LARRIKINISM AND THE REMEDY.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2821, 10 April 1882, Page 2

LARRIKINISM AND THE REMEDY.

[To the Editor.] Sir,—Mr Duval, in his last effusion upon larrikinism, states that my previous letter is so full of absurdities that he is compelled to reply against his inclination. Such and similar statements are what illogical disputationists resort to when they find themselves •* cornered " and their arguments refuted and disproved. This is the position Mr Duval has taken up at present. He abandons almost all his untenable arguments and confines himself to simply reviewing my previous letter, in which he endeavors to find absurdities, oblivious of the fact, perhaps, that his own productions are not altogether free from extravagant statements, fallacious arguments, and unpardonable inaccuracies. Here, only in his last letter have wo been able to get an expression of opinion from him with reference to Bible reading in schools, and then what does he say ?—“ A child may go to Sundav school and learn that God made man, and at school on Monday (or during the week) learn that his forefathers were monkeys.” Now here wo see Mr Duval knocking the ground from under himself, and embracing the standard of secularism in his _ fall—probably it was inadvertent on his part, but nevertheless ho has committed himself. Secular feathers appear to constitute no mean portion of his plumage. I would remark that I did not attempt to compare colonial larrikins with those midnight maimers and armed intimidators with which Ireland is unhappily

stocked at present. I spoke only of their juvenile associates, as compared with the larrikins of our colonies ; and in this respect I still adhere to my former statement, which goes to show that beyond the shores of New Zealand there is deeper budding villany and ruffianism than ever spiritual enthusiasts may hope to hear of among our colonial larrikins. Argus has read history with perhaps a little more advantage to himself than another person has read and studied logic and reason. Mr Duval’s argument that the present state of Ireland is attributable to 300 years of persecution and tyranny, is about as true and reasonable as to say that the impetuosity of the French people is due to the influence exercised by Joan of Arc. When Mr Duval attempted to show that our present state of civilization was effected by religion and Christian influence in times past, I called attention to the plan adopted by referring to deeds enacted “ under the cloak of religion,” as Mr Duval blandly admits. Now be ridicules my reference to the Hugenots, Henry the Eighth, &c., but I maintain that reigning. Monarchs of the past were just as capable of regulating judicious religious instruction to their subjects as any reigning sovereign of our day is—-thus irrefutably showing that religion alone is no safeguard against deeds of infamy and violence, Mr Duval, about the middle of his letter “ concludes by replying to the question of Bible reading in Schools,” and near the termination of his letter he “ finally tells ‘Argus ’ that he never said larrikinism was rampant in New Zealand,” and who said he-did ? lam positive I did not. I was challenged to name a place where the secular system was in vogue, and where, also, larrikinism was not rampant. ( In reply I stated that we need not go beyond New Zealand to prove that in the midst of a secular system, this social evil was not rampant, and in this assertion the Press of the colony will back me up. Mr Duval pounces upon New' South Wales as a frightful example of what larrikinism is, quite forgetting that New South Wales was pioneered by convicts transported from home, “ where religion is taught in the bulk of-schools,” and presumably has been before that colony was inhabited by“ compulsory emigrants whose vicious and distinguishing characteristics ” are a marked feature of society there to this day. Mr Duval states that he refers to the “ sons of respectable parents who take to larrikinism ont of inclination to mischief,” but at the. same time is it . not just possible that this class of youth abuse their religious training? Again, no reference is made to the style of education these “ sons of respectable parents received, because proofs could not be given,” tbe imagination is merely drawn upon for the purpose of polemical argument. The secular system has been in force in New Zealand, I. believe, nearly twenty-two years, and yet larrikinism is not “ rampant." According 'toiMr Duval, secularism has developed larrikinism in Victoria and New South Wales in eighteen years, lam almost inclined to question his authority. However, we will let the flea stick to the wall. I trust I may be pardoned for being so tedious and circumlocutory in my observations ; and in conclusion I emphatically re-assert that religions teaching in schools will never stamp out larrikinism, which is an outburst of human passions, and for which'the law is the only panacea. —Yours, &c., Argus.

[This correspondence must now cease. —Ed. S.O, Times.] '■■