The New Zealand Tabelet THURSDAY, JULY 10, 1913. A DEFINITE PRONOUNCEMENT

New Zealand Tablet, 10 July 1913, Page 33

The New Zealand Tabelet THURSDAY, JULY 10, 1913. A DEFINITE PRONOUNCEMENT

PLAIN and straightforward statement was ml/lwLa elicited from the Prime Minister at quesWP tion time on Wednesday of last week on Tg&JMJb the burning question of ' Referendum or rtjgjsjrrj No Referendum.' The statement appeared in the dailies of July 3; and we give it as s&&£&* wired to the Christchurch Press by that §P h paper's special correspondent at Wellington. Wiring under date July 2, the correspondent of the Government paper says: ' A definite statement in regard to the Government's intentions on the subject of education was made by the Prime Minister this afternoon in answer to Messrs. G. Witty and T. M. Wilford, M.P.'s. Mr. Witty wanted to know if the Government were in favor of retaining the present national system of free, secular, and compulsory education. 'Yes,' replied Mr. Massey. To Mr. Wilford he said the Government did not intend to introduce any legislation this session enabling a referendum to be taken on the subject of Bible lessons in State schools.' The full question put by Mr. Wilford was in these terms: 'Mr. T. M. Wilford (Hutt) asked the Prime Minister whether he intended introducing any legislation this session enabling a referendum to be taken on Bible-reading or Bible lessons in State schools; and, if so, what form of question or questions or issue, or issues did he intend to submit.' And to that the answer was, as above stated, in the negative. •,.•■/' The Prime Minister's statement is quite explicit; and would seem to settle the question, at least for this

session, and, indeed, for-next session also if the Government aie to be consistent. . For after definitely informing. the public that they 1 ‘ are ill' favor of retaining the present national system of free, secular, and compulsory education,’ it would be Obviously an act of inconsistency if the Government were to introduce or to support a referendum measure which is demanded with the express object of. doing away with one of the abovenamed features of the existing system. After the close of next session—that of 19 will be a general election; and, apart from the inconsistency of the proceeding, the j Government will ' hardly be likely to take up the referendum proposals— have aroused such a large measure of opposition - throiighout the country —on the very eve of an appeal .toJ the electors. On the other :: hand, .. if. referendum legislation is not introduced next;... session—so as ito enable the suggested plebiscite to be taken at the same time as the general election is being held—it may be safely predicted, for obvious reasons, that, it: ; w l ll not be introduced at all. It is, of.course, open to any private member either in this session or in the next, to introduce referendum legislation on his own initiative; But in the absence of Government assistance he would not have the slightest chance >of . carrying the measure through. Moreover, so. far members have evinced a distinct unwillingness to: get themselves mixed up with the present agitation. It is the custom at question time in the House, when members are keenly interested, to discuss fully and freely any answers • given by. Ministers which are considered to be unsatisfactory ; and it was noticeable and significant that on the occasion of. Mr. Massey’s answers to the two questions, presented on the subject of education^mot a memberwasfound to titter a word of objection or dissent. Nevertheless, although all the omens are at present thus entirely favorable, it behoves us to be prepared for all possible . eventualities ; and to that end we again urge upon all who are in charge of petition forms to press on with the work of obtaining signatures,- so that the Catholic petitions may be fully signed and , all in readiness to be. presented whenever the time may be deemed opportune.