South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, JULY 2, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2584, 2 July 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, JULY 2, 1881.

The Bible in Schools party have scored a win. The late plebiscite resulted in 903 votes for a portion of the Scriptures being road in the State schools, whilst only 39 had the boldness to oppose it. If the voting was really an index of the feeling of the community, then an amendment is sure, to be made in the present Education Act in the direction of

affording religious instruction. It is no use of going into the question as to whether there is or is not a clear majority of the heads of families in favor of Bible reading. The voting showed over ten to one in favor of religious instruction. But we think that it can be clearly shown that there is not such a large proportion of the general community in favor of the object of the Bible in Schools Association of South Canterbury. According to the returns 991 parents recorded their votes, and 536 refrained from responding to the appeal of the Association. It may be safely assumed that nine out of every ten of the 536 would be unfavorable to mixing up religion with State education. Again complaints have reached us from parents stating that voting papers had not been forwarded to them, and, singular to say, all the complainants are thorough-going Secularists. Of course we do not ■fully allege that these omissions were on purpose. They should nevertheless be taken into account in forming an estimate of the relative strength of Secularists and non-Secularists. Again there are a considerable number of children attending schools other than the Timaru High School and those under the control of the Education Board. There are the Catholic Schools, for instance. We are not aware that the parents of the children at these educational establishments were invited to express an opinion. Had they done so they would have voted in a block against the introduction of the Bible into the Schools. We are not advocates of the Catholic claims for subsidies for denominational education. We are in favor of secularism, and the leaders of the Roman Catholic party are as decidedly in favor of denominationalism. However, if a petition is sent to Parliament purporting to represent the views of the people of South Canterbury based on the late plebiscite, it will be entirely misleading. To give a correct reflex of public opinion every creed must be consulted. If the 536 parents who ignored the request of the Association, and the parents of children attending Catholic schools, and those who did not receive papers had recorded their votes, there would, doubtless, have been a substantial minority against importing such a dangerous element as religion into the public schools. There would certainly not have been a very large majority in favor of the views of the Bible in Schools Association.

Still we are inclined to the belief that a majority of parents are in favor of religious instruction when the question is viewed in the abstract. A great many,indeed, fail to apprehend the political bearing of the subject, and as the State provides the cost of education, the question is a political one. There is now an active minority in New Zealand opposed to what is called the present “ godless ” system. Great force will be added to the action of that minority by such plebiscites as those taken in Dunedin and South Canterbury.

In the majority of instances, no doubt, those who yoted for the Bible in schools were actuated by the most worthy motives. By recording “ No,” they would have had a most uneasy suspicion that they were voting against Christianity. The feeling is of such a nature that to overcome it requires an extended knowledge of the circumstances of the colony. The mixed character of the population should be taken into account, and above all the defective character of education when the advocates of religious instruction had it all their own way. The present Act eminently suits the requirements of the bulk of colonists. The system may not be perfect, but it is as perfect as anything we are likely to obtain in a mixed community. There can be no earthly doubt if the Bible is admitted into the State Schools, there will be a strong agitation for denominationalism pure and simple. There would be no end to the complications which would arise. At every election the subject of religious instruction would be a test question. The colony is at present happily free from religious discord. The Bible-in-schools party are raising up the spirit of religious intolerance. They, no doubt, believe that the latter would be better than what they consider the present apathy, especially if they have got the idea in their heads that they would be in the ascendant. Bigotry and want of consideration for others are in no slight degree at the root of the present movement. Harm is being done to the interests of true religion. Intelligent parents who really care for the religious instruction of the children are perfectly aware that little good would be accomplished by reading a few chapters of the Bible in the most perfunctory manner in schools to unwilling listeners. The teachers, as a body would not like the task, and they should be considered in the matter. The Bible-in-schools party know full well that there is a large section of the community who would most strenuously object to have a knowledge of the Scriptures imparted in such a way. Besides, it is one of the soundest maxims of modern times that the functions of the State should be kept free from those of religion. The Bible-in-schools party would commit the country to a policy of reaction.

The parsons and the ladies have carried the day in South Canterbury. The combination is all powerful in sentimental matters, and in its present stage the Bible in Schools idea is sentimental. But it is no sentimental matter for the colony to find £IOO,OOO a year for the purposes of education. That is a worldly concern, and worldly men are the most capable of judging how the best return is to be secured for the money. The Parliament of New Zealand considered the subject—considered it very carefully—and* came to the conclusion that to provide a system of general education, it must be free, compulsory, and

secular. On the last principle there can be no compromise. If the Legislature yielded an inch it must yield an ell. In the course of a few months there will be a general election. It will be lamentable if the electors are distracted by religious subjects.