ENDOWED SCHOOLS BILL.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 28, 28 October 1907, Page 9

ENDOWED SCHOOLS BILL.

THE ANGLICAN POINT OP VIEW. • : A'PROTEST FROM AUCKLAND. . [BY TELEGRAPH,—OWN COR RESPONDENT.] ' ' '■'■; .'■.'.■'■.'■. ''Auckland. October 26. Speaking in' support of his motion at the 'Anglican; Diocesan Synod.protesting against tho Government's separate Endowed Schools Bill, the Rev. Canon Mac Murray said ho thought it was exceedingly ''■ important that the action of tho general Synod, held in Dunedin .in January^and February last should bo supported by an expression of opinion 'from ,tho 'Auckland Synod. The facts were' that in 1905 a Royal Commission was set up. to inquire ■ into' a number of trusts, all of which were Church of England trusts,' In -1906 another Royal' Commission was appointed also to''inquire into trusts belonging to the Church of England. ' There we're a number of similar trusts held by Other religious bodies throughout the Dominion, aiid it was. significant that no Royal .Commission had been sot up to inquire into any of ,them, but that the Church of England trusts had been specially singled out. That, in itself , , he submitted,! should attract the attention of members.of the Church of England. 'It was a matter for'c'ongratulatioii that they had no reason to fear inquiry into'tho manner in which their Church had carried out those trusts. The 'report of the Commissions on ; those trusts was distinctly favourable. One trust, /however, was classed as 'a' failure— the Porir.ua which was set up for the purpose of establishing;.a pollege, which wasi never built. -He.thought they -should express their "to the Government for facilitating and- helping the passing of the Bill through the House, but what , made it imp6rtant.vand'nccessary; ; .that thoy should express their opinion that day was that during, the .last -session of;. Parliament a "Bill known, as' the Separate Endowment Schools Bill'was brought down, and was inimical to their, interests.' This Bill was read a first time,- and'had not been proceeded, with further, iip to the present. But what assurance had theyi'that it would not be broughtdown egain and,placed on , the.'Statute If they'had'such. an assurance it.would.riot,'of. course,''have "been necessary to j bring\ the. ', matter forward. • - ~,...,,..,.... . i : . STRENUOUS OPPOSITION.,', <:■ Canon Mac Murray submitted they should show the :Gqvernment they were strenuously opposed to .it;■•■■.■ln the Bill the Government sought to take "away the control of two of tbeir greatest , institutions, the Te Aute and T.'anganui' Trusts. . "'.Uncler the Bill, these, two properties—were to.be confiscated and vested in a new on, which the general Synod was to have representatives,' but over which it .would have no control. ■; !lhen the religious,character of the schools was to be destroyed."--It declared ! Canon MacMurray, schools, not only .upon.-tho /Church '., of :Eriglaud, but »lso upon'; other '■'religious .bodies,' arid' they, should resistiifc.to.th'eutmost.V ■-.'..'•..■!.'.'■.-, k ■' . The.Rev.iW,f 'Beatty,, did ; :not. thivik^that. ■ the .Bill.-. as\ it -stood"-.altogether justified Canon Mac Murray 's attack upon it, or tho passing'of such a strbrigly-wbrded, resolution. In the first place/'.with .regard to tho change in trustees," he ] supposed that the principle tho Government was acting on was that as oertain Government fsums were paid .to the upkeep of these institutions they wf-ie'---'6h- ; titled to That- seeined/to.him to be;/porfectly;jreasonable.' ;He , out thatrjw-hen',.rthe'-,.Crown grant was' made oonveying,- certain properties over.no v :.liitri-. tion .was made of religious ,education..' Canon MacMmrray had denounced "the"Bill 'as one which;.would destroy the 'religious character) of the institutions-::;: He presumed he ■ referred to; the''Conscience Clause. If that clause/destroyed the. religious character'.of s the. trust,- then, he 'submitted, that? that 1 Synod had deliberately. destroyed , the. religious character of Girls' High • School,' as''there Conscience Clause. " ''•","'.■'"';''/'"

Mr.'"Holmes ,sppke_in. support of,,the mpstating; that'nowadays the Government seemed that'.itviyas capable, of doing anything >~and . everything,,' irrespective ,of whether, it.was'.; right or wrong.-!','.;•.. ':!•.'..■ ■;;• ;'-';, TENDENCY; \ : ' ■■ ''■: ' Mr.'.'H.'.EinderVg&re'it-'ae' { h'is ppimoh.that there was.-a!..growing,tendency;of;political men to interfere, with religious trusts. :. , -. Mr. F: G. Ewingtori• supported the- motion. In regard to what Mr:'Beatty had stated: he (Mr. Ewington); :said: that" if any of their trustees! cpmmitted:a /breach i .of theiit'pbligations the^Church, could always call them to account, whereassif the' Government, offended the Church had, no, power to bring, them to book.' ''■' \" ' ''.■" •':.■'''"!"':■"'•. '"'.'". :: ■■'"' , . \ The Rev. P. T. Wi|liamswas"6f theopinion that the whole thing turned on the Conscience Clause. They should: sayjt'o 'thefGoverhment'., "If you want to lise our Church of England institution you must-conform-to our rules." : No..other.religious body in the Dominion' would allo'w such'' a 'thing - as- the Government, proposed..' ..•■ ~ :,.. ... . .:.. Mr: Bhrton,considered:that the-re-Bolution .yf&s t ' too"! sweeping.: V 7 Tho. whole trouble centred!round .the.' Conscience'Claiise, but' Tie 'did I not.' : see,why..'they'.'should, attack the Government on' this .when '.they allowed the. Conscience Clausoat' the, Diocesan Girls' Ilfgh School.^;"'!.,;'.' ..'.';.' | ':'. .'' ■' /.'. ' Mr. _ C.:;;j. : ._Tunk's,,:,dep'rpcated .'the; .Government ; interfering., in i.any;, way, whatever,; and said; that, the, .effect ,':of'. such ■.interfering, if allowed,;;would.'be] that in |the"ond the institution in..!qu'estidh.,would,.become .purely/a trovernment, concprri; ''-J, ...'..," !.'""'. '"'■ : STATEMENt^BY;;THE; : BISHbP.''■'... , The Bishop in reply:to' a 'suggestion that the Church shbuld'' have ■ some special committee to iwatch ''■such' legislation as affected it, , pointed ;put-that a Special-Parliamentary Committee, , /consisting of himself, the' Bishop | of Wellington, and Mr.; James Allen; M.H.R., had already been.set 1 up in connection' with 1 the matter;''!and u had' ; been instrumental in getting the Otaki-Porirua Bill !put through; It would have been better had members of tho Synod ,read tho-debate .on that, Bill in Hansard,'.; as- l ,otherwise r .certain statements made that,afternoon.would,never have been made. The.intprpretation.of;the Minister.for Education .'regarding ihe Crown grants,.was wholly'alien ,tp. what had been given .there that afternoon;: His .interpretation was that these Crown'grants' were' given'to the Church of ; England,■Church of Rome, and the Presbyterian Church" and others,.' fpr particular purposes, and 'that ' they' were given to these bodies ■ solely because, of the temporary, exigencies \qf; the '/period; The, Minister, said, that the grants wore' ,, made'in'the early days when there v was nobody except theso bodies who could uhdettako 'the 'work ; ; of;teaching. The Minister contonded that the grants were purely given temporarily for temporary purposes, and ■ that ••' the time had now arrived when the State , could'undertake the work itself, and i the religious bodies could be put aside. That Tas the danger. It would, be a ; very grave..thinpr f or civil and: religious liberty if ;such'a, ; thing was allowed'to pass. The ; Conscienqp Clause was meant for 'day students'onlyj.inot for boarders. Tho whole Church would.show its .gratitude to'the Bishop of Waiapu who had made many journej's to Wellington in connection with the matter, and also to' Mr'J Russell,' solicitor for the New Zealand Mission Trust Board, who had also been most attentive, proceeding to Wellington on numerous ■ occasions to interview the Minister. It: was-a question 'as to whether they should have a. Conscience Clause for boarders, and thoy on behalf of tho Cliiirch absolutely refused to give way one inch. The Synod should be-unanimous in the protest oii.the general question of interference with civil and religious liberty. The motion was carried by a large majority.