HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 996, 4 September 1877, Page 3

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Monday, September 3. The House met at 2.30 p.m. In reply to Mr Macandrew, Major Atkinson said tenders had been accepted for the construction of the missing link of the Christchurch and Invercargill Railway. THE EDUCATION BILL. Mr Pyke resumed the debate on the Education Bill. He would support it if its main principles were limited. He objected to make education a State monopoly. The Bill had given rise to general dissatisfaction throughout the colony. In regard to the Bible reading clause, he objected to a dominant sect of a country outraging the religious feelings of others. The Catholics and Jews were outraged by the State attempting such a thing, As a Protestant, he protested against it. The State should encourage private education as far as possible, only pi'oviding it where no other provision existed. Ho believed in payment by results in all schools. He regarded a purely secular system as an impossibility. He objected to compulsory education as unnecessary and improper. The Bill in this respect was tyrannical and arbitrary. The capitation tax Avould certainly be opposed to the very utmost. The Bill was a return to educational provincialism. In Otago the interior population would not consent to be governed in this matter from Dunedin. Districts should be smaller. He would support Mr Curtis's amendment if the the provision about the Board approving of books were omitted.

Captain Eussell thought it absolutely necessary to make education compulsory. A small capitation fee would be no hardship. He denied that education was a luxury. Local committees would obviate the evils attributed to having large districts. He did not approve of the partial religious instruction provided by the Bill. It was a mere farce. He would forbid all Bible-reading and prayers in public schools. In a democratic country it was absolutely essential that those in whose hands the franchise would rest should be educated. He would support Mr Ourtis's amendment, from a conviction that it was his duty to consider the feelings and convictions of a large proportion of the community. He had experience of Nelson, Westland, and Hawke's Bay to show that the system had worked admirably in those places. He regretted that endowments were not nationalised, and by extra reserves those in the North equalised with those in the South. The payment of fees to a master should depend on results. There was also no provision made for forcing Boards to perform their duties. Mr Seymour Slid the Bill did not provide sufficient funds to insure successful results in many districts. The amount which Marlborough would receive would be £9OO below was required to pay teachers' salaries, even at the present low scale. He objected to capitation going to local committees as unjust to small districts. He would vote against the Bible clause, and support Mr Curtis's amendment. Exempting certificates should not be at the option of local committees. Boards should make their own regulations. A treasurer to the Board should be provided for. He hoped to see the Bill pass with necessary alterations. Mr Bunny asked was there any necessity for the Bill at all. The provincial systems of education had worked well and t was undesirable to disturb them. Uniformity throughout the colony was impossible. He would not oppose the second reading, but in committee he would support Mr Curtis's amendment, and if that were lost he would oppose the Bill. The Government would do better to amend the County and Boad Board legislation, which was needed, than attempt to enforce uniformity in the scab, fencing, impounding, and education laws. Mr Montgomery thought the Bill a well considered one. He objected to the mode of electing the Board. He thought teachers should be appointed on the recommendation of committees. He doubted whether district high schools would prove satisfactory. He did not think a contribution of £3 10s from the Consolidated Fund enough. It would not meet the requirements in Canterbury. He objected to a capitation tax as inquisitorial, and the collection should not be thrown on committees, though reserves should be localised. Boards should be given greater powers independent of the Government. He objected to the Bible reading and Lord's prayer clause until lie knew who was to select the portions of Scripture to be read. He opposed Mr Curtis's amending clause. It would not only affect Catholic schools, but call into existence a number of other small denominational schools, which it would be impossible to carry on efficiently or economically. He would in every way vote against a capitation tax. ' Mr Gtubs supported Mr Curtis's amendment, as the system had long worked successfully in Nelson. It simply secured religious liberty to all classes. He objected to the compulsory clauses. Mr Manders thought the districts too large. The central Boards were too much inclined to encourage high schools to the neglect of elementary requirements. He opposed the Bible reading clause. Mr Tole opposed the Bill generally. It would be unjust to large sections of the community who could not come under its provisions. The Bill was quite unne'eessary. He objected to a political department of education being created. Instead of ignoring those who helped themselves in education, the Government should assist and encourage them. The Bill would make the poor pay for the education of the rich. High schools should not be confined to the pupils of Government schools. He objected to the compulsory clauses. He denied that the Bill was secular. It was sectarian in the most obnoxious form. Almost every subject prescribed could be made a vehicle of sectarian instruction. He strongly objected to a number of the details of the Bill, and replied to a number of objections commonly urged against aiding denominational schools. He advocated payment by results. The debate was interrupted.