XVII TECHNICAL EDUCATION 441 



in small places, where there are few persons who 

 take an interest in these things, you will have 

 very remarkable projects put forth, and in that 

 case the sole court of appeal for those taxpayers, 

 who did not approve of such projects, would be a 

 court of law. I suppose the judges would have to 

 settle what is technical education. That would not 

 be an edifying process, I think, and certainly it 

 would be a very costly one. The other alternative 

 is the principle adopted in the bill of last year now 

 abandoned. I don't say whether the bill was right 

 or wrong in detail. I am dealing now only with 

 the principle of the bill, which appears to me to 

 have been very often misunderstood. It has been 

 said that it gave the whole of technical education 

 into the hands of the Science and Art Department. 

 It appears to me nothing could be more unfound- 

 ed than that assertion. All I understand the Gov- 

 ernment proposed to do was to provide some au- 

 thority who should have power to say in case any 

 scheme was proposed, " "Well, this comes within the 

 four corners of the Act of Parliament, work it as 

 you like; " or if it was an obviously questionable 

 project, should take upon itself the responsibility 

 of saying, " No, that is not what the Legislature 

 intended; amend your scheme." There was no 

 initiative, no control; there was simply this power 

 of giving authority to decide upon the meaning of 

 the Act of Parliament to a particular department 

 of the State, whichever it might be; and it seems 



