RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOLS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1425, 6 December 1886, Page 3

RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOLS.

Those who take an interest ‘in the question of religious instruction in public schools—and who does not, either as a supporter or as an opponent?—will remember that some weeks ago the Nelson City School Committee resolved by a majority on the introduction ot such instruction under a time tuble and conscience clause; and then the whole Committee resigned, and stood for re-election, so as to give the householders an opportunity of showing whether or not the proposed action was approved of, or whether they supported the views of the minority of the Committee who were opposed to it. As the telegraphed particulars of the result furnished to us a few days ago were somewhat obscure, we are indebted to the Wanganui Chtonide for the following account of the election proceedings. This is what our contemporary sayon the subject: —“ A fresh election was held on the night of Friday, the 20th November, when the Provincial Hall was crowded with about 800 representatives of the adult population of Nelson City, no larger or more intensely interested assemblage ever having gathered together in that historic chamber. Noiwithstanding the keen though suppressed excitement that prevailed, the proceedings were most orderly, and the election was conducted with good sense and judgment, both sides being desirous of putting the question at issue squarely to the test. Without any preliminaries in the way of discussions or speeches by proposers or candidates, the latter were nominated. For the seven seats on the Committee, those in favor of religious instruction nominated five candidates, whose names were written on one blackboard. The opponents of religious instruction contented themselves with four candidates, and their names were written on another blackboard ; while a third section, who declined to identify themselves with either party, proposed two candidates, whose names appeared on a third blackboard. These two candidates, although they only polled 45 and 17 votes respectively, exerted a disturbing influence on the election, as, if the 62 votes recorded in their favor had been free for distribution between the opposing factions, it is quite possible that the result ot the contest might have been different. As it was, the opponents of religious instruction succeeded in carrying their four men, and thus won the battle, by gaining a majority on the Committee. Their candidates received respectively 553> 455> 4 22 ) ar) d 4 to votes, making a total of 1840 votes recorded against the proposal to permit the schoolrooms to be used for the purpose of religious instruction after school hours. The supporters of the proposal only secured three seats, and thus suffered a defeat, owing to a tactical blunder in dissipating their strength by putting up five candidates. They had, however, the | satisfaction of ascertaining that they nad rightly interpreted the feeling of the householders, who, by their voting showed unmistakeably that they are in favor of religious instruction. For their five candidates, the supporters of the proposal received the following votes:—6sß, sto, 408,395, and 3T4, making a total of 2285 votes. We have thus the curious anomaly presented of 1840 householders scoring a victory over 2255 householders, the splendid majority of 445 possessed by the latter being thrown away owing to bad generalship and the mystery and uncertainty which attach to the cumulative principle of voting, It is obvious that hafl the religious instruction party been satisfied with putting up four instead of five candidates, they could have carried them in easily, and thus have secured a majority on the committee, and have had the warrant of the householders for carrying out the programme they had decided upon. The result of the election, howevef, will doubtless set people thinking, and in the course ot a very few months the decision of last week may be expected to be reversed. Throughout the colony, too, we may look for a gradual revival of systematic efforts in favor, not merely of religious instruction after hours, but of the introduction of the Bible into the schools.” We concur with our contemporary in objecting to the cumulative vote not , be it understood, because the religious parly were, on this occasion, defeated —but on principle, as we hold this system of voting, restricted as it is to educational matters only, as altogether an anomaly and foreign to the spirit of our institutions, besides developing many and great evils, but it will be seen that in this case the defeat of the Bible in Schools party was not necessarily the result of cumulative voting, but was due to bad generalship. It wil* also be seen that the Chtonide falls into the error of confounding the number of votes wiih the number of householders, as it speaks of 1840 householders scoring a victory over 2285 at a meeting attended by only 800. The fact, however, remains that 1840 votes returned font candidates opposed to religious instruction, while 2285 votes in favor of religious instruction only succeeded in returning three candidates, that is to say tnat a three-fourths minority in voles secured a majority on the Committee. In a word, under the cumulative voting system, by clever management, the minority carried its way against the will of the majority. I his is not minority representation, it is minori'y rule, a system of things which cannot logically be maintained for a moment. Surely it is time that this cumulative voting system were put an end to.