rt was not presided over by its own
specially appointed Magistrate.

On this point the Director of Education said:

"This comment is true. The position has arisen because of the
practical difficulties of having the work carried out by specially
appointed Magistrates. The volume of work involved could justify
the appointment of only a few such Magistrates, and, because of the
geographical spread of the work, they could not handle it
expeditiously."

On this point we have no recommendations to make. We feel that the best
possible results are being secured by the Magistrates having regard to
their numbers and to the conditions under which they work.

_Page 59, paragraph (e)_

The Mazengarb Committee felt that it was a pity that proceedings in the
Children's Court were not conducted in a separate and distinct building.
It should at least be possible, said the report, to hear and determine
the cases in a room other than the ordinary Court room of a Magistrate's
Court. This was rather in the nature of a counsel of perfection. In
less-densely populated districts it would not be easy or economic to
provide separate accommodation of the kind envisaged. In larger and
busier centres it was often necessary to study the convenience of the
Magistrates themselves. The present Committee has no specific
recommendation to make in this connection.

The best that can be done is in fact being done.

_Page 60, paragraph (f)_

On the subject of the publicity to be given to proceedings in the
Children's Court the Mazengarb Committee said:

"There may be reasons why a Children's Court should be open to the
public ... The public has a right to know how child offenders have
been dealt with. The Committee does not recommend any alteration in
the provision prohibiting the publication of the name of any child,
or of any name or particulars likely to lead to identification.
Subject to this, it is desirable that reporters should be allowed
to attend."

With these views we find ourselves to be in complete agreement.

_Page 60, paragraph (g)_

The Mazengarb Committee appeared to hold the view that when children
have been placed under supervision there was no adequate "follow up"
procedure.

The following is Dr Beeby's comment upon this paragraph:

"It is a little difficult to see just what the Committee are
suggesting in this paragraph. If they are proposing that a Child