CORRESPONDENCE

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2060, 22 April 1907, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE

THE DATE PREMIER AND THE

LICENSING LAW

Sir, —la justice to the (load permitmo to draw attention to the fact that your reporter imperfectly caught what 1 said on one important matter last night. Mr Scddon did not make an extension of the period between the local option polls of from three years to six. Mr. Fraser, M.H.lt, assorted on the day after the lute poll that Mr. Seddon had promised to make such an extension, and Mr. Wiliams, colonial secretary to the Licensed Victuallers’ Association, made the same statement on the platform in Australia during the time that Mr. Seddon was there immediately prior to his death. I regret that in making our position clear to the public it should bo necessary to make any statement involving reference to the late Prcmiei, but “forewarned is forearmed. 1 mil, etc., _ FRANK W. ISITT. PASSION LER ACCOMMODATION. Sir, —it is not always the two extremes clash. It came under my notice in five days. I was on board of the Manapouri going to Napier on the lot'll inst. The accommodation that was tendered to me in that respect was simply disgusting. 1 could not get a blanket to keep me warm, and what was worse I could not get water to have a wash. 1 joined the Victoria on my return trip, and found lior to be a queenly boat of the highest typo.—l am, etc. MICHAEL O’ROURKE. April 20. BIBLE IN SCHOOLS. Sir, —You are right in fighting for the secularisation of the public schools'. There can be no just cause for the introduction of Bible reading oven by those who arc not paid teachers. The homo is the place where the Bible should be instilled into children, for it is there that the mother’s influence is supreme and her training lifelong. Depute home duties to others and there cannot be any permanency, and the mere reading of the Bible can have no permanent effect upon children any more than the reading of a history book or the repetition of strings of tables and dates can ha.ve in the intellectual development of children. It has been the cry of teachers that the subjects of instruction are too many ; if so, how comes it to pass that some of them are wanting the Bible to bo introduced? Is it because they will have an extra half-hour of the school day to themselves? I wonder bow many of the ministers of religion, if application were made to them, would consent to give half an hour of their Sunday service to the discussion of ethical questions? They would say, and I would agree with them, that there is a definite time set aside for religion. But is there not a definite time set aside for secular instruction? There are five school days each of five hours, and although the Act recognises a minimum school day as four hours, the school day in Poverty Bay is five hours. Are the persons who ask for a permit to give Bible instruction prepared to teach when the secular work is done? I write not as one who opposes Bible reading—for Bible reading is a daily duty in my home and by all my children—but as a friend. I wish to get parents and children to realise as a duty that the reading—the home reading of the Bil)le is what we lack in homes today, and I would gladly join our ministers in bringing this about, but the plan they propose cannot attain their ideals and will result in failure. I am, etc., ■» PARENT.