BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1663, 1 February 1913, Page 6

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Sir,—Thero aro one or two pointa con-, tained iu .'Mr. G. H. Nicholl's letter on the above which should not go unchallenged. Ho speaks of tho "subsidising at tho expense of all, of the religion of some." This is the old argument that most of tho opponents of tho "league" use. Now, would this proposed change in tho syllabus of the schools subsidise any particular religion? ' Mr.. Nicholls should givo some statistics to substantiate his, argument. Ho should inquire of 6omo of the secondary school managers: Has their Bible instruction increased tho expense of their schools?. Then we would know where wo stand." Mr. Nicholls should know that in most of the primary schools the parents have to proyido their, children with books, and some of the higher standard pupils are required to have two reading books, '■ which aro generally changed every year. Now, would it be any increase on the "expense of. the Education Department of on the parents if ■ono of -'theso reading books' was thlo Bible? Then it would away , with tho change that takes placo In 6ome schoolseyerjr year. Now, whero does the subsidising come in ? Besides, this one volume of the Bible would do several children of one family with carol Then Mr.. Nicholls accuses the leaders of the movement of a very serious charge, namely— stealing. Against whom havo they committed this crime? I consider it a most outrageous statement to make. As far as I know, there has been very considerable expense by tho "league" in promoting this crusade, and thero has been only one appeal - to the Churches for: funds on its behalf; and, judging from the tono of Mr. Nicholas letter,, he has not. given it any financial support. Now, where does this orime come InP Then Mr. Nicholls accuses the leaders of a sort of latitudinarianism. Ho does not make his remarks very clear. Ho 6peaks of Cochin China, and he supposes'what would be tho attitude of the leaders in that country. Well, I believe them to bo sincere in their handling of this question, and I do not think that Mr. Nicholls has any grounds for believing otherwise. If f.li'o majority is not to'rule,'who is to rule? This is the only act put into execution in any. civilised ooimtry that provides' a conscience .clause so as not to outrage the conscience, of any who do not ,wisli'. to liave their • children taught the sacred Scriptures in tl» public schools. ! It may bo information for Mr. Nicholls to know that, - in „tho .schools of. Ja»anj„pn. i the teachers' table 1 , alongsido'of tho Budv dhist" writings; lies tho' Christian New Testament. Mr. Nicholls and. his friends should make some inquiries what other, countries are doing-in the way of education. At the'meeting of the EdinburghSchool Board, .in'.November last, it: >yas" jidecided to aopoint an inspector-to exain-' ine the children in the board schools on i Teligious educaMon. This was carried' •unanimously, and it must be remembered that - there are Anglicans and' Homnn Catholics on .this board. Then let Mr. Nicholls look at yesterday's ' Dominion anent tho statement of the. B.C. Bishop of "Liverpool on the religious education.and .contrast it with the attitude of Bishop Cleary, and-some of tho leading lights in New Zealand.—l am, etc.. ' \ THOS. M. MILLIGAN. January 80.