THE EDUCATION BILL.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 189, 21 September 1871, Page 3

THE EDUCATION BILL.

(To the Editor.)

Sin, — Having had an opportunity of examining the new Education Act, I entirely agree with your late remarks on it, and perhaps you will allow me room to offer Rome observations on the clauses relating to Aided Schools, and on the powers proposed to be extended to the Minister of Education.

These clauses empower the different Provincial Board* of Education to aid "individuals and associations for the promotion of education " where "no school district shall have been proclaimed (52), and for the "maintenance of schools within school districts " (53) ; and there is a further provision in reference to those aided or denominational schools, viz:, that the Minister may, under special cir-

cumstances, authorize a shorter period than four hours daily for secular instruction ; in short, the Minister is to be empowered to allow any amount of denominational teaching. Wow, should these clauses be passed, three parties might consider themselves strong enough in Lawrence to apply for help to denominational schools, and allowing a fourth to prefer what the bill describes as the provincial schools, what would become of the present grammar school ? I am aware that it has been said that the Roman Catholics, whos*e case these clauses are specially intended to meet, are said to labour under a disability in not having denominational schools. Let these clauses be passed, and it is submitted that the other denominations will be placed under a disability. There is no sect whose destructive dogmas are* taught by the present arrangements in the Otago system. The Church catechism is not the symbol of the Episcopalians ; the Shorter Catechism is not that of the Presbyterians. In Lawrence the Bible is not even read as a claas book, but in its place a text book on Bible History. Let this measure pass with these clauses as" they are, and those who have sunk their external differences to secure efficient teaching, will be placed at a disadvantage in respect to the denorainationalists.

Moreover, I would say if .any man thinks himself unjustly dealt with because the State does not teach his children the form of religion he approves, it is submitted that ife does the taxpayer an injustice and a wrong in taxing him to support what he does not believe nor approve. Hence, if there is no solution to this question but denominational teaching, we must be shut up to purely secular teaching, leaving it to the sects to indoctrinate their own. ■

But the most objectionable feature of the Bill is the despotic power claimed for the Minister of Education. In case he judges that the opposition of any of the Boards is unreasonable, it shall be lawful for him to give such pecuniary aid as he may think fit. This, Sir, seems to me to be an antedoting of English History. It belongs to the age of the Stuarts, when constitutional forms were set aside ; and If ib is allowed in this ease, it will bo dangerous as a precedent in New Zealand History. I would say, much as ] value education I do not value liberty less ; and sorry am I that a professed zeal for education should furnish an- occasion for a proposal so retrogressive in respect to liberty. Such is my love of liberty that I would not even accept a good if liberty were the price of it, But I fear I have intruded too far on your space, and beg to subscribe myself yours very truly, . N. S.