CHURCH DAY SCHOOLS.

Globe, Volume II, Issue 132, 2 November 1874, Page 2

CHURCH DAY SCHOOLS.

[lii the article which appeared in our issue of Saturday we referred to a resolution which had been brought forward in the Synod, and rpioted nearly all that was reported of the remarks made by Mr Mclntyre in introducing that resolution. We have obtained a full report of the speech to which we referred. The resolution was as follows: —“ That, in the opinion of this Synod, the terms upon which the Church property was vested in the Church of this diocese remain unfull died, so long as no part of the revenue arising from that property is devoted to educational purposes.”]— Ed. Close. Mr Mclntyre said that, in moving the resolution, he hoped that lie should not be considered presumptuous, as a young member of the Synod, in bringing forward this resolution; but he thought it was Just one of those resolutions which would come more appropriately from a new member than from one who had had a share in the management of Church affairs in past years. If any other reason were sought, it must be found in the fact that he was a member of the committee of a Church day school. He took it that there were very few persons who would require him to produce chapter and verse in support of the assertion that the Church estate was bestowed specifically for purposes of education as well as for Church purposes. It might, however, be said that it was his duty to have adduced some evidence on this head, and therefore he would make one or two brief references. It was, no doubt, well known that in the Letters Patent under which the Canterbury Association was constituted, the purposes and objects of the association were declared (amongst other things), to be “for the establishment and maintenance of ecclesiastical and educational institutions, in the settlement so to be founded as aforesaid in connection with the Church of England as by law established.” In the “ Church Property Trust Ordinance,” passed in 1854, which vested the Church estate in trustees, the words “in trust for ecclesiastical and educational purposes,” were used in every instance in which the objects to which the estate was to l)e applied were referred to; and the title of the Ordinance was “A Bill for establishing a trust for the management of property held for ecclesiastical and educational purposes by the Canterbury Association, —and for other purposes. ” One paragraph in the interpretation clause of that Ordinance struck him as being somewhat remarkable as evidence in favor of the assertion contained in the resolution. It was the definition of the word “parish.” “The term ‘ parish ’ shall be held to mean a district formed under the authority of this Ordinance for ecclesiastical and educational purposes. ” He was quite aware that in 1855 Christ’s College was established and endowed out of the Church estate, but it must be borne in mind that under the deed of foundation the amount required for the college was not made a charge upon the general revenues arising from the estate, but certain specific lands referred to in the schedule thereto were set apart as an endowment. [The Dean— One-fifth.] He thanked the Dean for the reminder. No doubt it was stated in the report of the Commission appointed by his lordship in 1804, that it was estimated at the time that the land set apart for the college amounted in value to one-fifth of the whole estate, and also that the association, by their agent, had expressed themselves as satisfied that the trust for educational purposes had been fulfilled. But he had not been able to find that the report of that commission had ever been adopted by the Synod as a correct official statement, nor could lie discover any reason why “ one-fifth ” should be accepted as a fair apportionment. It appeared to him that one-fifth was quite insufficient, because it was clear from the terms of the trust that an undivided interest in the estate was given to educational purposes, and it was quite impossible to get rid of all claims on the estate in respect of edution, by merely conveying a small portion of the estate for that object. He believed he was correct in saying that if the intention had been that a certain part of that estate should be set aside for one purpose and the remainder for another purpose, the words used in the Ordinance would have been “lands held in trust for ecclesiastical purposes and educational purposes,” whereas the words were “ecclesiastical and educational purposes,” the claims of the two being equal, and the one considered as the complement of the other. It would be for those who opposed the resolution to show that the trusts in respect of education had been fulfilled. He hoped that he would not be considered as making an unwarranted or rash assertion when he declared that in his opinion the Church in this diocese had ignored her duties and responsibilities, as a Church, in respect to education. Church day schools had existed for many years, but, as far as the Church was concerned, they were allowed to maintain themselves as best they could ; and although they were able to pay expenses, they were not in a position to incur any large expenditure in order to raise their teaching standard, or place them in a a high degree of efficiency. It must not be forgotten that up to twelve months ago they were in receipt of Covernmcnt aid, without which they would not have been able to carry

on. He considered that one of the most vulnerable points in the armor of the denominationalists was the fact that the church schools were not of the high standard they professed, and did not really supply the educational wants of the people. It was too late, when the Ordinance was brought in, to attempt to make amends with any hope of stemming the popular tide. The church had lost her opportunity ; and the mere indulgiu invective and anathemas had only the effect of smothering the sympathy—even in the minds of staunch churchmen —which might otherwise have been extended in a practical form. He believed that had it not been for the hostility which the Church exhibited to the Education Ordinance they would have found that the privilege allowed to ministers by that Ordinance would not have been withheld by the committee of one single district, whereas the fact now was that the districts where that privilege was granted were the exception and not the rule. At the present time there were a few C hurch day schools still in existence, although they might be said to be in extremis. There was no disguising the fact—and it was well that there should be no mistake—that those schools could not longer exist from parochial resources alone, and that if no extra-parochial assistance were granted they would inevitably die out. That was a fact in respect to which they must not and could not plead ignorance. He held that the church was bound to take up a definite position on this question —either to deliberately assist those schools, or, as deliberately, to allow them to be closed. Last year, for the first time, he believed, a money grant of £l5O was placed in the hands of the Diocesan Education Committee for distribution, and small as were the amounts received, when divided among several schools, yet it was undeniable that but for that assistance the few remaining church schools—one certainly—would have succumbed. At a parish meeting held at St Luke’s about tAvo months ago, a resolution Avas passed to the effect that unless some pecuniary aid Avere granted by the Synod at this session, the school should be closed at Christmas. If the Church estate had been bestoAved for educational as Avell as for Church purposes, they ought honestly to carry out the obligation, to which the Church consented Avheu she accepted that endoAVment. Because there might be other objects, even urgent and important objects, on Avhich their funds could be expended, they Ayere none the more relieved of their obligations in regard to one specific object to Avhich they Avere bound to apply part of those funds. If he might be allowed to use the expression in that place, he would say that it was not right to rob Peter to pay Paul, no matter hoAV indigent might be the circumstances of the latter. They had before them proposals to expend £SOOO on the Cathedral, and a similar amount on churches and parsonages in country districts, and there ought to be no difficulty in finding a small amount in support of their schools. The resolution had been brought forward Avithout concert with others, and. on his own responsibity. He did not see lioav it could be negatiA r ed, as it simply affirmed Avhat Avas a matter of fact. And if it Avere carried, the logical and practical result must be that they should deA r ote a part of their revenues to the support of their schools. It was worse than useless to pass resolutions affirming the desirability of maintaining the existing Church schools, if they gave no practical assistance : it Avas a demand for bricks Avithout straAV, —• a Pharisaical exhortation to those Avho were starving and in the cold, to be Avarned and filled. He wished to add that he had been fortified in the step he had taken by the assurance which he had received of support from tAvo gentlemen Avho had been associated Avith the province from its foundation, one of Avhom had stated that he would support the resolution, and the other that in years gone by, it had ahvays been felt that the Church had not fulfilled her obligation in respect of education. It will be remembered that the debate Avas adjourned on the understanding that the resolution should be discussed on the folloAVing e\ r ening, and that on the next day, when the resolution was called on, the Synod resolved, by a large majority, upon a division, and on the motion of Mr C. R. Blakiston, “ That the Synod pass on to the consideration of the next order of the day,” thus preventing any further discussion.