NATiVi; r.DlH ATlo.N IN Till-: TKANSKl-:!. 467 



liii^hcr standards. lUu in n\\ cxporiciKX' of the i)resc'nl svslcni 

 I have ohserved a,:^ain and again h iw an imperfect understandiivj^ 

 of the hm^uage in which the chihh'cn were taught led to an 

 imperfect and inacciu-atc Ivnowledge of the suhjects taught 

 through that hmunagc. LhiUh-en came to lose interest in the 

 reachng they did not understand, and so in ])lace of learning hy 

 understanding they committed large i-arts of the reading Ijook 

 to memory, and once started (^i'f they ap])eareil to read, hut 

 really recited the passa'^e : and niucli of wha: tliev did nianag.^ 

 to read they did not in the least understand. 



Surely it would he far l)etter to allow them to he taught 

 throughout in the vernacular, retainino- luiglish as a suliject — 

 as an important suhject. It is far better to educate the natives 

 soundly rather than to gi\e them a thin coat of English paint; 

 and if luiglish is of such essential importance to them, why is 

 not the other official language of the Union equallv imi)ortant? 



The fact is that the languages of the Union might with at 

 least equal pro])riety be trilingual. With a native population of 

 some seven millions as compared with a white ])opulation of one 

 and a (juarter millions, the native language should have its right- 

 ful place; and surely, if anywhere, its rightful ]ilace is in the 

 native .schools at least. In all his dealings amongst his own 

 people the native will use his ov.n language — not English — and 

 only a very small ];ercentage of the total ]>opulation re(|uire to 

 talk English after all. Better then, by far. to educate him 

 through his own language, always retaining English as one sub- 

 ject in the curriculum, so that he may benefit to the full, and 

 understand what he is taught. I ])elieve that Native Edtication 

 will have far greater value, and be sounder in most respects 

 when the hcjjeless policy of teaching them through a foreign 

 language is abandoned. 



Moreover, we are making the extraordinary mistake of not 

 leachino: the natives the grammar and structure of their own 

 language ! Kafir should, and must, be taught as a separate sub- 

 ject. Many native? do not even understand what they read in 

 their own language because their knowledge and their vocabu- 

 lary arc so limited ; nor can thev write a letter, which is iirammati- 

 cally correct. It is most important for us to realise that we are 

 making their grammar for them. Thev had no idea of grammar 

 - — ^they just talked! We have reduced their language to writing, 

 and to <^rder. and to some extent we have mastered the \arious 

 rules. I believe that a (lisco\ery of first importance has been 

 made within recent months regarding one oi the points which 

 long has been a jn-oblem to investigators: a discoverv of such 

 imp{^rtance as to necessitate the rewriting of the Kafir grammar 

 book. Since there is little value in an education that does not 

 adequately educate, and e(|ui]). men for their work in life. I am 

 prepared boldly to advocate readjustment of the curriculum in 

 these three important i)articulars : — 



I. The use of the vernacular at least to Standard l\' as 

 medimn of teaching. 



