XVII TECHNICAL EDUCATION 441 



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 unfounded 

 than that assertion. All I understand the Govern- 

 ment proposed to do was to provide some authority 

 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 pro- 

 ject, 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 

 to me that that is a very much simpler and better 

 process than relegating the whole question to the 



