South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, JULY 5, 1880.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2277, 5 July 1880, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, JULY 5, 1880.

Tuk red herring drawn across the (rack hy Sir Win, Fox will hardly deceive anybody. His introduction of the Bible as a subject of political controversy at a lime when taxation end appropriation arc affording ample latitude for debate is, to say the least, singularly When the financial and industrial prolems, which arc the burning questions of the hour, have been settled satisfactorily, it will be time enough to revive tin' old old feud over secular education. The time which Sir William Fox has chosen for introducing the Bible in schools proproposal is so manifestly inopportune, as to raise great doubts as to his sincerity . People who venerate sacred writ will scarcely feel delighted at the gratuitous and uncomplimentary way in which it is being shnilled into political prominence. Jf Sir William has a sincere regard for the. Bible as a hook of morals, is lie justified in using it as a poker wherewith to stir the embers of political discord ? Is the time propitious? Arc the circumstances favorable? The Ministry arc pledged not to interfere with the Education Act. At whose bidding then has the member for Bangitikei taken up the cudgel ? Has there been any public agitation of late on this abstract subject. If it is the general desire that the session should he a brief, hut not a prolitless one, why the introduction of this element of discord ? Is this Haunting of the Bible, ns a red rag, before the impulsive blood of the House of Representatives, respectful to the Book of Books, or to the religious feelings of the community ? Is not the honorable member trilling with the Bible, and trilling with the temper of the country? For the sake of the urgent work which is still before Parliament it is to he hoped that this effort to put the House on a false scent will not succeed. That it is merely an attempt to divert the attention of members from the urgent questions of representation, and land and financial reform, is, wo submit, pretty evident. The Bible in schools, as about to he agitated hy Sir Win. Fox, is simply a piece of ingenious hy-play. The astute politician appears to have adopted the tactics of the expert London pickpockets who get up a pugilistic exhibition in order that they may rob the spectators. While members are seriously wrangling over Bible reading, the obnoxious tax collector will bo picking the pockets of the property holder. The move is no doubt a clever one, but its object is somewhat transparent. The condition of the colony at present will hardly permit of the discussion of abstract questions of theology or even morality. There is, unfortunately, a large amount of distress and destitution in the colony, amhhow best to alleviate this suffering is the question that demands immediate consideration. The employment of the unemployed, the securing of food and raiment for parents and children, and the prevention of a threatened labor exodus from our shores, arc subjects that demand precedence. The Bible in schools can very well aiford to take a back scat for the present. The providing of clothes for the back and food for the stomach must precede the inculcation of Bible morality. Children cannot live on air. They require some other nourishment besides moral and spiritual precepts. While the Government tux collector is going about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour, and laboring men are crying aloud for employment, and families are bereft of the common comforts of existence, time is too valuable to be squandered on the discussion of abstract subjects like this. If Hir William Fox is really a friend of

the Bible, lie should strive to brings its maxims to bear in a practical manner on the wearers of line linen and broadcloth, who, while legislating- profcssedl}’ for the public weal, turn a deaf ear to the cry of industrial distress winch is ringing' throughout the length and breadth of New Zealand.

The Bible in Schools question can very well stand over lor a season, till the legislature lias finally decided on the remedies most applicable to the financial and social ailments of the country. We would suggest (hat the Christianity of which Sir Win. Fox assumes to bo a virtuous defender, would take a far more practical form by refraining from stirring up sectarian or religious discord, at a time when parliament is engaged on problems whoso issue will affect the material veil-being of the people. The situation is a grave one ; the present is no lime to trifle with the interests of connnnnilies and individuals. What is wanted is not; the Bible in Schools, but daily bread for the population. After the children have been clothed and fed they will be ready for the reception of theology,that is, if home influences in that direction are deemed insulliciont. The movements of politicians who shoulder the Bible in the heat of party warefarc are invariably suspicious. The members of the House will show their good sense by shelving this motion rc the Bible in schools without discussion. The Bible deserves a belter fate than to he made a football for sinister and designing politicians to kick into prominence whenever (hey think lit ; —■

Polemics witli religion play, As truant children cast, From hand to hand the dying ball, But to be lost at last.