter as inaccurato in its statements and misleading as a whole." That is a very promising beginning for some destructive work on the letter; one would expect some stubborn facts and demonstrative proofs to substantiate such drastic assertions. Mr Bulcock thinks that throwing some abusive terms at, and imputing bad motives to, the author of the letter is the better method of proving the inaccuracy of its statements." Few, I believe, even of his own friends will appreciate such work. Let me inform Mr Bulcock plainly, if he can point out any "inaccurate" or "mis- leading statement in my letter, it will afford me as much pleasure to either justify or withdraw it as it did to write it at first. So far we have had nothing from him but words, assertions, and no evidence. Mr Bulcock pretends to answer the question Should the Gwespyr School be stopped ?" by the query Should it ever have been opened ?" The writer I suppose considers that a very masterful answer. Your readers, I presume, consider it—to use Mr Bulcock's classical term-a rather naive method of answering. If he were to read my letter again, and put a little more thought and less imagination in his reading, he will find, I hope, a better answer. Mr Bulcock invites his readers to follow him into the matter. The matter of Mr Meurig Jones's letter one would expect, but behold he misses the matter and plunges into the mud, a creation of own, and throws handsful of it at myself and the supporters of Gwespyr School. Mr Bulcock's reference to the meeting held at Talacre Arms is important. That meeting was held about the end of December, 1905. Whether he represents the convenors of that meeting and supporters of the new school, as being one and the same persons, accurately, concerns them alone. This is the statement I would call your attention to. Mr Bulcock writes It was unanimously decided (at that meeting) that Sir Pyers and Lady Mostyn should continue to carry on the Tatacre Schools as heretofore. Sir Pyers and Lady Mostyn agreed to do so." By heretofore I understand, as the Talacre Schools had been carried on since the Educa- tion Act of 1902 came into power, i.e., a non- provided public elementary school in the true sense of the term. Now does Mr Bulcock seriously mean to tell us that Sir Pyers and Lady Mostyn AGREED to carry on the schools in that sense of the term ? If that had been the case no one, I believe, would have thought of opening and supporting a new school at Gwespyr. How will Mr Bulcock reconcile his state- ment with the following resolution passed at the manager's meeting on the 20th October, 1905, at Talacre Hall: The school to be given up to the trustees to be by them man- aged at the expense of Sir Pyers and Lady Mostyn as a private certified elementary school instead of as a public elementary school as here- tofore ? When Mr Bulcock had the imprudence-to use no stronger term-of accusing me of perverting facts," I cannot but think that his own statements were uppermost in his mind at the time. Of the" darts" and arrows he refers to I defy Mr Bulcock, or anyone else, to prove that I have said anything, in public or in the press, disrespectful of Talacre School or the Roman Catholics, I wish and want the Roman Catholics to have their rights, but not to have our children. If Mr Bulcock is unable to distinguish between dust and facts it is not my fault. Whether this is a "question of rates" or otherwise depends on the man himself. Mr Bulcock seems to put more value on a penny in the rates than on political and religious freedom, rights and privileges. The 135 ratepayers who voted at Ffynnongroew for the Gwespyr School seem to be much higher bidders for principles than this gentleman. "That I have tried to set the different denominations and churches at variance is untrue. I have done my best to secure to the children of Gwespyr the same Educa- tional treatment as all other children of England and Wales get. Peace with honour is worth fighting for. To be spoken against, for doing my duty to the children that are partly under my care, by Mr Bulcock, will not dishearten me. I would rather be a dis- turbing brook than a quiet pool. Unless Mr Bulcock shows better capacity to appreciate facts, principles, and honour, I must treat any further contribution of his as unworthy of my notice.—Yours, etc., Llanasa. D. MEURIG JONES. Printed and Published by J. T. Burrows, Prestatyn, in the County of Flint.