STRONGLY HOSTILE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1825, 11 August 1913, Page 7

STRONGLY HOSTILE.

TO BIBLE IN SCHOOLS. CASE PUT TO THE PREMIER. BY DEPUTATION. , LITTLE CHANCE OP CHANGE. The ease in opposition to religious ia« slTuction in schools was put before tlio' l'rimo Minister (tho Hon. W. 1\ Massey) and tlio Minister for Education (tlio Hon, J. Allen) by a deputation from tho N.v tional Schools Defence Leaguo on Saturday. It was a very numerous deputation, and probably more than half of tho members wero teachers, university professors, or others associated with tho control of education. There wero also present, several members of Parliament, and somo ministers of religion. Apologies wero rcceiveil from soveral other educationists, ministers of religion, and public men, among them tho Roman CMholio' Bishop of Auckland (Dr. Cleary), Bishop O'Sliea, of Wellington, and the Hon. George Fowlds. Among those present were: Messrs. Roljert Lee, J. S. Tennant (Principal Training College), Tainblyn (Training College), Cooke, Clement Watson, Grundy, Webb, McMorrnn (representing Dunedin Head Teachers' Association), Barr, Parkinson (secretary Eduo. Inst, of Now Zealand), Minefield, Polson, Rowntree, Fanning, Blolce, Erskine, Miss Ilelyer, Miss Myers, Mr. Cauchley (ex-president Educ. Inst, of Now Zealand). The foregoing wero either members of tho teaching profession or connected with it.' Others present wero: Mrs. Mooro, Mm, Atkinson, Mrs. liodou, Mr. J. Huteheson, Mr. J. Gammell, liev. J. Crowes, Sir. W. M'Lean, Mr. W. C. Stephens, Mr. I{. Forest, Sir. J. Morrice, Mr. T. W. Ward, Mr. Colo, 'Mr. Meyers, Mr. J. M. Geddes, Prof. Kirk, Prof, Hunter, Prof. Mackchzie. The Hon, A.' L. Herdman introduced tho deputation. Tho question of tho Bible-iu-scliools, ho 6aid, was ono of the most important of the hour, upon which it was evident that feeling was running very high. It was unnecessary, ho said, that he should explain his own views is tho matter. The Sectarian Danger. Mr. A. R. Atkinson, as president of tho league, was tho first speaker'. Tho immediato occasion, of the deputation waa tho answer given to a question by tho Prime Minister in tho House to the effect that tho Government would not this session introduco legislation to permit of a referendum being taken on the question, Tho league wished to bo assured of tbo Government's probaMo action next session, and of their probable attitudo towards any Hill which'might bo introduced by a private member noxt year. Ho wished! to mako it clear that they did not stand as opposed to tho Biblo or to religion, nor did they wish to deny to religion its proper place in the full scheme of education. Ho did not wish to reply to tho attacks of tho other side, which sought to split tho community into two parties—"tho sheep . and the goats." Though tlio State might tolerate that sort of thing, it would bo doing wrong to allow this spirit to get amy direct oflicial footing. Many peoplo not hostilo to religion, some of them Christian ministers, wero members of tho National Schools Defence League, and ho would umlortake to say that (.lie deputation comprised a better representation of education in this country than the other sido could possibly secure with the utmost pains, and with all their organisation and resources, if they searched tlio colony from end to • end. Educationists wero almost unanimously with the league in this mat- . ter. Religion had a place in a full system of education, but it had no place in State education. This was wheTO the lino had been hitherto, drawn, and tho league held that Parliament should maintain the same neutrality on mattors of religion that it had maintained in tho past; Tlio league also said that tho platform of tho • Dible-in-schools peoplo wouul infringj this neutrality. Tlw carrying into effect of this scheme of religious instruction would mean the imposition of a religious test on an. important branch of tho Civil Service, and subject tho teachers to disabilities on cocount of their religious opinions.

"Religious Biootry and Political Cant." Particularly tho league opposed tho means by which it was proposed by tho Bible-in-Schools Leaguo to achiovo their , • obioot—by plebiscite. No question, they held, which violated tho fundamental principles of tho, State's neutrality in matters of religion ought to be submitted to the pooplo in this way. If Parliament gave tho referendum, it may !» supposed that Parliament would givo effect to tho majority's wish. But licfoix) it could do this it must bo assumed that tho majority would have tho right to diotnto to a minority in matters of rclipioii.' This the leaguo domed. Tho referendum was riot merely a delegation to tho people of a certain' amount of power or responsibility. Tho prior responsibility devolved upon Parliament to see that tlio question to be submitted to tho people was one that could properly bo determined by tho vote of tho people. Tho knguo wore met by the Bible-in-sehools people with tho cry "Trust the people." it was very singular that tlio forces working for tho Biblo-in-schonls movement wero a mixture of religious bigotry and political cant.' • If, ns wits claimed, there were 75 per cent, of tho people in favour of the Bible in schools, they would .need no referendum to achieve their end?. Before granting what the Hiblo-in-sehools people asked Parliament, before oven giving them any audience, thry should apply the tost— Havo they exhausted their oilier remedies? In actual tact: they had Jiad their opportunities, and were making 110 uso of them. In tho city of Nelson 'J7 por cent, of (lie children in the .St.xlo schools wero receiving a religious education under tho voluntary methods now permitted by tho law. No change in the law was necessary to givo tho Churches power to impart religious instruction to the children, liven if tho Churches wero clothed with tho power thoy desired, could the parsons liopo to round up tlio odd tluee per cent.P Why did tho children of Wellington not reecivc religious instruction as -was taking place in Nobon? It sxmed to bo localise tho parsons preferred a political agitation to get the Mate teachers to do tlio work they were permitted now to do themselves. Last of all, he hoped Parliament would not be g-mlty of tho most, grievous of betrayals of its trust by granting a referendum next session. If a Bill wero passed late in the year the poll would 1» taken shortly'afterwards, at two or three months' notice, on the dnv of tho general oleetion. That, lie thought, was <ui im- ■■ possible demand for Parliament to grant. On such subjects the pcoplo needed education and organisation, of which tlio other side had now through the Churches a monopoly, to overcome that most dangerous lorco in politics, inertia. It would fo intolerably unjust to submit such a , quisstion to tho pcoplo at only a few months' notice. Other Objections A statement was read on behalf of the National Schools Del'eneo .League of Auckland 1 , covering much the samo ground as that already covered by Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Meyers, who vend the f-tatemenv,also ndded some remnrks expressing tho view of his own religious community, the Seventh Day Advontists, which was 0110 of uncompromising opposition to tho proposal that tho majority should rule in matters of religion. Mr. John Caughley, M.A., of Christoliurch, spoko as a represeutativo of tlio teaching profession. Ho endorsed all that Mr. Atkinson had said, and ho added, further, that it was impossiblo for tho Stato to provido a system of Biblo teaching which would l>o acceptable to all pcoplo in the community, as a system paid for by tho people as a wholo ought to bo. Ho pointed out also that tlio 75 per cent, majority support which tho I3iblc-iu-Schools League claimed to havo, was very largely ovor-ostimatod. Wholo churches ..had. been, committed by' churok fcourts,

•.without the question being referred, to the congregations. His own church, for ■ instance, had been committed by fifteen people. .He argued also, and bo spoke as n Sunday school teacher of twenty-fire years' standing, that it was impossible to };ivo lessons based on the Tending of tho Bible without teaching religion in precisely, the eamo nay'as it was now taught in Sunday schools. He quoted from reports and tho like, to show that in Australia tbe system of religious instruction <was not carried out .with any zeal either by teachers or clergymen. In fact, experience in Australia had shown that religious effort was most active in Victoria, where the State did not interfere in matters of religion. ■ • The Hon. J. T. Paul said be represent the National Schools' Defence League, and a section of organised Labour, which., i 'lie said, was opposed to any system of religious education which "would violate tho conscience, of any of our people. He hoped tho Government would 6et their face against the referendum proposal. Mr. P. 'C. Webb entered an emphatic protest on bolialf of Labour against the proposed plebiscite, which would, whatever tho result of it, giyo rise to a swat deal of sectarian bitterness. And- tho world and mankind had suffered too much in the past from religious bigotry and sectarian strife for anyone to wish to re,vive it again. • " . , .. . Mrs. A. R. Atkinson spoke on benalf ot tbe Women's Christian Temperance Union, which, she said, was generally opposed. to .the Bible-in-Schools platform, but in favour of tho Nelson system. Sho asked thn.t tho Government take it out of the power of school committees and education' boards to prevent the Nelson system being put into operation. PRIME MINISTER REPLIES. CANDID OPINION; . Tho W. F. M-a'saoy, in reply, stated 'that he had been very. pleased to meet such a large and representative deputation, and to hear their views on the very important question. He wished to congratulate 511-3. Atkinson on tho excellent speech she had just delivered. Ho had been especially interested to hear her express approval of tho Nelson isystem, mid to hear her request\tli'at there' should' . be an alteration in ; the; Act to prevent education boards from making it impossible for this kelson system to be put into operation. Reference had been made to the political agitation by the organisation ' known as tho Bible-in-Schools League. While ho had read ft pood deal of matter with refeienco to tho Bible-in-Schools League, lie wished the deputation.to know that the Bible-in-Schools League had never approached the 'Government in connection with the pro- ' posal that a referendum- should be taken on ' : tho question, and ho ' did not _ know ; that they had' approached any Minister ; individually. They had certainly not approached him. - . Jtr. Atkinson had said the deputation 'had been induced to coine' to him on account of tho answer lis had given to a U/uestion by Mr. TV M. Wilford some few hvoeks ago. The question addressed to htlie Government:'was'whether legislation f would be introduced session to env able" a referendum to bo taken on the ■ Bible-in-Schools question. Ho did not 'know in whose interests Mr. Wilford •asked the question, .but it w-as a. straight, r question, and ho had given ,1 slraicht .'answer to it—that the Government did i not intend .to introduco legislation this [year to provide for a referendum being • taken. i Now the deputation wished .'o know '.iwhat attitude the Government would take jinext session. It seemed to him scarcely (41 fair-question, but he .could tell the deputation that tho matter had never ' .been considered by Cabinet. If they ivanted to know the opinions of tb» Government, they must consider tho opinions sof iwldvddiml hiembma of the GoreimWmt' 611 tho question. "For himself, over since ho had been in politics, and kin; , 'before that, he had stood for fee, tfcuJar, and compulsory" education. (Apiplause.) Perhaps ho was not as good a Christian as he ought to be. (Laughter.) ■It was not a jokinj matter, but he b«jiieved in the Bible, and he stood hv that 'belief always, and ho was utteclv opposed to' anything that might be called, sectarianism, in tho publio schools of this country." 'HeVthought he could go so fur as to say that while the present Government remained in office nothing would be done by it which trould not 1)9 eon6istent -vvitli the principle of free, secular, and compulsory education. in tho schools.of the Dominion. (Applause.)' Mr. Herdman thanked the Prime Minister for having received tho deputation, and Mr. Atkinson thanked him'f.r the very satisfactory and candid , reply ho had given to them. ,THE LEAGUE'S ANSWEH. SERMON BY CANON GARLAND. Tho Rov. Canon Garland, in St. Paul's Cathedral, yesterday, said: "In view of a certain occurrence which took placo yesterday I wish, before I preach, just to 1 anake one or two remarks briefly on the ' subject of that deputation from certain persons to the Prim© Minister yesterday. That deputation laid down a doctrine that the majority should; not rule in what that deputation was pleased to describe as religious matters. That is a new doctriue 111 an Enellsh-speukiug country. .That, doctrine properly stated would be that the minority should rule in. religion and in all matters. Let it be clearly understood that the Bible-in-State-Schools movement is seeking to removs the rulo of a minority, and a rule of a minority ■which from our point 'of view is absolutely tyrannical. A rule which was imposed upon tho people of this Dominion i.ivithout their being oonsulted directly, and in all probability without their boing consulted indirectly. What is the effect of that minority rule which has 'prevailed and which (let me repeat) wns imposed without th® people being con6ulted directly? It is that Christian parents, who wo claim are in' a majority ■in this Dominion aro compelled to receive, for their children n definite form of' re-' ligious instruction which ia contrary to the belief of tliet majority. I use that phrase deliberately, a definite form of religious instruction '« given ' in' the ' schools of this land nojr,' the religion of secularism. 'As Charles Bradlau»h said: 'Secularism is as dogmatic a religion as Christianity.' And our protest is against, o.nd our effort is intended to remove this tyranny, that'a small minority of a few . per cent of the people should impose, as the official school religion, on the childreii of tho.'land; the dogmatic--teaching of saculorism. Let it be borne in mind that the league is not proposing, nor will it be a.party to, such tyranny as' Christians aro subjected to by this-secularist system. : If our proposal is carried, the children of that minority represented 111 that deputation yesterday, a few per cent, only, according to the-census, will still only have secular teaching. No child will bo forced to read the Bible lessons. /The child may bo visited by his minister --if lie can find an atheist minister; but our proposal is that nothing shall be compulsory, upon, any child, and that if the parents' shall choose, a minister of that child's faith can go into the school, and .give the child definite religious instruction. So much for our platform.

. "Nov/, for. tho principle. That deputation by its request sought to prevent a free people, in a ; British country who desire to- vote secretly and legally—sought to prevent tho fres peopl® of the Dominion access to the ballot box on this matter. I would ask a question which seems to me.to be pertinent: Whj aro they soiafraid of the pcopla gettinj to the ballot box? We are not. Tho only effcct- that I can see from such all attempt will bo. to rouso tho senso of freedom in.tho people of an, English Dominion to > resent by their action and by their voice any attempt which will hinder tho accoS3 of tho, people to tho ballot box'on any mater in which they desire suoh access. I venture to predict that yesterday's deputation and its attempt at the arbitrary muzzling of tho people Of tho Dominion, will lead to the expression of the paoplo's will with such a voice that it will prove itself irresistible. They wont to the Prime Minister, they spoke of th» function of Parliament: What i* that but * recognition of Parliament as tribunal or court to provide tho necessary machinery to allow the people free access to tho ballot box? And what is that principle which is applied to accepting government by Parliament? It is tho principle—whether it is a principle for good or ill— which prevails, that "government of the people by the people for the people." shall prevail above. everything else. It is worth bearing in mind that this principle has been emphasised n rid emphasised in a,.manner which cannot be overthrown. from the day. when members of

Parliament accopted wages in tho shape of goldon sovereigns Irom' the people. They recognised that they were servants untter masters; servants paid wage?, whlcli tliey accepted to curry out the will of people who employ them, and not to frustrate ;the will of their masters! The question was put by the deputation to tho Prime Minister. I venture to eay that the question is not one which the Prime Minister can answer. Tho question was put to tho l'rime Minister as the representative at Parliament. I venture to say it ia a question which oven Parliament cannot answer. There is only one tribunal which can decide this question. There is- only one Court where this question can be heard as the final Court of Appeal! The question addressed to tho Primo -Minister, to the Parliament through him, is really addressed to the whole people of the Dominion, and it is their answer to which we to-day appeal. It is to them wo look and not to any individual who may happen to be either in favour ot thin .clause or against it; or to any individual who may happen to have the opportunity, as a member of Parliament, of expressing his personal news oii the matter. My last word then, is: "Let the people decide in the.name of God."