THE BRITISH EDUCATION BILL.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIV, Issue 109, 8 May 1903, Page 2

THE BRITISH EDUCATION BILL.

(To the Editor.)

I Sir, —I have read with great interest your leader of May 5 upon the EduI cation Bill. It should be borne in mind that Dr Clifford does not represent the views of all the and that he is much too better a.partisan to state his case with strict .justice, and 1 hope you will find room some time to publish also Mr Balfour's reply to Dr Clifford, a pamphlet most interesting as coming from a Premier (a rare thing in ! these days) also as being a crushing rejoinder, and because of, its literary 'style.

But I think something can be said from the Anglican point of view. The Church of England realising the duty of educating the joor, when the State did not, 'established schools to combine religious and secular education. The Church of England people have voluntarily subscribed over £40,000,000 for their schools, and about one-seventh of the voluntary contributions of to-day is given to the schools. We have to find about £ 1,000,000 a year—our people make great sacrifices. Yet from statements made lately in the Radical press one would think we had committed a crime in doing this.

It must not be forgotten also that the Wesleyans and Roman Catholics and others have built schools, and have a good number, and have maintained them by voluntary contributions, assisted by the State grant given upon results, which all elementary schools, Ohurch, Nonconformist, Roman Catholic or Boa,rd receive if they admit the Government inspector. in, 1870 came Mr Forster's Act establishing board schools. Even with the severe competition which they brought in through having/rate aid, they did not crush out the voluntary schools (Mr Jb'orster never intended that they should), for the Church of England has established 5000 new schools since the passing of that Act, and a large majority of the children of England are still' in the voluntary or denominational schools. ' •

Now the educational system of England is chaotic through the?, different interests at work. There is ho system by which the elementary and secondary and higher systems of education can be connected in general, so as to allow of a child rising from one to the other. The Cockermouth judgment, which came as a ■bit of a.surprise, declared that the rates raised by School Boards could not be used for secondary or technical education, and it became evident to all thoughtful men that there must be a reform in our educational system, and that very quickly.

The present Government with great courage determined to deal with the question. They had to face at oiiee a serious fact, a fact that could not be put on one side or ignored in any way, and that was that the greater part of the educational system was in the hands of various denominations, and that any educational scheme that ignored them wafe doomed to failure. The State could, of,course, bring in.a scheme ignoring them, and set up a purely State and secular system in every parish, but experience has proved that even then a large number of children, if not the majority, would still go to the voluntary schools, and thereby render the State system ineffectual. /So What was' to be done? "Confiscate the schools," said some Radical; but this was too unjust and so could not be done. "Put them under elective popular control," .said others; this was to arouse the political force of the Church of England and the Church of Rome, who would never give up their schools. No educational system could be of use to the nation as a -whole which left the_a-out,so the only N ■--•■■

' thin" to do was ,to make a bargain which Should draw in these denominational schools into the national scheme. So the Government put forth -its scheme; The whole jivstem of education in a given area comes under one authority, Which is to deal with primary and secondary education. This authority has a very free hand; it takes over the. whole of the secular education in both board and. denominational schools, and as it is to have full control it is to pay for it out of the rates. So the Church of England gives over to this authority the use of all her school buildings, some 13,000 in number; the use of°all furniture and materials; has to surrender the school three nights a week; give up the appointment of teachers, excepting the head teacher; keep these buildings and furniture in repair, rearrange her trust deeds; and in return the secular, education is given up and put on the rates, and' we get a guarantee of religious education! It is said that the bill is brought in to favour the Anglicans and to put'education under .their control, and hand the schools over to Anglican priestcraft. This is curious when we see that the Wesleyan and Roman Catholic schools come under this 'bill, and the conscience clause is strictly and honourably carried out. We Anglican clergy 'consider it a very hard bargain indeed. The schools were before under our full control; now the religious education even is taken out of,our hands and vested in a board of six managers. We have no control in our own schools after the Scripture lesson is given. The under teachers pass entirely out of our control. Many clergy have used the school every evening for parish, purposes —we must give it up three nights now. We have still to raise large sums to keep the buildings in. repair. Valuable property is handed over to the ratepayers (in my parish in England the schools accommodating 750 children are worth £8000). We take two men on the board of six managers, who are elected by the ratepayers. We get in return a guarantee of religious education, which, however, passes out of our full control. As regard! Dr Clifford's statement about the appointment of head teachers, which you publish, I should liketo see the-Roman Catholic or Wesleyan school which would take a Church of England headmaster. ' Our schools were built with money subscribed by Church people, and we naturally expect the headmaster to be a Churchman, and the State has guaranteed to us that he shall be, as it has also guaranteed the same right to the Roman Catholic and the Wesleyans. There has been a tremendous agitation; politfca.l "Nonconformists agitated, strongly and made great noise, but the Anglican clergy watched events and kept quiet. The reason that so much noise was made has been well pointed out in the "Times," that every Nonconformist pulpit became a Radical platform, while it said truly that the political Church of England parson is almost unknown. Now, if the Church of England had tuned her pulpits with half the vigour the Nonconformists did theirs, there would have, been heard as great a noise, on behalf of the bill as an honest attempt to deal with a great national problem.

But there are signs already of reac-, tion, the cry of resistance is dying down, the morality of the cry is now being gravely questioned. The Sussex County Council have kept off the committee it has elected anyone who had shown a strong party bias. In my own parish (anyone can have the name of it who wishes) the children have crowded out the large , school, and another -schoolmust be built. The vicar, wishing to give the new Act full play, declined to erect a Church ''school, but gave the Nonconformists a chance to build a school. There are four strong bodies of Nonconformists in the town, but they did nothing. The Town Council did not wish the County Council to build as it meant too heavy a rate, the Town Council therefore unanimously requested the Church of England vicar to build the school. He has consented, and is now begging of his congregation the sum of £2000 to build it with. So the position in that parish is this: Church people will build this school and then partly surrender it. Reckon the other school (value £8000) at 4 per cent., and we give the town an equivalent of £400 a year, the use of buildings, the control of teachers, representation on the management; we also keep the buildings in repair, likewise .the furniture, but the ratepayers in future have to maintain the secular education. We'got in return a guarantee of religious education. Who gets, the best of the bargain, the town or the Church? .

It must be borne in mind also that several years ago Mr Mundella, a great educational authority, planned a bill up•on these lines, «and that the greatest authority on education in the Wesleyan body supported this bill. Ido not know of any conference of teachers or masters that has condemned it, bu> I have read Of some that have approved the main lines of the bill; and no scheme has been brought forward by those opposing the bill that would solve the problem with justice to all.

Dr, Clifford's opposition can be easily understood, and is not taken very seriously in England. He, as an ultra proBoer Radical, is opposed to everything the present"Government does.. He has ever been a bitter opponent of the Anglican Church. He is terribly carried away by the "exuberance of his own verbosity," and is opposed to all religious education in schools, and would oppose our Bible in schools movement in New Zealand, unless he has altered his mind recently. In all questions affecting the political and social life of the people we give his statements a very liberal discount. —I am, etc., ARTHUR FOWLER. St. Matthew's, May 6, 1903.