CAPITATION FEES.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5144, 18 September 1877, Page 3

CAPITATION FEES.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES, Sib, —My attention was called this morning to a paragraph in your paper of Saturday last, with reference to my vote on the subject of the capitation fees, proposed to be levied under the Education Act now before the House Representatives, in which you display your usual ingenuity in misrepresenting my conduct. I voted against the capitation tax, and intimated that when the House went into committee on the clause under which the Consolidated Fund is to be charged with £3 10s. per head for children attending school, I should move that all funds required for the ordinary support of the schc ols should be defrayed out of rates to be levied by the school board in each education district.

Now, my reason for this is that I consider the cost of education as properly a charge upon property, and therefore that to defray that cost out of the Consolidated Fund is to throw the burtheu chiefly on the poorer classes, to the relief of the richer, who, however, benefit more largely from any increase in the general knowledge of the people than the former do. But you suggest that ray proposal would be more oppressive to some religious denominations than that of the Government. Let us inquire into this, and let me take the case of the Homan Catholics for the purpose of illustration. The Roman Catholics are said to number one-sixth of the population of the colony, and therefore would contribute one-sixth of the amount to be applied out of the Consolidated Fund under the Government system, besides contributing a sixth of any amount expended in buildings, &c. Now, the amount proposed to bo applied out of the Consolidated Fund for ordinary purposes for the ensuing year is £130,000, and for building purposes it is proposed to borrow £50,000. Of course if the Roman Catholics generally attended the State schools they would get the benefit of their quota of the proposed expenditure ; hut except where no other school is available the children of that denomination will not attend these schools. Let us assume that one-fourth of the Roman Catholic children will, under the pressure of circumataucea, attend the schools. Still the Roman Catholics generally will be contributing £16,250 of Consolidated Fund and £6150 of loan towards the maintenance of the schools during the very first year of their establishment. They are in the minority in this colony, and we can, of course, impose this upon them whether they like it or not. Probably if the Protestants stood towards the Roman Catholics in a similar minority, the latter would exhibit little tenderness in dealing with them, but our belief that this would be so, does not make it a whit more Christian on our parts to take advantage of our chance. Now, sir, if my views as to the mode of raising the necessary funds were adopted, the difference to the 'Roman Catholics, even if we did not excuse them one farthing, would only amount to £2250 a year, or 10s. per head on the proportion of children of that denomination attending their own schools. But I should be prepared to go further in exemption than this,

chiefly on the ground that the Roman Catholics can get hut little benefit from the large reserves that have been made, and are about to he made, for educational purposes. You will, of course, say that I am a denominationalist of the worst type, because I choose to recognise the fact that the Roman Catholics cannot join with the Protestants 'on any common educational platform, and because I think it improper and unchristian to use their money for our purposes, simply because we are strong enough to do so. Well, sir, lam content that you should indulge in any amount of abuse towards me on this score, and equally content in thinking that my own views, if less acceptable than yours in some quarters, have at least the merit of fairness and justice. —I am, &c., Wm. Thos. Locke Travers. Wellington, September 17. P.S.—How is it that you see no inconsistency in my colleague, Mr. Hunter, making a strong speech against a property tax, and yet supporting a Government which has declared its intention to propose such a tax next session “ as a cardinal point in its financial policy?” [Mr. Travers, as is customary with him, has let his temper get the better of his sense. He is now doing exactly what we predicted he would do, exhibiting himself as a denominationalist, whilst professing to be a secularist. What Mr. Hunter’s opinions on a pi*operty tax have to do with this is really a matter that passes onr comprehension. However, we may say that Mr. Hunter, like mu-selves, may see fit to support an honest, consistent Government, even though that Government is in favor of a form of taxation which we think should only be used as a dernier ressort. — Ed. N.Z. Times ]