BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2287, 22 October 1914, Page 7

BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS

THE INQUIRY CANON GARLAND GIVES EVIDENCE

A BOOK OP TESTIMONY

Yesterday morning Canon Garland, organising secretary of the Bible-in-State-Schools League of New Zealand, appeared before tho Education Committee of; the House of Representatives and gave evidence on the Religious Introduction in Schools Referendum Dill. Mr. G. M. Thomson, M.P., presided at the inquiry. Canon Garland's evidence consists of a book of 236 pages. He set out to read the whole of this compilation, but after he had been reading for two hours the committee decided to take the remainder as read l .

A question was raised aa to whether Canon Garland was entitled to put in the portion of has evidence which consisted of a collection of the evidence of other pfeoplo. The point of the pbiection wae that Canon Garland should not have quoted these people ftilly, but have restricted himself to brief extracts. Ultimately, the committee decided that this portion of the evidence (whioh. consists of 76 pages) could bo put in as an appendix, While thie point was being discussed Canon Garland said that he was present in tho position of a. defendant; but Bishop Cleary objected to this definition, of Canon Garland's position, arguing that as Canon Garland asked for an alteration in the law of the land he was irn the position of a, plaimant. Biahoj> Cleary objected also to Canon Garland's lumping together the opponents of the Bill &s one party. "I say that is not so," he declared. Professor Hunter (National Schools Defenoe League): And I. Tho Rev. D. O, Bate?: And I. Bishop Cleary said that he represented only the OathoUo body of New Zealand, and that h> party differed very widely from the National Schools Defence' League. The Working of the system'. Canon Garland said that the system for which the league was asking had boen at work as follows:— "Now South Wales.—Since 1866 by Act of Parliament in New South" Wales. This was while there were national schools side by side with State-aided fiy denominational schools. In 1880. the, whole educational system was re-cast, State aid to denominational isohqols was abolished, but whatever other alterations were made none was made as ra- | gards the system of religious ipstruci tion, whioh was again enibodied in the amending and consolidating Act. "Tasmania.—-Iu Tasmania, tho. system has been at work since 1868, regulations embodying tha system beiug gazetted on February 9, 1869. In 1885, Tasmania amended and consolidated lte Education Act, and therein embodied by Act of Parliament the religious instruction system, formerly operating only by regulation. i "Western Australia.—ln 1893, Western Australia, by direct Aot of Parliament, embodied the Bame system of religious instruction. "Norfolk Island—ln 1905, Norfolk Island ceased to be a'ctependenoy governed from England, and was transferred to the. Government of New 'South Wales. The New South Wales Gqyernr men in. January, 1906, by ordinance of tho Governor-in-Council, made operative in Norfolk Island the religions instruction clauses from the New South WalesAct. This was one of the first Acts, if not the first Act, of government exeroised by New South Willes over Norfolk Island, in. whioh island' there had formerly been only denominational schools. "Queensland,—ln 1910 Queensland, after taking a referendum to a.Bcerta,ui tie will of the people, passed an Act of Parliament embodying the system." Trial of Half a Century, "It is claimed," Canon Garland continued, "that the fact of the system existing for nearly half a century in the States of New South Wales and Tasmania, and 20 years in Western Australia, IB in itself irrefutable proof that it has given satisfaction to the' vast majority of the people. It ie incredible, if dissatisfaction existed seriously exoept amongst a small section, that opportunity would not be made to alter or amend vthe system. On the contrary, New South Wales,, when it cast its leducation. system into the melting-pot in 1880 and abandoned denominational schools, throwing the whole weight of the State into national schools, embodied without minimising the original system of religious instruction. Further, when New South Wale's Lad. .an opportunity of extending the system to a new dependency it did 60 promptly, as was t]ie oase of Norfolk Island: It ia difficult to believe that a Government would introduco to a new dependency a system unless it had learned by experience that such an aor tion would give satisfaction. In the year 1902, New South Wales sot up a Royal Commission to inquire into existing methods of instruction and to recommend for adoption whatever improvements they might consider could with advantage bo introduced into New South 'Wales. Following upon that Commission, the Minister of Public Instruction called a conference in 1904 of inspectors, teaohers, Departmental officers, and prominent educationists when the wliole system of education was considered. Much revision of the whole education system followed thereupon, but no modification whatever-was made ia the.system of religious instruction. Another Example. "Another examplo of the attitude of New South Wales in increasing and not hindering the facilities for religious instruction was afforded last year, when a deputation waited upon tho Minister of Publio Instruction, complaining that as certain public schools had become high schools there was no provision in the present Act to give religious instruction iti the high schools, and that, in consequence of certain public primary schools being lnado high schools, classes which had been receiving religious instruction were now quite shut out from the clergy, who wore prevented from having access to these schools. The Minister pointed out iu reply that there had been no alteration made iu tfho Tights and privileges formerly enjoyed. They had been conserved with regard to the high schools. In all the high schools of the State the Committee might carry out religious instruction, because instructions 'had boon given in order to allow it. "Tasmania from 1868 had an opportunity of removing religious instruction by ii mere stroke of tho pen, cancelling tho regulation at any time; but, on the contrary, took the opportunity, in 1885, of making tho regulation an Act of Parliament."

As to Western Australia and Queensland, tho witness said: "It is significant that both these States which have introduood religious instruction into tho national schools havo adopted the same system which they found in tho sister States/ and of which it is reasonablo to suppose from thoir cou« liguity they were ablo to acquire moro or loss practical knowledge, and make confidential inquiries from tho Governments of.tho States in which the system existed before adopting it in their own States."

It therefore would bo seen that tlio States which had opportunities of revising tlio system allowed it on every occasion to stand, and thus tacitly affirm-

Ed that tho vast majority of the people was fully satisfied;. It could easily bo understood that if there were any substantial demand for its alteration, individual politicians as welfas political parties would not avoid the opportunity ot pleasing their constituents by obtaining through Parliament its abolition or modification. ivas irrefutable that when once introduced tho system had. never in any State been interfered with, diminished, much less abolished 1 . Tha Solution of the religious instruction problem afforded by thjs system had therefore removed the subject from the political arena.

Unrest in New Zealand. "Contrast this settlement with New Zealand, where there have been agitations, more or loss continuous, since 1877, asking for religious instruction, seven Bills in Parliament attempting to deal with the problem." It was not urged by the league that there was complete and universal satisfaction, or even that the system was absolutely perfect, It was admitted that the Roman Catholib Church opposed the system. On the other hand, every other Christian Church which had expressed itself in Australia stood by the national school system, provided it included the religious instruction system referred to. In addition to the Christian Church, it was well known that the Jewish Church supported the system. So far as ho could learn, he had yet to find, with the exception of New Zealand, any English-speaking State in tho British Empire which, did not make some provision for religious instruction in connection with its educational system, He submitted a statement of the result of inquiries, on the subject respeoting Great Britain, Ireland, Cana,da, and South Africa. In South Australia and. Viotoria soma provision was made for the recognition of religious instruction.

' A Solitary Exception. The whole of tho English-speaking parts of the Empire being accounted for, New Zealand remained tho only State which was not in line with the rest of the British Empire in its Englishrspeaking parts., in rn.ak.ing soine provision for religious instruction in connection with its educational system, and almost all these places, with tho exception of South Australia- and Victoria, incorporated some, system of' religious instruction as an inherent"part of the currir oulum,

The Schools Singled Out. Proceeding, Canon Garland said;—"l have pointed out already that New Zealand, as far as I can learn, stands alone in the English-speaking world for making no provision, for religiqus instruction in connection with its education system. It further may be pointed out that it singles out the schools in this respect. There is no othor law Sealing with any part of our national life, in New Zea.Ja.nd wpjoh s nys that the prooeedinge shall ho entirely secular. The Bible has a recognised place in the hands of tjie Governor, in the hands of members pf Parliament, in the hands of the Judges and Magistrates, and of the witnesses in ]a.w courts. Parliament it: self is daily opened with jirayor, which, so fa-r from being ivjthin the tenn 'entirely secular,'" ig distinctly and strongly Christian. The Bible finds its way jntq i\\6 cell of every prisoner in the gaols, who, moreover, is afforded facilities for religious instruction from his own minister. In the Maori day schools under the 'entirely secular' Eduoation Act, the Bjbje is read and religious, instruction given, I have made inquirios, and have not heard of one Maori school to the contrary; but within tho last few months I have heard of the closing of a Maori school near Huntly, the children of which had been acoustoined to their Bible reading and religious instruction, but on crossing over .to the pakeha- school found they .were deprived of tjies.o advantages. The Amqkura training sjrip, itself a, State institution, has religious instruction. This league asks that • the eanie recognition which is made in other departments, of the na-tiqnal life shall be extended to the schools. The position at present is, tjiis; Though a boy who obeys tho law mugt not have- Bible lessons or religious instruction in school, if he break the law and is transferred to gaol or the reformatory he at once finds that provision ma4e which was denied to him while he remained a, respectable child. "The war in whkih we aro engaged slows a similar recognition of religion by the State. Chaplains are provided, given an offioial status, and paid by the State to enable them to supply religious ministrations (instruction); and orders of the day show how amidst the exigenoies of military life provision can bo made hi 'time-tables' for the exercise of religious ministrations, (instruction). The league is not asking for payment, but that the Churehps may he allowed at their own expense to provide ministers who will give religious instruction, the State being asked to do no more on this point than make provision in the time-table." ' Evidence and Its Value. The league had published a pamphlet of educational experts' opinions. These opinions were those of the permanent heads* of Education Departments where the system existed, of political heads (Ministers of Education), of Governors, of inspectors, and of teachers. These were of various dates, some going back as far as the year 1893; but no matter what the year was the testimony was to the same effect. It was alleged by opponents that these testimonies were of no value, inasmuch as the teachers who gave them were bound to express an opinion coinciding with, that of their Department, to which it was replied that these testimonies were addressed, not to the Department, but to individuals not associated wjtih the Eduoation Department. As to the freedom of teachers, they had their annual meet ings and their associations in which they criticised freely whatever needed criticism. In tho oaso of New South Wales, one section of teachers had formed a union with the object of bringing the Minister of Education before the Arbitration Court on the question of salaries. Teachers who were not afraid to take such an extreme measure as that would not be afraid to express an adverse opinion, but neither in their associations nor meetings had any suoh adverso opinion over been expressed. But it was not teachers only who had given these opinions. Ministers of the Crown, amongst them Mr. MacGowan, Labour Premier of New South Wales in 1011, Mr. Hogue, Minister of Education for Now South Wales, and others, had made similar statements. Among others quoted by Canon Garland were the Hon. Digby Denliam (Premier of Queensland), New South Wales inspectors, tho Westralian Director of Education, and Mr. D. M. Yeats, late hoad-toacher at the Hutt District High School. Parliament Troubled Seven Times. "The _ present campaign of tfhe league is but tho culmination of many protests made against the absence of religious instruction from tho New Zealand schools," continued Canon Garland. "Tho Churches have made various attempts to have tho 'entirely secular' clause modified. As evidence o!' this, there were tho following Bills introduced into Parliament to deal with this question ;—IBBS, Mr. Downio Stew? art; 1802, Mr. Downio Stewart, lost by ono vote only; 1001, Mr. Seddon's General Referendum; 1903, Mr. Arnold's Special Referendum: 1903, Mr. Seddon's General Referendum; 1004, Mr. Seddon's General Referendum ; and 1905, Mr.. Sidoy's Special Referendum. Contrast these seven efforts made in tho New Zealand Parliament with the condition of affairs in tho four Statqs of Australia whore, sinco tho religious instruction system was introduced, thoro hns never been any Bill even introduced to modify it, much loss to roi peal it. In thoso States there has been.

political pence in Parliament on, the subject. Tho settlement of the problem has remained politically permanent no matter what political party camo into power.

"I take it for granted that our opponents, who havo shown ■ themselves industrious students of Hansard, would have unearthed any efforts, or, indeed, any serious protests in Parliament, againgt the religious instruction system. I do not believe that any such oxists, and will wait fqr our opponents to prodiiGß evidence to tliat effect. There have been lengthy dqbates in Parliament at tho introduction or reaffirmation of such religious instruction, lint tho subject disappears as a disturbing factor in Pcirlianientary life once the Eastern has been adopted."

Going into the mattor of precedents, Canon Garland" quoted the cases of Switzerland and tho Australian States, and made reference to Mr. Seddon's 1901 General Referendum Bill, which expressly excluded the Bjble-jn-achools question.

He then quoted an extensive budget of opinion covering Jewish opinion: he referred to tho position and trend in Great Britain, and several portions of the Empire; tho yiewe of the Hon. H. Holman, Premier of New South Wales; the Hon. A. H. Barlow, exJUinistor of. Education for Quensland; and Inspector Crisp, of the Queensland Ediication Department, N-S,W. inspectors.

Reply to Bishop Cleary. - Deferring to the evidence given by Bishop Cleary, Canon Garland said: e "l gather from Bishop deary's .lengtny statement that the Roman Catholio Church is totally opposed to the Bible in-State-Sohools League's proposal, and equally oppqsed to ' ascertaining the will or the people by means of a referr endum, and is determined to press its claim for State aid to its denominational schools, whether there is religious instruction or no religious instruction m the publio schools. This, in my jiidgment, sums up his 58- pages of typewritten statement! and 1 should be content to leave it at that, but that it might be considered his many assertions were conclusive facts. I have endeavoured to make my notes as brief as the. circumstances permit, and in a desire to save tho committee's time I have omitted attention to the mere trivialities as they seem, to me, many of which would involve mere tions." "It is a>mistake," he. continued, "to speak of the League as presenting a petition (p. 1). The League appToaened the Government submitting the requests of the governing courts of the Church of, England, the Presbyterian Church, tjie Methodist Church, and the Salvation Army, asking that a referendum should be taken tipon the proposal qgreed upon by those churches. In support of its request. it shows a mem-i bership of over 153,000 electors or persons qualified to bo electors, but not in a.ny sense of the word did they sign » petition, to Parliament."

Professor Hunter's Omissions. Of Professor Hunter's evidence, Canon Garland said: "Professor Hunter professes to give the detailed result of 37 years' experience pf the secular system in New Zealand. His historical sketch is defective from its omissions. He ignores entirely the faot that the be-st friends of our national system of education have protested against ite inadequatenoss in exoluding the Bible from the curriculum of qur schools- The demand made that the Bible should form part of our school syllabus is no new claim. It'is one that has beou lnado by leading citizens of New Zealand and by nearly every section of the Christian Church since 1877, when the Bible was excluded. The Hon. Mr. Bowem, who had- charge of the present Education Act when it was ft Bill beforethe House of Representatives, was an earnest advocate of the Biblo rending as part of. the syllabus. He had a special clause in his Bill legalising prayer and Bible reading.".

Tlio comniilitee lias acljourned till 10.30 tliis morning, when the cross-examina-tion of tianon Garland is to commence. If Mr. J. Caughley arrives from Christchurch ■by the morning ferry, lie will open the cross-examination. If nqt. Professor Hunter will do so. Bishop Cleary, the committee has decided, will be the last cross-examiner.