Reform At Thb Boys School.

REFORM AT THB BOYS SCHOOL .

IN another column we publish a letter from Bro . Bel ward Hobbs , the present Accountant of the Eoyal Masonic Institution for Boys , in reply to remarks under the above heading which appeared in our issue of the 5 th instant . We should very much have liked the discussion on tho points

we then referred to—and which we consider are fair subjects for criticism—to have been conducted in a friendly and brotherly manner , but we are afraid Bro . Hobbs does not share our desire , as he starts off with fcho determination to save the Institution from " mis-statements and

inaccuracies" contained in our remarks . We will not quarrel with Bro . Hobbs as to who has the greater desire to promote the welfare of the Masonio Institutions ; he is comparatively young at the work to which he has set his hand , while we have a record of upwards of fifteen years

to refer back to , and although we may have sometimes said hard things , and written in a severe strain , wo venture to think there is no one who will accuse us of being actuated by unworthy motives . We have raised up enemies , because we have occasionally been a little rr . ore

outspoken than the majority of English Freemasons , but we have generally had the satisfaction of afterwards knowing that those whom we have for the time offended havo subsequently approved our actions . Brother Hobbs answers our remarks on behalf of fche Committee entrusted

with the publication of the accounts , and we thank him and his co-workers for the courtesy they have shown in recognising our criticism , bufc our thankfulness stops there . The system on which Bro . Hobbs replies to our criticism may be described as being founded on his professional

ability , while we , on our side , profess to have the sentiments of the Graft , or afc least a considerable section of ifc , to support us . Neither will do any good fco the cause by making this discussion personal . We ask questions , and it is for Bro . Hobbs and those who instruct him to say , whether or no we are to be answered . Afterwards there

will be the subscribers of the Institution fco deal with ; perhaps they' will take no notice of our comments , while , on the other hand , it may happen they will demand some further explanation than has yet been given . Above all things let us avoid—we repeat ourselves—anything like personality or individual recrimination .

Our remarks were based on a statement , —which was pretty widely published , —to the effect that under the new regime the expenses at the Boys' School had been reduced to £ 39 5 s per boy per annum . We then said that the information thus given was too good to be true . We

repeat this ; and , supported as we now are by Bro . Hobb ' s letter , we are convinced that the average of the first six months under the new management will not be maintained during the first financial year . When we wrote it was merely a surmise on our part , now we regard it as an absolute certainty .

The " new system of book-keeping , " designed by Bro . Hobbs , and which has been in use since the 1 st July last , is defective—when it is desired to show the average cost per boy per annum at the Institution ; and although ifc

may be founded on the system I ecommended by " a Committee of Chartered Accountants of greafc eminence " appointed to report upon the best form of accounts for Institutions similar to the Boys' School , it is none the less open to public criticism . The laws of England are framed

Reform At Thb Boys School.

with the greatest care , and are based on the best of all authorities , but is there one-tenth part of them that docs not possess some simple loophole , some absurd formula , or some impossible condition ? Such being the case Bro . Hobbs need not be upset because his pai'ticular form of

accounts , although tounded on such eminent authority , aro not absolute perfection . We are inclined to be somewhat old fashioned , and admit we havo not yet learned to grasp all the new fangled ideas of the present age . When we wore taught book-keeping there was no grand array of chartered

accountants to guide the ardent seeker after knowledge , so thafc we ask to be excused for any stupidifcy we may show ; but we are sincere in saying there are others who share our stupidity , and who consider the acccounts of the Royal Masonic Institution for Boys point to a different yearly

average than is claimed for them by the Committee entrusted with their preparation . Ifc is perhaps unfair to work on rumour , but considering the truth of the rumour in regard to the clothes of the boys , and which Bro . Hobbs admits are not reckoned in the expenditure account on which

he bases his average of £ 39 5 s per annum for each boy , wo ask if the £ 27 19 s 3 d set down for milk represents tho expenditure under that head for the entire six months ? or whether it is not true that the £ 27 odd is one month ' s bill ,, and that as a consequence there is about £ 150 to be added

to the Expenditure Account for tho half year ? A sum of £ 150 may not seem much on an outlay of upwards of £ 5000 each six months , but it puts up tho average cost

per boy nearly £ 1 3 s per annum , and this , added to tho one other item we have referred to ( clothing ) , will make a wonderful difference to the annual average , erroneously sot down at £ 39 5 s per head .

We are afraid to say all we think , lesfc Bro . Hobbs should consider us hypercritical in our remarks , but he cannot bo insensible to the effect these items will ultimately have on fche " average , " and we venture to suggest to him and his Committee that it would be better to face the disclosure

now than six months hence . We believe that economies have been introduced , without any falling off in the efficiency of fche Institution ; and probably the average may some day go down to £ 39 5 s , but not yet . Why , therefore , raise false hopes , only to have them dispelled

when the June accounts are published ? May we venture fco submit to the new management what is required of them , —although in all probability they already know it . The Craft desires the strictest economy , based on efficiency ;

and wants to know exactly what is being done with the money subscribed . They have an elaborate balance sheet before them , bufc , as Ave said before , —it is too good to be true .

We are ready to believe that everything appears in tho accounts which legitimately belonged to them so far as Bro . Hobbs knew , but is ho just in sheltering himself for any omissions behind the certificates of the Secretary and Matron ? If so , it would seem there is a grave flaw in tho

system of accounts drawn up by the " Committee ot Chartered Accountants of great eminence , " which should not rely on personal certificates of interested officia ' s , but should provide a proper book to show exactly what comes into the Institution . We know , in onr

old-fashioned time , we had an invoice book , and if after any half year ' s balance sheet had been issued , a regular item—such as the milk we speak of—amounting to close upon £ 30 a month , had turned out to have been omitted from the accounts , there would have been a very unpleasant