THE R.C. CLERGY AND THE EDUCATION BOARD.

Evening Star, Issue 3118, 15 February 1873, Page 2

THE R.C. CLERGY AND THE EDUCATION BOARD.

At the meeting of the Education Board on Thursday, the following correspondence was read in reference to the charge brought against the schoolmasters and educational system of Otago in Bishop Moran’s Lenten Pastoral: —

Education Office, Dunedin, Feb, 3, 1873

Sir,—l have the honor to submit, for the consideration of the Education Board, the accompanying correspondence between the Rev. Father Coleman and me. I may mention that 1 have hud a conversation with the head-master of the Tokomariro school on the subject of the alleged beating reported by Mr Coleman. There was no time for my doing anything more in the matter before B shop Moran’s pastoral was issued. 1 think it advisable, therefore, not to submit any report of my own, but to respectfully suggest that it would be well to cause an investigation to be made by some trustworthy person or persons pot connected with the Education Board or the Tokomariro school. It will be better that I should not submit any report om the general question of religious instruction and Bible reading in the district schools, pending any enquiry that may be made by the Board. Such report will be embodied in my ordinary apaual report now in course of preparation, John Hjseop, Inspector. The Secretary Education B ;ard, Dunedin.

Education Office, Dunedin, January 28, 1873. The Rev, Father Coleman.

Rev, Sir, —I have the honor to brine; to your recollection the visit which you and the Right Rev. Bishop Moran made to this office a few days ago. In the course of the con versation which took place on that occasion, you mentioned that an occurrence had been reported to you somewhat as follows : - “ A boy, the son of Catholic parents, was a pupil of the Tokomairiro Grammar chool. One day he was chastised or threatened with chastisement by the head master, the alleged reason being that the boy was too late in presenting himself at school. The under master remonstrated, and urged that the boy was a Catholic. The head master, in reply, exclaimed, “I don’t care for that;” and proceeded with the castigation, notwithstanding his assistant’s remonstrance.” As far as I can recollect, this is the substance of the statement you made to me. I understood you to mean also that the boy’s lateness consisted simply in his not appearing at school till after the morning Bible reading had been finished, and that he was soon enough for the ordinary secular yrork of the school. I also understood you to mean that you did not wish me to receive your statement officially, or as positively correct, because you did not think you would be fully able to p: Qve the accuracy of the information furnished to you. You seemed to me to doubt trustworthiness of your informant, and I believe I was quite warranted in gathering from what fell from you and the IJhhop, in the course of convention, that neither you nor he could place implicit confidence in the statements made by some of your people in connection with attendance at school, and that in fact a number of them were acting very contumaciously in regard to this matter. Believing our conversation to be unofficial and confidential, I did not conceive it to be my duty to take auy official cognizance of your statement in regard to the i'okoraariro school ; but the publication of Bishop fllorap's “Lenten Pastoral,” and the statements jt contains, compel me to bring the matter under the nptice of the Government and the Education Board, in order tfiat a very thorough investigation may be made into the charges contained in the Bishop’s “ PastpFJfl’’ Before comnmnicating with the Government and the Education Board, I think it is only fair to request you to be kind enough to inform me if the foregoing statements, as regards the Tokomaiiriro school* boy, and the inferences I have drawn from your own and the Bishop’s remarks, are substantially correct; if not, I shall be greatly obliged by your kindly correcting any inaccuracy, or supplying any omission you may consider worthy of notice. Referring to the Bishop’s Pastoral, I take this opportunity of stating that 1 shall be very glad to learn such particulars as you may be able to give respecting the other cases, either of recent or more recent occurrence, in which the “ conscience clause” of the Otago Education Ordinance has “frequently proved”a “sham apd a snare,” or where Catholic children “ attending ihp Government schools in Otago have been or are” exposed tp chastisement for refusing to “ road or assisting at the reading of the Protestant Bible, learn Protestant prayers, and read the vilest calumnies against your church and its ministers.” I am sure the Education Board will very readily cause the most thorough apd searching investigation to be made resp.ectj.ng all spclf cases, but, in order to this being done, it ia necessary that thp charges should be more specific and the names of tfie schools given, I have addressed this letter to you rather than to the Bishop, because the statement respecting the Tokomariro school was made by you. Waiting your reply,—l have, &c., (Signed) John Hisw?, 9 Inspector o? Schools,

' The following is the portion of the Pastoral referred to by Mr Hislop Under the system of theve three Provinces, the reading of the Bible Protestant—is com--1 puisory. This provision of the law excludes all Catholic masters and mistresses from the schools as efficaciously as if Catholics were i excluded by name, and certainly stamps upon them the distinctive character of Protestantism. In Otago it is Presbyterian Protestantism ; in Canterbury, Anglican Protestantism ; in Wellington, Protestantism of any and every kind. There is, as wo are aware, what is called a conscience clause, but we know that in Otago it is frequently a sham and a snare ; and we entertain no doubt whatever it will bn found to be the samo in the other two Provinces. Notwithstanding this conscience clause, such unfortunate Catholic children as attend Government schools in Otago are exposed to chastisement for refusing to read or assist at the reading of the Protestant Bible, learn Protestant prayers, and read the vilest calumnies against the Church and its ministers. We know of cases in point of recent occurrence.”

Dunedin, Feb. 1, 1873. John Hislop, Esq., Inspector of Schools : Si r) _You wish me to it.form you whether a statement made by you, and your inferences from it, as expressed in yours of the 2Stb January, are correct. any additional grounds of complaint and ca-es known to me. I shall give you the statement as made by me to you. and then you can draw your own conclusions. I called upon you, and said that; I hoard that the head teacher of the Tokomariro Government sciiool had beaten a Catholic boy for refusing to attend at Bible reading and Protestant prayers. You may remember that 1 stated I was not bringing any charge against the (eacber as I could not prove the case. That my information was on report, and not seeing the teacher inflicting the punishment; I could not, therefore, prove the charge by legal evidence. That if I had known it of my own knowledge I would make a formal report of it to the Superintendent and the Inspector of Schools. I asked the boy’s sister whether her brother had been punished as stated, and she replied yes, that he had told his father so. Both the Bishop and myself told you that we could not rely upon those people who send their children to the Protestant schools These people are aware that they are acting contumaciously, and, therefore, they endeavor to conceal as much as possible from us, and even teach their children to tell lies as to their being taught prayers at the Protestant schools. This we find out by questioning the children when they c une to Sunday school, where they often recite the Protestant prayers instead of Catholic. Even when they admit that their children are present at Bible reading and prayers, if we make a move to have a formal complaint made, they beg to be let alone. They dread lest they may lose their employment, knowing that there are bitter feelings on this education subject. 1 stated to you that as we could not obtain the good we wanted, our object was to prevent as much evil as possible, I added that it was not sympathy with it or liking for the system that caused me to report the matter to the Inspector, but the hope that his desire to see it progressing would move him to correct the abuses complained of, and thereby help to save us from wanton insult. You then thanked me, and promised to enquire into the matter. The Bishop gave you some cases with which he had to deal, He is making his visitation of Canterbury, When he returns I have no doubt that any communication from you will receive due consideration. 1 am satisfied any statement made by him was on gn;d authority. He can answer for himself You can now see that your s atement and mine do nob agree, and your inferencs are not warranted by whafc I said, You wish for instances known to me? I hnow a case, where the master, on being asked by me whether Catholic children were taught Bible reading? replied, that he could not give him an answer, not knowing what use I plight make of it. He afterwards admitted that he had Catholic children present when he read the Bible, and that be read it to be beard by all present. Does not that look like a sharp system ? In another case the head master of one of your schools admitted to rpe that the Bible was read to Catholic children, but not by him was done by others of the teachers in the school He promised it would be discontinued. I hope it has. Even then there is no security, for it may be done without the head master's knowledge, as it is now done in many cases without the Inspector’s knowledge. In this town and neighborhood, Catholic chilr dren learn Protestant prayers, as we find when they chance to oorno to tho Sunday school. As to the children being taught the vilest calumnies against bishops, priests, and the Catholic Church. 1 do not think you ask seriously for a reply. The Progressive Lessons, Advanced Header, School Expositor, &c.. will furnish you with sufficient proof. In these books' Catholic children are taught that transubstantiation is bat the supposed change of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ; they are taught that superstition is false religion, and that the Popish religion is superstitious, and then it will not require much reasoning power ti draw the conclusion that the religion of these Catholic children is false. Dr Webster’s Dictionary, written by a Protestant, has the word “ Popery,” Webster says this word is considered by Catholics to be offensive. It is used in the books for Catholic t children in your schools. Is it not cruel and insulting to teach Catholic children to look with* contempt upon their faith and Church, whilst at fhe same time pretence is made of dping then* justice? Many cases have corpe under my notice, even since the Bqard of Education recommended that cape be taken npt to offend the different denominations • but as I hpd no hope of redress frotp the Government, I h e P fc po written account of them,. lam of. opinion that if the Board issued an order, instead of a recommendation, to the teachers, and plainly staled the penalty for a violation of that order, there would be an end of Bible reading to Catholic children ; more especially if the teacher saw the Inspector determined to enforce the fulfilment of the order, and supported by tho Board in that determination, —I am, {sir, with respect, your truly, Wm. Coleman.

Education Office, Dunlin}, February 3, 1873. The Rev, Father Oqleiqan, Rev Sir,—l have the honor to acknow : ledge the receipt of your letter of the Ist inst. Your account of our recent interview appears to me to differ so little from mine on all material points that I am quite willing to accept it as correct except as regards the two following particulars;—(l) You take no notice in your letter of the assistant teacher’s alleged remonstrance and the master’s reply. Now, I have a very distinct recollection of this forming a very prominent feature of the case, as narrated by you (2) I have no recollection whateverof you or Bishop Moran specifying any other case than that of Tokoraairiro. I am positively certain you did not. Any other complaints you or the Bishop made were of a very vague and indefinite nature, and were chiefly directed against your own people. In fact, they were very much of the same nature as those contained in your letter of the Ist inst. It would be quite out of place on my part to enter on any discussion with you in reference to the attendance of Catholic children at the Government schools, and I therefore refrain from following you into the several matters adverted to in your letter, however much I rpay be tempted to do sq. My sole object in communicating with you is to bp able to submit a clear case or cases to the education Board fqr thorough investigation, I will forward the whole of this corres» pondence to the Secretary of the Board. It will therefore be for the Education Board to consider whether they should request Bishop Moran to specify the cases which he alleges in his Moral have ccwe to jila

knowledge where Catholic children attending the Government schools in Otogo have been or are “ exposed to chastisement for refusing to read or assist at the reading of the Protestant Bible, learn Protestant prayers, and read the vilest calumaiei against “ his Church and its ministers.” In my former letter I requested you to inform me of the particulars Jof any such cases as you might Le a quainted with, besides the alleged occurrence at Tokomairiro (which will be enquired into). As yon have not specified any other case or cases, I conclude that you are unable to do so. Please keep in mind the exact words of the Pastoral:— “ Are exposed to chastisement for refusing. Sc.” Referring to the second last paragraph of your letter, I take this opportunity to point out an error into which you seem to have fallen, in regard to the Education Board’s resolution on the subject of religious instruction I enclose a copy of the Board’s resolution, from which you will learn that the Board has really issued an “ injunction or order ” to the teachers on the subject, and not a mere *• recommendation,” as you think, i consider the insinuation contained in the concluding paragraph of your letter to be (juite unfounded and most ungenerous, lam as anxious as you or bishop Moran can possibly be (perhaps much more so) that every reasonable ground of objection to the attendance of Catholic children at the Government schools should be wholly removed ; and I am confident that every msmber of the Education B iard entertains the same feeling. I have done all in my power in my intercourse with the teachers and the School Committees, to ensure this result; and notwithstanding the allegations of Bishop Moran and yourself, 1 feel confident that my ettorts have been succ?ssful. I feel highly gratified that so many of the intelligent Catholic laity throughout the Province, appreciate our public scaools, and the services of our teachers to the extent they do; and I consider it would be not only very foolish, but exceedinglv base and dishonorable on the part of any teacher, so far to betray the confidence placed in him, as to cause any Catholic, or other child in his school, to 1 e present at any religious service, or to learn any lesson about which there might be any doubt, without the full knowledge and express sanction of his parents or legal guardians. L have always understood that it is the parents or guardians of th; pupils only that the educational authorities and the teachers have to deal with. In conclusion, I venture, on behalf the Education Board to assure you, that if it can be proved that any teacher has disobeyed the Board’s injunction in reference to religious instruction, such offender will be visited with condign punishment.—l have, &c. (Signed) John Hislop, Inspector of Schools.

Dunedin, February 6th, 1873. John Hislop, Esq., .Inspector of schools. Sir—i am in receipt of yours of the 3rd February. You say you do not wish to enter into a controversy on the various topics touched upon in my last; neither do I wish for anything like controversy. I wrote to you at your own request You are correct as to the mention of an assistant teacher, and as to its being reported that he remonstrated with the head teacher. I did not mention the matter in my reply to your letter, not having the name of the gentleman referred to, and therefore not being able to specify, as required by you. That it was a part of the report made to me, I am perfectly certain. That I mentioned to you what I heard, I am equally certain. You asked me to give you such particulars as L may be able, respecting other'cases. I gave you two cases known to myself, where the teachera admitted to me that Catholic children had been reading the Bible and were present at prayers. The names of ihe schools shall be forthcoming, if I be required to furnish them, without any danger to me of having any action entered against me, if the teachers of ihese schools should be severely punished. I learn now, for the first time, that the Board of i ; ducation would be prepared to punish any teacher requiring Koipau Catholic children to be present at Biblereading’and prayers. I remember that we received a memorandum from'the Education Office la.st yeir, in which the instruction? to the teachers was a recommendation, not an injunction. Between an injunction and a recommendation, I see very little difference, unless the non-attendance to either be followed by a penalty specified ip the instruction. I never ?aw any sqch resolution. { thank you for the memo, attached to the letter. The date Idp not know. Yqu direct ray attention to the Bishop’s pastoral, with reference tqthe chastisement* &c. I have already given my answer and opinion as to the Bishop’s statement. But must J infer from yeur letter, that my statement Is vague, because I do not specify other cases of reported chastisement ? Are the cases I mentioned of no account, because chastisement was not used for the purpose of getting Catholics to be present at Bible reading ? I suppose I am correct in coming to the conclusion that, as the school authorities and teachers hold themselves responsible only to the legal guardians and parents of the children, the Bishop and Boman Catholic clergy should not be looked upon otherwise than as ohtruders, who are putting themselves forward in matters not appertaining to them, Ido not deny your anxiety to see your school system progressing, and to see difficulties removed. I always thought, and still think, that you personally wish that justice should be done to us. But allow me respectfully to ask how much has been done to remove the offendve and insulting books, to save our children from gross unjustice done them, when such hooks are put into their hands? —To call out lessons, passages, expressions, words {as yoqr memo noiy furnished implies), and to te*l the cnildren to pass over them, because they are bad, offensive, qr insultiqg, is to teach the children to take special care to read aud study these very passages. I J*m of opinion yq« will admit the truth of that statement. Again does the Board show a desire to see the resolution enjoined on the ‘ teachers enforced ? Does it give any instructions to Koman Catholics to report any interference with their children ; are the Catholic clergy asked to do so ? Have they the privilege of calling at these schools to make enquiry as to the treatment of the Catholic children ? I know they could go if they begged a permit from a member of the school committee. I \yas forgetting that the authorities and masters deql vyith tfye legal gqarcjians and parent? only. I see the books the same, the teachers following the same course as heretofore, as far as we can learn j no specified penalty for the infringement of the Board’s instructions, no safeguard for Catholic children, the right to interfere, except for the legal guardians and parents only, not recognised by the authorities and teachers ; such being the case, I fail to recognise the great desire on the part of the Government authorities to do justice to Koman Catholics. I know I must lessen your gratification at the appreciation of the intelligent Catholics of the Province, f u r the services of the teachers, when 1 inform you, that no Catholic of intelligence or respectx* hility avails himself of your schools, when it is possible to avoid it. Even though Bible reading and prayers were prohibited in your schools, yet they would still continue highly dangerous to the faith of Catholic children ; therefore, if a Catholic parent love his faith and his child, be would not send his to such schools. If he did, he would be withqqt principle, and acting with qrqelty tqward? his child, by exposing him to the loss qf what hg considered his greatest blessing. I do not think yqu would consider yourself honoured by the approbation of persons of that class. I presume, to assert that in the Province there is not one man who lives as a practical Catholic, who lives up to the principles of his faith and Church, that approves of the system or appreciates the services of the teachers, or unaer any circumstances sends his child to one of your whopls, when it» possible to avoid it, J

admit there are persons who call themselves Catholics that send their children to your schools : but, except in name, they are as much Catholic as yourself. The respectability and intelligence of such Catholics in this case are not very enviable, and their appreciation is a condemnation of the system. 1 would far prefer that they gave up the name Catholic and betook themselves to their proper place. You allude to an “insinuation nnfoundtd, and most ungenerous I beg to assure you that I wish always to state openly what I mean, and that I did not intend to insinuate. Moreover, I should be sorry to use intentionally an unkind or injurious expression where you or any other gentleman is concerned. If any expression of mine will bear only an interpretation exhibiting an unkind tone, I say it is without my knowledge, and if called upon I shall readily apologise for it.—l am, &c., Wm, Coleman.