Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Merthyr Times and Dowlais Times and Aberdare Echo

The copyright status or ownership of this resource is unknown.
Hide Articles List

13 articles on this Page

Advertising

[No title]

!ABERAMAN.

CWMAMAN.

MOUNTAIN ASH.

SENGHENYDD.

Advertising

l TROEDYRHIW.

Advertising

ICorrespondence.

News
Cite
Share

I Correspondence. THE ABERDARE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE TEACHERS. In the Tarian y Giccithiwr for the20thinstant there appears a paragraph with the above heading. A portion of it has reference to the Aberdare Scnool Board, to which I will refer further on in this letter. It was with great surprise that I read, m your last issue, your report of the A)>crdare School Board. .How the Board think that their school teachers exist passes my comprehension. The air and surroundings of Sweet Berdar are believed to be very health-giving I know, but then the Aberdare School Board ought to consider that even school teachers cannot exist on air alone, however good it be. Their School Management Committee have long sat on this salary scheme, and after a few months sitting they have hatched—what? Absolutely noth- ing. The Board must not think that thev are so very economical after all, for they can afford to give some of their teachers, who are utterly worthless, a magni- ficent salary compared with their teaching abilities. Again, other teachers who do work, and in fact are the main props of the schools, get a mere pittance. .Aow, I think it would be quite as economical if the Board gave to the deserving teachers a good and reasonable salary, and to their undeserving, listless political, and armsfolding teachers a mere acknow- ledgement 1 urther than that. I think the Board should con- sider the following qucation :—Why should head. maliters in various schools under their control get £ 120 a year for doing next to nothing, while the poor assistants, who drudge and toil and earn the grant for them, get only from £ 35 to JB60 a year? Yes, I venture to ask, why should these gentlemen be paid for what their assistants do? I consider one of the remarks in your last issue s little rough, Mr. Editor. You said that to "get worse results than those of the Aberdare Schools, one must go to remote rural schools managed by a parson." Now, I do not wish to praise such schools or otherwise, but I have known and visited dozens of remote rural schools. In Cardiganshire, the schools maintained by the Church and managed by parsons are able to compete with any of the Aberdare Schools which are maintained by the ratepayers. Yes, those small schools, sir, though remote and rural, would scorn to be classed with such schools as those of the Aberdare Board. Now the writer m the Tarfon, after arguing with himself or his shadow, whether clergymen are friends of education or not, comes to the conclusion that clergmen generally do their best to lower the standard of education, directly or indirectly. To get the public to believe thia extraordinary statement of his, he quotes one example, the London School Board. From the reading of his letter we are led to suppose that he has various other examples, but for want cf space or something he justifies his saying by alluding to what *i J 1 the last meeting of the A!>erdare School Board—the Board of Boards He condemns the action ,,f the Rev. H. R.Johnson, lowell, B.A., in opposing the motion of Mr Heppell, but with regard to the Rev. W. James, a Methodist minister, who has done exactly the same thing as the above-named clergy- men, no comment is made. Is tho writer a Metho- dist? He tries to make out that these gentlemen opposed an increase in the salary of their teachers, but that idea is monstrous. The question before the Board was not the salary question, but a question as to the ability of the members of the School Manage- ment Committee. I acknowledge that great praise is due to Mr. Heppell for his efforts on behalf of the teachers, but really I think that Mr. Heppell ought to give the usual notice of motion for the next meeting. when 1 am certain that one, if not two of the clerical members would back him UIJ. Furthermore, this writer says that if these two clerics had backed Mr. Heppell's motion, it would have been carried. That is as plain as A B C, but does he not think that the votes of the Rev. W. James and Mr. W. Charles would have the same effect ? Again, he tries to have a snap at the National Schools in the Aberdare parish. It is only a waste of the gentleman's time and paper, for the National Schools in this parish speak for themselves. They are known (especially one of them) throughout the length and breadth of "Dear Old Wales." The National Schools, though they teach God's Word, and not only some creeds, as he thinks, find no difficulty in reaching as high, if not a higher standard than some Board Schools we know of. Trusting the gentleman will have less apathy towards clericals as educationalists, and apologising for the space I have taken,-I remain, etc., JACK. TEMPERANCE AT CEFN. SIR,-Of all contributions that I have ever known to appear in the press, I have never seen anything so vague nnd baseless as that which appeared in your last issue of the Times, and Apparently written by Mr. M. I;. Price. I am prepared to make great allowance in consideration of the very high pressure of fever heat that he labours under. It is well under- stood that he has given up the main question at issue, viz., tho right of the committee to appoint whoever they had a mind to to the chairmanshipof the Plenydd meeting also that there is no icason whatever "hv the Rev. J. H. Davies should not he granted the honour. In my last letter I repeatedlv :1!'kpd, why not Mr. Davies?" But not once has M. L. P. and Co. attempted a reply. Why ? Because they have no reason but what arises from hatred and jealousy, as I have stated from the first, mainly because they, forsooth were not consulted in the matter. And rather than abide where he should (as he so unwi.ely liegan this quarrel) he wanders all over the country to smoking-rooms" and public- houses," &e. What has fill that to do with the chair- manship of the meeting? Ridiculous. I should not take any more notice of him had lie not introduced matter into the discussion, though irrelevant, which may, if left unnoticed, lead to mis- chief in other quarter". In your issue of the 6th inst., in denouncing the committee for selecting Mr. Daviesas chairman of the meeting, he says: Why not choose-Mr. M. Owen or Mr. Jacob Thomas," &e. He pretended to be much interested in the welfare of the above two gentlemen. But, xir. may I ask what has occurred since ? Have M. L. P. and Co. thrown the above two gentlemen overboard already ? Who is the pet this time? Neither of the above, but Dr. Rees. Ah, how is it that Morgan did not mention the doctor's name sooner? What business has he to mention this gentleman's name at this stage ot the discussion? I have as much respect for Dr. Rees as anyone at the said meeting, but Price and his crew knows perfectly well, as has been many times stated, that the chairman of the meeting was appointed by the committee previous to the night of the lecture, which they had a perfect right to do. And it is well known that Dr. Rees was not a memher of that com- mittee, and who knew whether or not he would be present at tho meeting? I am sure, sir, that Dr. Kees is far ab jve being troubled about such trifles. Price, as soon as ho discovered that his assumed love for the Rev. Jacob Thomas and Mr. M. Owen had failed in its object, threw them on one side, and took up Dr. Rees instead. I am sure your readers will understand his little game in doing so, but, like all other little games of the sort, 1 they turn out miserable failures, and in his despair, he flees to his last and only refuge, to "Moriah Chapel," where (he says) are n.en of moral backbone," in whose hands he says he is willing to leave his case." Worse still,"arc we to understand that what ho means is that he confides in the loading •(?) men (or some of them) of that church to defend and approve of his attacks on respectable members of various churches, and two deacons of this very church, all of them men of unquestioned reputation? Is it possibe that this church will shield him? It is well known, Mr. Editor, that in time gone by (and not so very long ago), the church at Moriah would not tolerate such conduct for a moment. It was looked up to by I many as a model church for rigid discipline; but alas if we are to take for granted what we are told by Mr. Priee, what a change I am nrompted to rejieat the question of old, Pa Fodd y Owy;ni>odd y Cedyrn ? How are the Mighty Fallen ? Is there not a remnant of the good old stock left ? Are there no men of valour that will yet st-md up for the dignity of the sacred cause ? I hope so, and I most earnestly appeal to all that remain true to their professions to see that this "Cyhuddwr y brodyr" has his due meted out to him, even, if necessary, to the extent of handing him over to Satan, that he may teach him not to blaspheme." Who are those broken reeds on whom ho puts reliance? It is certain that the two accused deacons, Messrs. Peters and Edwards, are not reckoned upon. There are but four deacons What about the other two? Time will tell. I am personally acquainted with many of the "members of the church, and, to their credit, I must say, they disapprove very much of Price's conduct. In conclusion, I beg to state that what I have written is in defence ot what is right, independently of all parties and" cliques," and, as testified by "Hen Lane" in your last issue, my statements are true and correct.—Yours, &c., JUSTICE. A BUTTER CASE AT CAERPHILLY. At the Caerphilly Police-court, on Tuesday, before Alderman Anthony, Captain Lindsay, Messrs. E. Owen, H. P. D. Phillips, Jonathan' Edward?" E. Edwards, and Dr. Leigh, Mr. W. D. Richards, grocer, of Caerphilly, was summoned at the instance of Inspector George Roberts, under section six of the lood and Drugs Act, 1875 for selling butter which contained 21 per cent. of water.—Mr. David Lewis appeared for the defence.Inspector Koberts said that he purchased on Tuesday, the 14th ult., half-a- ^U-i i ^utter at Mr. Richards' .shop. He divided the butter into three small parts, and told tho assistant ho would take it to be analysed. The assistant replied that he would find the sample all- right as it had been guaranteed as first Cork. The inspector then labelled and sealed the samples. Ho gave one to the assistant, kept one, and sent the third to the public analyst. The analysis read as follows — "County of Glamorgan. To Inspector George Roberts,—I, the undersigned, public analyst for the county of Glamoigan. do hereby certify that I received on the 16tli day of Jauuarv, 1896, 'from vou per post a sample of butter marked No. 44 G for analysitand have analysed the same, and declare the result of my analysis to be as follows; 1 am of opinion that the sauieisa sample of genuine butter, but contain ing 21 per cent, of water, which amount is ece^ive Jn cros-examination by Mr. 1). Lewis, Inspector Roberts admitted that the sample left with Mr. Richards' ass,stant had not been marked ill accordance with the Act. (J pou this admission beino- made, the Bench dismissed the case.—Mr. Lewis stated that his client Would waive the objection and proceed will) the case on its merits, but the Bench refused to let it proceed. It may be remarked, in justice to Mr. Richards, that his solicitor, Mr. Lewis, had procured an independent analyst of the butter, which gave the percentage: at 19*73. Ho was also prepared with expert exideiicc to show that this pereentage was not fraudulent.

[No title]

[No title]

Advertising