INSPECTION OF CATHOLIC SCHOOLS.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 9988, 18 March 1898, Page 3

INSPECTION OF CATHOLIC SCHOOLS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir,—l see M. Nolan enquires where the lines are to be found on which Catholic children travel free all the year round. For his edification the lines are in Canterbury and Otago, and if lie applies to the Kailway Department no doubt ti-ey will give him the fullest information. I fail to see what your readers will gain by M. Nolan singling out the poverty-stricken Catholic population. It is certainly new light to mc that the poorest classes of psople pay the heaviest taxes. He also attempts to deal with the financial aspect of the question. This is just as I would wish. He supports your figures as they stand, and starts with a supposition that the Catholic children cost £5 per head per annum ; if he would say £1 be would be nearer the mark. M. Nolan knowe as well as I do that the teachers in the Catholic schools, male and female, never see the colour of money from one year's end to the other, and if ever there was a case of sweating that the, Government should enquire into it is here, and the country through these schools is losing thousands of pounds every year I and certainly "we should be better off without them," "as M. Nolan quotes. For M. Nolan's information there are dozens of schools in Canterbury not half tilled, and some can scarcely exist, these schools being built partly to satisfy the convenience of the Catholics, and M. Nolan says "that the priests and bishops would be wanting in one of their moat solemn and important duties if they did not restrict the parents from sending their children to these schools," after encouraging the Board to build them, and allowiug the children to attend. He also speaks of Godliness and criminality. What about the children they take into the Catholic schools, and guarautee they will teach no religion. According to M. Nolan's own argument they are teaching secularism and immorality, and I see he acknowledges " that juvenile crime has kept pace with their present education system," which I thoroughly endorse. . In reply to " Catholic," I would like to state that upon inquiry I find that the spiritual advisers of the children I referred to have given permission to the parents to send their children and to avail themselves of the privileges of the State school, which they have gladly accepted, aud the priest hae somehow got over counting it a " grievous sin"; and, as M. Nolan says, this priest "is wanting in one of the most solemn and important duties of his office " by sanctioning such a proceeding. The rest of " Catholic's " letter is only abuse and side issues.

" Not a Bigot" says " I evade three points in my letter." Hβ quotes figures and conveniently mixes all denominations. Let us see how they stand when separated. As space is limited it is not necessary for mc to quote percentage of all denominations, but for purposes of comparative criminality we will take the Roman Catholics and Wesleyans. These two religions are numerically nearer equality than any other two; also, the Wesleyans have been throughout the staunchest supporters of our education system, while the Roman Catholics are the most opposed. The Wesleyans have relied solely on our secular schools for inculcating moral instruction ; the latter have relied on denominational teaching as of primary importance. Out of every 100 persons in our gaols there were in 1893 three Wesleyans and thirty-three Roman Catholics. If we take the numerical strength of each sect and allow for the difference, we see that out of an equal number of each there was nine Catholics convicted to every one Wesleyan. Now " Not a Bigot" has got the information he desired, and I hope it will soothe him. His second and third point is clearly and concisely answered in my letter qf Friday, and space does not permit of repetition. If I juggle with facts why do not your correspondents prove mc wrong ?—-Yours, &c. Taxpayer. March 13th, 1898.