PROTESTANT POLITICAL ASSOCIATION.

Otaki Mail, Volume 26, 13 June 1919, Page 3

PROTESTANT POLITICAL ASSOCIATION.

PUBLIC MEETING AT OTAKI. ADDRESS BY EEV. HOWARD j ELLIOTT. | The Rev. Howard Elliott, lecturer for 1 the Protestant Political Association of ! New Zealand, gave an address at the Druids’ Hall, Otaki, on Wednesday j night last when there were about 50 ..persons present. Mr Byron Brown, who occupied the chair, said no doubt all had heard of Mr Elliott and had formed opinions of him ( by hearsay. A man was often judged J not so much by what ho said as by j what people said that he said. Mr ; Elliott, was now here to speak for himself, and as the representative of a ■ large public association tvas entitled to a fair hearing. j Mr Elliott in his opening .remarks j (

stated that the- P.l’.A. hud been established two years ago, and since that recent time had established 200 groups, representing 200,000 voters, so that, though young, the organisation was strong, and was.being well supported, particularly in Southland. I Mr Elliott said the members of the . I’.P.A. thoroughly believed in British fair play to all, and that schsc of tole- ' ration was extended lo all Roman j Catholics. The Roman Catholics had , organised tlicir forces, and for the’past thirty years had exercised a powerful | influence in politics. The Roman , Catholic Federation had been organ-. ised some years ago to further the interests of the Roman Church politically and had developed this organisation to such an extent that Bishop Brodic had ' boasted recently that they cou]d bring i

50,000 votes to back tlicir demands. The speaker dealt ivit-h tlie attitude of the Roman Catholic Church with regard to the war, contending that the Pope and the Church had hindered the Allies’ progress. :By their attitude in Ireland they had .made it necessary to keep a force of SO,OOO men in that country, thus greatly handicapping Great Britain’s war efforts. * Atr Elliott pointed out that while the Catholics had for years used their united influence to further tlicir own cuds politically, the Protestants , had followed various parties and had not united their forces. He particularly stressed the point that they (the Protestants) were not against the religion of tlicir Homan Catholic friends—they were not out to persecute them or interfere with their rights. This was a free country where all could worship as they liked; but when the Roman Catholics banded together for political purposes the Protestants had a right to oppose 1 them. It was untrue to say that the P.P.A. was out to persecute the Tt ms said his Association

VmILUUUOS. XU - fc \vas raising sectarian strife, but lie contended tlicy were acting in self-defence. Mr Elliott proceeded to deal with some of flic -reasons wliy it was neces- > sary for Protestants to combine, touch- | ing first on our national educational system,' which he said was of the fit- j most importance. AVc had not. a perfect, j system, you-it was one of which we had C vcry reason to be proud, and our chil- ; dreu who shared in that system com- | pared favourably, educationally, mor- | ally and physically with those of any j other country. Tlicir Roman Catholic friends were not satisfied with the public schools, which, they said, wore Godless and lacking in tone, and were given permission to erect schools of their own. Mr Elliott, contended that, official figures proved that the Roman Catholics provided twice as many criminals as the Protestants did—these figures, by the way, had been kept out of the last year booh, probably at the instigation of the Catholics. Thus he argued that parents doubled the chances of tlicir children becoming .criminals by sending them to Roman Catholic schools. Now the Catholics were demanding £121,000 annually to pay for the teaching of their children, although they stated that the teachers of their schools were not paid. The Catholics claimed that they were paying for the education of a portion of the children and that portion of the expense should be refunded them. The P.P.A. contended that if the public schools were

not good enough for tlie Catholics, and : tlicv wanted their own schools, they . should pay for them! (Applause.) If the country allowed such a claim, the Anglican, Presbyterian and other donominations would also be entitled to payment for sectarian schools, and our * whole national system of education ( would be completely broken up. The P.P.A. : stood solidly for free, compul- B sory. and unsectarian education. The speaker stated that all Roman Catholic schools in the Dominion were ' exempt from rates, although nil other j church schools did cot enjoy that privi- > } le"e. The only argument that the • f Romanists could advaneo against such j an injustice was that Protestant schools ( were business concerns, while Catholic. . schools were religions institutions. Mr , Elliott remarked: “I am sure you will , all immediately see the difference! ” (Laughter.) _ ‘ Then 3000 children were being carried daily on the railways free to at- _ tend Roman Catholic schools. This meant some £lslO annually, while £IOO was paid by the Government to enable, nuns to travel free on the trains, though no State school teacher could enjoy that privilege. Mr Elliott instanced how this free railway travelling affected small settlements, often keeping a school a one-teacher school which would be raised in grade if children were not taken away ky train to attend schools elsewhere. This was a free country, said the speaker, and . they did not object to the Catholics having their own schools, but let them ‘ pay for them! He added that if it ‘ were a Roman Catholic country no Protestant schools would be allowed -to start. Mr Elliott, while speaking most highly of Sir James Allen’s ability-as a Cabinet Minister, - accused him of treachery to the Protestants of the

country. The Education Boards . had persistently’ refused to give scholarships to private or denominational • schools, but Sir James Allen had, he 1 contended, deliberately altered the 1 word- “Board” to “Minister,” thus 1 giving the Minister power to grant, j scholarships, and this had led to j scholarships being granted by the Min- | istor to Roman Catholic schools, which, ,ho urged, should not be done. That, j he declared, was an act of deliberate treachery to our national educational system. Turning to military compulsory service, the speaker spoke very strongly on the fact that Roman Catholic priests and Marist Brothers were exempted from active service, while ministers of other, denominations were not so treated, and one-third of the male teachers of other schools had voluntarily enlisted. This exemption of the Roman Catholics, which he denounced as mostunjust; had been brought about as a result. of a compromise between Sir Jas. Allen and loaders of the Catholic Church. Sir James agreed that if the

| Catholics abstained from joining the t anti-militarists and helped to deter the "Red Feds” from opposing the Government, lid would see that the priests ! and Marist Brothers were exempted | from active service. > A voice: Is that a-fact? : -Mr Elliott: Yes. Mr Elliott added that he had charged Sir James Allen with this repeatedly, and he had not denied if. He declared that a man who could make such a bargain was a danger to Protestantism in New Zealand. • The speaker said that he would remind j his audience that their member (Mr AY. H. Field) was one of the men who , was so held up by .the fear of the power J of Rome that he had voted for the 1 exemption of priests and Marist 'Broth- j ers 'from active serviced He had evi- I dentlv thought that the Protestants j

j wore not worthy of consideration. Mr 1 Elliott said lie hoped that the men who had so voted would not disfigure the House of Representatives again. The speaker sounded a note of warning re the steadily increasing proportion of Roman Catholics gaining admission to i ihc Civil Service of this country, and | ! pointed out that whereas ten years ago the proportion was about 25 per cent., I it was now 33 to 40 per cent. If they • i were not careful, in another ten years j I it might be 00 per cent., ns it Was in . r some of -the Australian States.. f Mr Elliott touched on the censorship I | of Protestant literature. The “Heavcnj Twins” (Hon. A. M. Myers and Sir | Francis Bell) had held uj) sixty books. Some of the works banned, because ! they were said to be immoral and dangerous, included books written by some of the most eminent men of the day, and had boon widely circulated before the war started. Ho strongly opposed the banning of' Protestant, books of such a nature, when not a single j Catholic publication had been held up.

Mr- Elliott explained the history of the famous Ne Temcre Decree and its working, and said the P.P.A. demanded the amendment of the laws of the land to prevent the impugning of men and women in marriage and the legitimacy -of children. No Church, he contended, ( had a right to over-ride (lie laws of our | land. ! Mr Elliott, after a lengthy address, i sunpned up his- points, and urged the -j need of the Protestants of the country ; banding together to protect their own | interests. He urged that they should j select, men to represent them in ParliaImcnt who had principle and independence. The P.P.A. was preparing a platform that would be wide and compre--1 hensive, and if the Protestants worked ! unitedly they could elect men of intel- ! ligence and integrity who would safej guard those privileges which Protestants had fought and bled for, and 1 which they valued so highly. The j speaker said that he and the secretary i would be glad to enrol members, and said ho hoped lo see a branch formed locality j Mr Bowden asked the speaker if it was not.a fact that scholarships were } won on their merits, to which Mr Elliott replied that no one won any ! scholarship except on its merits, but they objected to .the scholarships being . extended to Catholic schools. 1 The meeting closed with a vote of thanks to the speaker and to the chairman for presiding.