111.11 SCHOOL BOARD ELECTIONS.
IF the man of average sense and discretion had been asked before the late School Board elections, how he would like things to go at the polls, he would, if not specially in- terested in the particular contest, have in all probability replied that what London wanted was an educational policy which would, like that of the late Board, be directed towards keeping the rates from becoming exces- sive, but, unlike that policy, would have no tendency towards unduly restricting the work of teaching. What the better ratepayers want is rigid economy, combined as far as possible with a complete carrying out of the principle that every child. in London shall be put within reach of education. But to obtain this combination, it is necessary that both the party of mere economy and the party of extended education at any price, should. be strongly represented. Further, the elector who desired to see the old policy of economy carried on, but carried on in a distinctly wider spirit, would desire that though the party of economy should still remain in an absolute majority, and still retain possession of the chairmanship and the other executive posts, the majority should not be large enough to render the party in favour of extending education altogether helpless. The upholders of economy should be installed in office, but the policy which they would be obliged. to carry out should be greatly modified by the minority of the Board. Such, we take it, was "the better opinion" of thinking London. If it was, its wishes could not have been more exactly carried out than they were at the polls on Monday. The net result of the elections is the return of the sup- porters of the "old policy" in sufficient strength to allow them to retain Mr. Diggle in office, but not in enough numbers to allow them, as they have perhaps been inclined, to refuse the legitimate demands of the " Progressist party." The School Board elections, then, may be said, on the whole, to have given another satisfactory proof that among Englishmen popular election is by far the best method of choosing those who are to conduct public business. Taken as a whole, the elections clearly show that efficient management is what the majority of the electorate demands in local affairs. In spite of the fact that a policy of retrenchment always makes very bitter enemies, and. in spite of the fact that the late Board did its cheese- paring and conducted its business generally with a con- siderable amount of unnecessary harshness and asperity, the electors evidently realised that they had been well served by the late Board. Besides the encouraging fact that the electors showed an evident appreciation of the men who wanted to manage their affairs with a proper reference to the question of finance, due notice must be taken of how considerable a number of persons well known for their capacity in educational and social questions have obtained seats upon the Board. Miss Davenport-Hill, Mr. Whiteley, Sir Edmund Currie, Mr. Lyulph Stanley, and Mr. Albert Rutson, are among those whose names will be at once recognised and approved by the general opinion as belonging to persons specially well qualified to fulfil the duties of members of the London School Board. Again, another subject of congratulation may be found in the fact that persons of every shade of thought and feeling have been placed upon the Board. The argument for the cumu- lative vote was that it ensured the representation of minorities. In securing the presence of Mrs. Besant, Mr. Stewart Headlam, and Mr. Conybeare, it has certainly done its work. Of these, Mrs. Besant is, o course, the only member from whom any serious work can be expected. Objecting to her opinions as we do on every possible point, we still are glad that the various secularists scattered over London should obtain the share of representation to which they are entitled. We can hardly imagine that Mr. Conybeare is likely to increase the efficiency of any body into which he is introduced. Those who have watched the growth of that feeling of terror and dismay with which friends and opponents alike regard him in the House of Commons, will feel no little amusement in observing the impression made by him at the Board. -Unless we very much under-estimate his power of disturbing the harmonious working of deliberative bodies, his election will ultimately force the Board to adopt some very stringent form of closure.
It may seem at first sight somewhat discouraging that in reality little more than one-fourth of the electors took the trouble to vote at the recent contests. No doubt the fact is not one which any one would desire to extoL Except on account of inability to vote without serious physical discomfort, no ratepayer should neglect to exercise his right of choice in the case of a Board which raises and spends the revenue of a small Kingdom,—the School Board expenditure is over £2,000,000, of which half falls on the rates. Still, though no advocate of repre- sentative institutions can ever admit that abstention at elections through lack of interest is excusable, it must be owned that in practice the abstentions at the School Board elections are no.t of a bad kind. In fact, the London School Board elections are left entirely to those among the electors who are in some way or other interested in the education question. Since, too, the result is, on the whole, so satisfactory, we need not greatly complain, except on the ground that when elections are carried by a small minority, any passing excite- ment may bring new masses into the field who will act without considering the traditions of the Board. Continuity is, under such circumstances, always in danger. Probably one of the reasons for the very large number of abstentions is to be found in the system of cumulative voting. If two men are put before a con- stituency, it is not difficult to decide which to vote for. If, however, it is necessary to pick out five on a list of ten or twelve, there is a very great tendency for a voter to say,— ' The thing is too complicated; I shall never remember which of the five hold the opinions I like. But is it not better not to vote at all, than to vote for the wrong men ? Besides, I really take no interest in any of them. Why, then, should I vote at all ?' To thousands of men, such arguments, we feel sure, served this week as a ready excuse for not voting. Yet if it had been only a choice between Jones, who was for economy, and Brown, who was for more expenditure and higher education, the selectionwould have been readily made, and the voter would have gone to the poll. We do not say that in other ways the cumulative vote may not lave advan- tages. It certainly helps those who, though they have only a few followers, are very ardently supported. On one point, however, there can be no doubt. The cumulative vote dis- tinctly tends towards encouraging abstention, and thus may produce a very demoralising electoral habit.
Previous page
