Evening Post. FRIDAY, JUNE 2, 1882. THE EDUCATION DEBATE.

Evening Post, Volume XXIII, Issue 127, 2 June 1882, Page 2

Evenin g Post. FRIDAY, JUNE 2, 1882. THE EDUCATION DEBATE.

That Mr. Ptke's Education Act Amendment Bill would elicit a vigorous debate, was a foregone conclusion. The debate occupied the whole of last evening's sitting, or very nearly six hours, in which time no fewer than 30 members spoke. It will therefore be self-evident that the speeches could not have been long ones, and as a matter of fact, they were without exception brief, terse, and pithy. Indeed, the whole disoussion was one of the most moderate, reasonable, and creditable, that has ever been listened to witbin those walls. Even the members who have already acquired some reputation for long-windedness seemed to catoh the prevailing tone, and were " short, Bharp, and decisive." There were many interesting features in the debate, notably the different attitudes assumed by Mr. Waltkk Johnston and Mr. Sheehan, who both treated the question from the Roman Patholio standpoint, yet arrived at diametrically opposite results. The various speeches afforded conclusive demonstration that the subject was not dealt with from a party standpoint, or anything approaching it. It would be impossible to conceive a more thorough divesting of party colouring. Even Ministers voted in different lobbies, Mr. "Walter Johnston going with the supporters of the bill, as did also his late colleague. Sir John Hall, to the extent of pairing in its favour, while Mr. Bbtce, Mr. Dice and Mr- Rollsston voted against it. All three Opposition leaders, Sir George G»kt, Mr. Montgomery, and Mr. MacAndrew voted with the majority of the Government and— mirabile dictu! — all the native members voted in the opposite lobby to that patronised by Mr. Shkbhan. This last incident is we believe almoßt without parallel, for Mr. vote is popularly understood to carry that of his Maori colleagues. However, so it happened in this instance, and it accentuated very remarkably the absence of party spirit alike from the discussion, and from the subsequent division which resulted in the rejection of the bill by the decisive maj ..rity of 21 in a House of 73 members. The real key to the situation was undoubtedly given by Mr. Eollkston. Members might deliver themselves of their pptighb sentiments on the Education question but it was merely in the spirit of a debating club, simply because, as Mr. Eollkston justly observed, they knew the question was absolutely

settled, and oonld not be disturbed without an express appeal to the country. It was therefore that two people holding such directly opposed views rb Mr. Rollbbton and Mr. Walter John 3' on could, without inconsistency, ait together in the same Cabinet. Notwithstanding that Mr. Johnston might personally approve and support Mr. Pykb's Bill, he wa3 well aware that it could not be carried, and that he and his Ministerial colleagues had explicitly accepted the situation, so far as the Education question went, as fixed and practically unalterable. It is for the same reason that we have not hitherto deemed it worth while to discuss the education question on ita merits, and that we still think it supererogatory. Not that there are not many, very many, points in regard to whiph our educational system needs material ' amendment. It is monstrously coßtly, and the mode of inspection is to a large extgnt exceedingly unsatisfactory, in some instances j a barefaced sham. That the Roman Catholics do Buffer considerable hardship, and that they have made noble efforts to provide for their children an efficient system of education in accordance with their own conscientious convictions, most people will cordially recognise. Mr. Wbston put this very forcibly in his well-timed speech last night, but he none the less firmly declined, as did Mr. Sheehan, although himself a Roman Catholic, to disturb the existing state of things until the people of the colony had expressed their wish that this should be done. That is the real point now. Until a direct appeal shall have been made to the constituencies, and a plain, unmistakeable vote given on that appeal, every Ministry, and indeed Parliament itse.f, mußt of necessity treat the Education question as definitely decided, and no longer open to doubt or discussion, so far as main principles are concerned. The Education question is as much a settled thing of tha past is the Abolition of Provincialism. It is not a moot point of the present time at all, and cannot with propriety be interfered with, even by Parliament itself, unless at the clearly-shown wish of the country, declared at a general election. The moat atrenuouß opponents of our colonial system of education must admit that no such expression was given by the electors in the recent general election. There was nothing approaching such a declaration. Should the question have to be fought out, it will be Btoutly contested on the sharpest lines of party demarcation. But until that time arrives, and until the public mind is thus declared, the Education question must be regarded as finally disposed of.