CANON GARLAND AND THE BISHOP.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2211, 25 July 1914, Page 7

CANON GARLAND AND THE BISHOP.

1 Sir, —It will very shortly becomo my duty to lay some deplorablo_ coses of misrepresentation of honourabie oppon-, ents oeforo the publio and the league executive. Meantime, permit: ino to deal with an Assertion of the league organiser (Canon Garland), in your issue of July 14- He states that, in 1882, Gatholios' "advocated a roferondum in Switzerland, and hero denied tho right to settle the question of religious instruction in schools' by tho method which : they advocated else- : wljere."_ With its contest, this assertion expresses, or implies what follows: (1) That there was ■ a referendum in Switzerland, in 18S2/ on "the question of religious instruction in schools; (2) that the league's "method" of settling this question is tho Swisß "method'* vof 1882 —a referendum ; (3) that Swiss Catholics, in 1892, held the referendum to bo tho "right" method.-of settling, • for the nation, "tho question of religious instruction in .schools." Not even one of these expressed or implied statements is correct. - 1. The issue of tho Swiss of 1882 was, briefly, State"' (Canton) rights against Federal (Central Government) rights in the inspection and organisation of educatiop. (See, for instance Boyd-Winchester's "Swiss Republic," pp. 260-261; Ogg, "The Governments of Buropo," ; p. 435; "Annual 'Register^'for 1882, p.*268.) 2. Switzerland .lias' tho referendum; New Zealand has not. Historically and constitutionally (as I can show) the Swiss referendum is. essontially, a form • of substitute for tho American veto. It enables electors to reject or approve certain classes of measures _ after they have been passed by Parliament. It has nothing whatever ,to do (as the league's proposed plebiscite has) with promoting future legislation. As stated:: , the issue of the 1 Swiss referendum of 1882 was Federal against Cantonal(provincial) inspection, eto., of schools. This issue was, in its a Matter of political policy. There ' is tip Catholic doctrine or principle which forbids a -referendum such- an issue, whether in Switzerland or New !&ealand. Many Swiss Catholics and "orthodox" Protestants feared tha.t tho

Federal Government's radical majority, chiefly from the Protestant. Cantons, would drive religion out of the schools if they got control of them. . But the issue of: "religious' instruction in schools" was never placed 'before the electors/The league's schenw of 1914 is not a.referendum; It dops liot submit to popukr veto or approval measures passed by l both Houses of Parliament. It is a more plebiscite, for future ballotbox legislation over the head of Parlia- -

merit. It also deals with questions of religion,_ religious conscienco, and : ligious "instruction." . .The ; Swiss refer?' .. endum of'lßß2, dealt with purely, temporal matters of school inspection and school administration. _ ■» . 3. If ,tlio league ' organiser fad travelled' in Switzerland even half'as much or a a often as I, and consulted the Catholic authorities, he would have learned what follows:—(a) Swiss Catholics (like Swiss. Protestants and others) are divided as to the value of the referendum even fori purely temporal matters; (b) on precisely the same Biblical religious principles as .New' Zealand Catholics, Swiss Catholics are entirely opposed to majority rvdo in raat- ' ters of religion and religious conscience; . (c) if the law coerced us into it, and allowed us no other means ;of defending sacred rights, ; both . Swiss and New Zealand Catholics would go to a referendum poll for that purpose; but we' would to i; yeto and upset . invasionsof/.God-giveii.; rights of' conMimce,;%liiSi-'-wo'.'.caiiv never • surrrender, and which no league'or Gov- , ernment has the moral light..to .."knock down"; to.the highest bidder :Ofi'votes. ' ':'Whether. jn tlie. case of the Swiss ;referendnm or tho league's plebiscite we would hardly bB such. simpletons as to • stay at home on polling day, thereby .-..'aiding and abetting the oppressor. of conscience, and tamely submitting to ■ the, auctionrsale of "our. teachers' souls - in open market; (d) I am in a position to 1 give the league organiser testimony as to; the trickery and religictas oppression which may he or. has .been perpetrated under the referendum, in Swit-. zerland. , I can quite understand the frequency of the league's appeal to a country of established State religions", State payment for religious 1 , instruction, an2.ro-; •ligious tests for teachers. '' For the thousandth time I say the league .. adopt the principle of equal rights, of conscience before the law, ! and it"'will find Catholics sympathetic friends. The _ recent-and former manifestoes, of the 'Catholic Bishops make this quite clear. >-I am., etc., y ' :■ H&sB.Y W. CLISARY. i - .'' Bishoh of Auckland. . July 15. " ;