Days of future past
In 1930 historian A. G. Butchers published a book on the New Zealand education system. He could not have anticipated the controversy it engendered.
At issue was a section which dealt with illegitimate birth rates. Butchers examined statistics pertaining to babies born out of wedlock, combining them with figures which detailed births within marriages of less than nine months’ duration. He suspected that extra marital sex was on the rise. Moreover, by matching these numbers to those of first births, Butchers was certain that a significant proportion of those indulging in this unsanctioned copulation were under the age of 21. He concluded that ‘‘ . . . this can mean nothing else than under present conditions, approximately every third girl in our schools will conceive her first child in that way’’.
The historian’s intent was to argue for an improvement in the standard of sex education. Instead, he was vilified. Butchers’ concluding sentence was taken as a slight on high school students, especially girls, who, in the double standards of the day, were seen to have disproportionate moral responsibility. The Board of Governors of Napier High School were incensed. They mounted a formal protest against Butchers on the grounds that his book was subsidised by the Department of Education. Mr R. A. Wright, MP, asked questions in the House, demanding an explanation from the Honourable H. Atmore, the relevant minister. Atmore responded by pointing out that Wright himself had commissioned Butchers’ study and that all the historian had done was to quote official statistics, figures that reflected the state of the nation when Wright was in power. Nevertheless, Peter Fraser damned Butcher by labelling his ‘‘inference’’ ‘‘rotten’’ and ‘‘absolutely putrid’’.
The NZ Truth took their lead from the future Prime Minister, claiming that Butchers had ‘‘
. . . made a sweeping and unwarranted allegation against the morals of young New Zealand’’ which ‘‘had been challenged by all sections and classes of the public’’. It suggested that ‘‘all available copies’’ of his book ‘‘ . . . be forthwith collected and dumped in the nearest incinerator’’. A fortnight later, to the paper’s credit, it published Butchers’ response. As compelling as his arguments were, they again fell on deaf ears.