South Yorkshire Times, September 19, 1942
Objection to “Private” Letters A.C.C.
Issue at Conisbrough
At last Thursday’s meeting of Conisbrough Modern School Governor’s, after the reading of the minutes of the previous meeting, which had devoted much time to and had turned down the request of County Authority that the Governors should take an active part in the formation of an Army Cadet Corps, both Canon J. Holohan and Coun. H. Gomersall raised objection to the fact that since that meeting they had received personal letters from Mr. A. L. Binns, the County Education Officer, asking them to reconsider their views on the subject.
Coun. Gomersall asked why the name of one member of the Committee was mentioned so much in the letter. He strongly objected to any member of the Committee going to Wakefield to give reports of what took place at the local Sub-Committee meetings.
“Mr Binns has asked me to reconsider the matter, but I am not prepared to do so. I have said before, and I say it again, I cut the line at preparing children for war. I think we have been led up the garden path with the Youth Movement. Regimentation has come from the 16-year-olds to the 14- year-olds now. I am not going to allow Wakefield to dictate to me nor coerce me.”
The Clerk (Mr. E. S. Stockdale) assured Mr. Gomersall and the meeting that both he and the member referred to had been instructed to go to Wakefield. The facts were that someone had apparently drawn Mr. Binn’s attention to the Press report and he had asked them to go to Wakefield to give him full report of the meeting and on the feelings of the Committee. He was bound to say that Mr Binns was not in any way dictatorial, but on the contrary, he was trying to be helpful.
Mr. Stockdale said that he was of the opinion that neither Mr. Binns nor anyone else at Wakefield knew any more about the aims of the A.C.C. than did the Conisbrough Committee.
Canon Holohan said “The decision was of the meeting and I object to a partly personal letter being sent to me. I object to officials dictating policy to me. It is for this Committee and not officials, to determine local policy. Even now there no explanation to why we were asked to act on the report o someone we did not send. The letter was not marked private, but it is semi-private. The decision was the meetings, and It should be left at that.”
The Chairman (Coun. D. Sheldon), interrupted the discussion, saying. “As far as I am concerned these letters have nothing to do with this meeting. We have already taken our decision. I think you should answer those letters privately. Mr. Binns has not written to the Committee.”
Mr. Gomersall: We have taken a decision; so has the Youth Council. After that, two Individuals are sent for to Wakefield. We (Canon Holohan and himself) are then selected to receive letters, and told if we want further Information the Clerk will be pleased to give it. I don’t want it. I am grieved. I am not tied to Wakefield, I speak my mind, and because I have done so I am being coerced.
Mr. W. Gledhill (headmaster of the Modern School), said he could not see why the A.C.C. was looked upon as a military organisation when the A.T.C. and G.T.C. were not. He did not know that the A.C.C. gave boys educational facility which would ensure promotion when they had to join the Army, but Conisbrough was denying these facilities to their boys.
At this point the Chairman closed the discussion.
At the subsequent meeting of the Eudcation Sub-Committee the matter was again briefly referred to and Canon Holohan said: “The whole matter has been wrongly handled. Wakefield was in the dark yet they expected us to take action in the dark. Who is responsible for keeping it dark? I am still of the same opinion, these letters are not treating the Committee fairly. I think the whole of the Committee should have been considered. The headline In the Press was not correct. It was not an ‘Outburst,’ we were merely expressing our opinion. It was probably a bit of war propaganda on the part of the Press. The Press should not have been admitted to the meeting. They were not admitted at one time, in any case the heading was not exactly fair. It was not fair to send for someone to Wakefield to report on what we said. It struck me that the letter was an attempt to get at me outside a meeting.”