THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2164, 1 June 1914, Page 4

THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS

Sir, —I have read with great interest the report of the meeting of the Central Committee of Weflington Province of the Uible-in-Sohools League, held in St. John's Schoolroom, oft .Monday evening. I must sincerely congratulate Canon Garland on tfe admirably rtr ; strained, and perfeaWy straightforward statement of the case l'mm tho League's standpoint, which lie male. There is no evasion of the issuesv. no attempt to throw dust in tba eyes of tlio pi<sb!.ie, no drawing of a fed herring across the scent. Everything ft open awl above' board. The issue before the peoplo of New Zealand is plain; it is this: — ■ To whom do tns scneuis iielo.ng? Who supports them slid far wliat. purpose!'' Who is to decide whether the Bible and religion's instruction ■ are to be given in them or not? The answer is plain. Tim schools belong to tlio people, are supported by the people, and the .people must, in the last resort, , control them. "Uovoinment of the people, iiv the people, for tho people," is a sound democratic principle. The right of tho .people to >er'n themselves and to control their own institutions has been Son <tt tremendous .'cost, and any movement' that tends to. undermino or curtail this right should bo carefully scrutinised and strenuously resisted, lest this desrly-bougl.lt right; bo lost again. The controversy between the Bible*-in-Schools League and ' the National School Defence League lias ttow rcAieed itself to this simple issue, which must be settled before we 1 can do so ittuch as discuss tho proposals el cither league, viz., who is to control the national schools? It is clear that «e.me> body musk The simple, but primary, question is, Who?

I am not a member of either I write simply as an interested'specwho is at tlu> Same time a citfecn of this democratic community. aiid as suclr I am and have- been for years convinced that tho only way to settle this vexed question js ',b.y ascertaining tho will of tho people by direct vote. I nm, therefore, .Jwartiiv, and v.ifirawt •any /.reservation?-," 'ivitli tlx* BibhvinSchools League in dcrrrniWlmg sv refe-t----endnm on this question. .The Government will dp well to bo very clear on this point. It is riot asked to pronounce any" judgment oil tho question of Hible and religious ins miction in schools, hut it- is asked to pfo'Vido the machinery for the UCople to determine tho .question for themselves by direct votes at the. bsHoMios., Many friends of tlvo Gorcfmijerit will regret it if it takes tho itftdmnacfatic stand of refusing to provide tins mrt--chinory for the people 4-0 express their will on this yexed question. It should'be borhe vft mind that tho 'direct' voto of tho' people is no now tliim; in New Zealand. Wn hsvj hat! it for many years on the liquor onestion, and no .one would' wWiute to openly advocnteits abolition, Tito s>m.pio irnSh is that the referendum is. tho logic; of democracy.—l am, etc.. , . J. PWn 01, ARSON, i Wellington, May 28, .'l9l-4,