Subsidised Schools

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 107, 30 January 1935, Page 11

Subsidised Schools

Sir. —May I reply to some of the points raised by “Fair Play”? It is clear that “Fair Play” is unaware of the vast difference between Roman Catholic education and public school education. There is a world of difference—the difference between this world and the next. Catholic education is concerned with the moral, mental and physical development of human beings; the main objective of publie school education is worldly success, and it is entirely unconcerned with such things as immortal souls, God and Christ, the moral law, life and death. But the Protestant attempt to introduce the Bible-in-Schools Bill is proof enough that the Catholics are completely justified in this contention that public schools do not provide “splendid educational facilities.” “Those who are not prepared to accept the splendid education . . . should pay for the upkeep of their own schools.” Roman Catholics have no objection to this whatever, but they are forced in addition to pay (in taxation) for the rest of the community—manifestly unjust. “Fair Play” submits as an axiom that “the Government is expected to consider the people as a whole.” Alost assuredly. This is precisely what the Catholics are trying to point out and precisely what the non-Catholies cannot see. The Catholics are part of tlie whole—with a perfect right to social justice. But as England and Scotland have at last realised, the Catholic demand for justice is not unjust. “Fair Play” would be well advised to examine the implications of his nom-de-plume.—l am, etc., B. J. BARNAO.