“ELEMENTARY JUSTICE”

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 412, 21 July 1928, Page 13

“ELEMENTARY JUSTICE”

BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS QUESTION DR. BUXTON MAKES A COMPARISON Accusing Canon James of ignoring the facts of the “great national contribution’’ of the Catholics, Dr. Buxton has written in reply to the canon's letter published yesterday. Dr. Buxton makes a plea for “elementary justice.” The letter is as follows: “The tactics of Canon James remind me of those of the German fleet which during the war made more than on© raid on the English coast. After peppering the peaceful citizens of Scarborough and other towns with high explosives, the Germans, under cover of fog, ran for their lives to their funkholes, befor© Beatty and our boys in blue could engage them in open battle. In Wednesday’s Sun I asked the Canon to state in plain, unambiguous words, what he meant by the gratuitous insults he hurled last Sunday at the peace-loving Catholic citizens of this Dominion. The Canon has disappeared into the fog, and, refusing an open engagement, endeavours to apply the closure. A SIMILE “In my letter I stated that Canon James could not, or would not, see the justice of the Catholic position. His reply proves this. Relying on the generous hospitality of your columns, may I place the position before your readers. Tak© two people whom we will call ‘P’ and ‘C.’ They have a common educational fund. Both agree that true education must include religion. They differ as to the quality of the religion, to say nothing of the quantity. ‘C’ suggests they should each be provided from the common purse with funds to educate their own children to whom they would incidentally teach their own religion in their own way. They adopt this system. After some time *P’ demands a chance. ‘lf/ he says, ‘any of our common funds are to be expended, a form of religion common to us both must alone be taught.’ ‘C’ replies that such a religion is worthless, that it would lead to indifferentism, and is unacceptable to himself on the grounds of conscience. ‘But,’ ‘P’ retorts, ‘I have put more money in the purse; I am bigger than you, therefore you must swallow such religion as I alone prescribe, or go without.’ ‘But you are using my money!’ ‘C’ very properly objects. ‘Your proposals are unjust! You should not use my money to pay fo.r educating your children in a form of religion my children cannot take part in.’ ‘P’ recognises this, and withholds his hand from the theft.

“Canon James would call this ‘placation.’ I call it elementary justice (Your readers will recognise the Statesubsidised denominational teaching prior to 1877, and the introduction of the secular system. Catholics, of course, have never, and can never, accept a secular system as a satisfactory compromise.) NATIONAL WORK

“Canon James apparently does not yet appreciate the national work being done by the Catholic people in erecting, equipping and maintaining their schools at their own expense. But your readers may be interested in a practical example of what Catholics save th© State in cost of secular teaching alone. In my own parish, 322 children are daily educated up to State requirements in our Wellington Streel school, in the heart of the poorest quarter of th© city. The debt on these up-to-date educational buildings is £7,000. Besides the heavy interest on that amount the living expenses of nine teachers and the running expenses of the school, even to the purchase of the paltry transfer forms, and the School Journal, from the Government Printing Office, have to be provided by my people. On the other hand, if we did not shoulder this ever-pressing burden, the secular education of the children in this school alone would cost the Government, on last year’s figures, upwards of £4,000 a year. In addition, Catholics are educating 700 children at Vermont Street, 400 at St. Benedict’s, 400 at Grey Lynn, and so on, until the total children educated in Cathplic primary schools in New Zealand reaches the grand total of 22,000.

“But Canon James and his friends ignore the facts and figures of this great national contribution. He wishes to cease open discussion of it. He adopts other methods. He beats the big drum at an Orange meeting, to which Protestants only are invited. He finally calls for a referendum of the people, from whom he wishes to suppress the facts, and whom he has sought to inflame with sectarian prejudice.” L. J. BUXTON.