PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 271, 21 August 1925, Page 10

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS MR. ISITT’S BILL DEBATED LABOUR HOSTILITY * The event of the day in the House of Representatives yesterday was an extended discussion on a nono-party Bill introduced by Mr. L. M. Isitt to provide for Bible reading in primary schools. The debate, which was keenly contested, opened early in the evening and continued until a late hour. The Bill was opposed and denounced by the Labour Party, but its supporters included the Minister of Education,

The Religions Exercises in Schools Bill was debated at length. In moving the second reading, Mr. L. Al. Isitt {Christchurch North), who was greeted with applause as he rose to his feet, said that the matter had been thrashed out so often that it was difficult to find something new to say. He felt, however, that he must again point out that New Zealand was a Protestant country, part of a protestant Empire, and that the Home Parliament was opened by prayer each day by a Protestant clergyman. The State saw to it that the young were protected from ignorance by the school system, and why could they not be protected from religious ignorance by religious instruction ? The State was directly responsible for preventing this form of instruction from being given to the children, yet the speaker was confident that at least twothirds of the people of the Dominion uesired the measure. “Is this a mere statement, or are there some facts to support it?’’ queried Mr. Isitt. “There are facts, and I will give them to you.” Attitude of School Committees. He went on to state that 25,000 copies of the Bill had been forwarded to the 2300 school committees in the country, and the replies received to date—some were still coming to hand—numbered 620. Of that number 220 committees had expressed themselves as against the Bill, while 600 had voted in favour of it. That, said Mr. Isitt, was a startling majority, and it was enhanced by the fact that the 600 had voted definiteIv in favour, while the opponents had advanced all sorts of different reasons. “Some requested the deletion of the conscience clause,” proceeded Mr. Isitt, “but they will have to wait a long time before I bring down a Bill with the conscience clause struck out. I say again that two-thirds of the people are In favour of it; " A Labour voice: Rot 1 A Barrier. Proceeding, Mr. Isitt expressed the belief that the one barrier to the passage of the Bill was the opposition of the Roman Catholic Church. Catholics should not adopt that attitude, since they, as brother citizens, he was proud to affirm, were treated with scrupulous fairness, and laboured under no religious disabilities. The Bill did not seek to place any religious disability on the Catholic children; its main feature was the full conscience clause. The Bill did not ask that the teachings should be placed be-. fore the children of Agnostics; it merely asked that a small measure of Bible instruction should be given to the children of the parents who wanted it. Once the measure got on the Statute Book the people would be so satisfied that it would be the end of anyone receiving State aid for denominational schools. The Bill would leave no possibility for denominational trouble, for anything like dissension, unless the teacher wilfullv violated the law. The speaker said he had arrived at the conclusion that no nation could ignore the claims of religion without sooner or inter paying the full penalty for its error. Surely members who proposed to vote against the measure would be sorry if thev thought their children would be brought up without any religious instruction. . In supporting the Bill, Mr. V. H. Potter (Roskill) said that there, should be some 'form of instruction in the school so that the children could acquire the knowledge that there was a God. labour Opposition. Mr. H. E. Holland (Leader of the Labour Party) observed that the two previous speeches had been remarkable for two features: The member for Christchurch North had referred offensively to the Labour Party only, three times and the member for Roskill had approvingly quoted His Holiness the Pope (laughter). Those on the Labour benches would vote against the measure and adhere to their election pledges regarding the principle of free, compulsory and secular education. If the Bill meant anything it meant State religion for New Zealand, and the speaker’s attitude was that religion was essentially a matter for the individual conscience. The proper places for the teaching of religion were in the church, the Sunday school and the home. There were many portions of the Bible which one would not hesitate to have taught anywhere. Those sections contained the finest English the world knew, thev possessed a literary excellence and represented a splendid type of poetical expression, but there were portions which even the hon. member for Christchurch North himself would not ask to be read in the schools. Parts of the Old Testament even for history purposes, would not be suitable, as students themselves admitted that some of them were legendary and represented the literature of a primitive age. Hon W. Nosworthy’s Attitude. The Minister of Finance (the Hon. W. Nosworthv - ), who had supported the Bill last year, expressed surprise at the statements made by the opponents after their eulogies of the Bible. He reminded the Labour members that Queensland, where there was a Labour Government, had not turned the Bible down. New Zealand was a Protestant country, and representative of the greatest Protestant empire in he world, and surelv the Protestants whose percentage was between 75 and W> had the right of consideration. He was satisfied that if a referendum were taken there would ’ be an overwhelming majority in favour of the Bill. One member had stated that a member of the House had made, the statement that he would not sit with a Roman Catholic or a German. “I was that member,” added the Minister, “and if the honourable member thinks I am not going to stick to that statement he is mistaken. I was forced to answer the question, and yon do not know, the provocation that existed at the time. I stand up to the statement, and live up to it whether I am in the Cabinet or not. It is a pretty plucky man who burns his boats behind him. . . . .The question of sectarianism has been raised. If there is any sectarianism it was brought in independently of the Reform Party " Mr G. W. Forbes (Hnrunui) opposed the Bill, remarking that its effect . would be to introduce religious dissension in schools where to-day it was non-existent He deprecated any-

thing in the nature of a measure that would engender sectarian bitterness in the land. The young people afforded a wonderful field of work for “ a clergy of the Dominion, who might do more for them instead of concentrating upon the older sinners. The clergy would be much better employed if, instead of putting in so muchi time at their afternoon teas, they devoted their lives to the young people. Scripture Reading Approved. The Minister of Lands (Hon. A. D. McLeod) said he had been asked on at least 20 platforms during the last election campaign if he would support Bible reading in schools, and He had replied in the affirmative He was opposed to religious instruction from the point M view of denominationalism, but reading of Scripture had not led to sectarian bitterness and he had seen other countries where the system was ln Mr >S A : .' Harris (Waitemata) said fie believed the majority of the people of the country approved of the principle of the Bill, so why did honourable members refuse to give the people what they desired? Sir James Parr on Anomalies In School Practice. The Minister of Education (Sir Tames Parr) strongly supported the Bill which he said was quite outside party politics. “It is agreed by all. educationists of note,” said the Minister, “that education does not merely consist of cramming a boy or a girl’s head full of facts of knowledge. Education, as the great leaders of that great science are saying to-day, is of a threesided character. It deals with three vital aspects of the pupils’ life and character. Firstly, it deals with the physical side—that'of the health of the child which must be attended to. It is of little use to give the best education in the world to a boy or girl who is in a poor physical state. Secondly, education deals with the mental side, and the child’s mind must be developed according to its aptitude. Thirdly, there is the moral and ethical side of the child’s character to be developed as part of its education.” Sir James Parr went on to refer to the attitude towards Bible reading in schools, which had been taken up by the late Professor Huxley—an agnostic in religious matters himself—who was filled with the belief that the Bible should be given a place in the schools, and when he became chairman of the London School Board saw that it was carried out. “I want to stress the point,” the Minister added,' “that education cannot be considered to-day as a one-sided business. . Education is a comprehensive process of which thej factors are physical, mental and spirit-' ual and moral, which must be developed. The position to-day in New Zealand is a peculiar and an anomalous one. . In all our high schools and technical schools we have religious instruction. Go where you will in New Zealand you will find that those institutions begin the day with a little service and the reading of a passage of Scripture. While nearly 25,000 children in those schools are receiving exactly the type of religious instruction that is indicated in this Bill, with the approval of the parents and of the authorities controlling these institutions. yet we are told that to give the same privilege to the primary schools would be to inflict a great disaster on the country.” No Innovation. The ’Minister went on to say that what was provided in the Bill was no innovation outside New Zealand Nearly every Protestant country in the world had religious instruction as part and parcel ot its every day scnool lite. We were singular in New Zealand m that we did not attempt in the elementary scnools something of the same kind. England, Denmark. Holland and America were among the countries that had religious instruction in schools. “All over tue world to-day you will find that the leaning educationists are agreed that there should be some form oi religious education in our schools,” said fair James Farr. Today the Protestant denominations m this country are absolutely in favour of it. rhe bitterness that stopped the measure in 1877 has vanished, and all Protestant sects for the first time in history are agreed about this matter, therefore the reason that obtained for complete secularity in 1877—the differences—do not exist today. Wretched Differences. “No system of education is complete —it is a poor one-sided tiling—if it does not see to it that the moral and ethical side or the pupil is attended to everyday of his school life. There is no book I know of that is a better basis fox the foundation of character than the Bible. Even the agnostic must recognise that, as did Professor Huxley. We are depriving the child of the finest book in the English language. The finest piece of literature, but owing to the wretched differences between men about dogma this Book has been cut out of our schools." In conclusion Sir James Parr said that if the Bill was passed it would be his duty and that of the Department to see that the conscience clauses were put in such a form that would conform to the individual right of every parent and every teacher who objected on the ground of conscience. Every’ teacher would be given ample opportunity of being heard and it would be his duty to see that they were heard. He had a very strong conviction that the great majority of the teachers were not opposed to the Bill and he had no doubt that they and the majority of the parents were behind the measure. About tbe Clergy. Mr. H. Atmore (Nelson), who strenuously opposed tlie measure, said that if the clergy believed what they said about the Holy Writ they were shirking their duties in throwing’ the burden of instruction on to the shoulders of the School teachers. He believed in religious instruction, but he considered that it should be taught by experts. “We have heard a lot about religion to-night, but not a word about Christianity or brotherhood,” said Mr. G. Witty (Riccarton), who expressed the opinion

that the measure would only create strife. Religion, he averred, created more wars than anything else. “Why can’t we live in this lite without strife?” asked the speaker. “We should live together for the common good.” He referred to some ministers as being tin gods and dictators in their pulpits; they waved their arms and ruffled their hair, if they possessed any, and,” added Air. Witty, “when they come into fhis House they are no better, Mr. Speaker, than you or I.” (Loud laughter.) “Sectarian Strife.” Another opponent of the Bill, Mr. J. A. Lee (Auckland East) said that Mr. Isitt in the last moments of his political life was endeavouring to fan into flame the embers of sectarian prejudice and strife. The late Prime Minister’s policy, as outlined at the last election, supported the system of free, compulsory, and secular education, and although the Bill was not characterised as a party measure, the Reformers wHb were against it could be counted on the fingers of the one hand. “A child of ignorance and prejudice and sectarian hatred” was the speaker’s description of Mr. Isitt’s proposal. The debate was still in progress when The Dominion went to press. TAXATION RELIEF IN CASES OF HARDSHIP The Land and Income Tax Amendment Bill was introduced by GovernorGeneral’s Message. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. G. W. Forbes) asked whether the Bill contained anything that was different from what was contained in the Budget with reference to taxation. Mr. Forbes asked, also, whether the Bill would be sent to the Public Accounts Committee. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Nosworthy) said the Bill provided for relief in cases of hardship arising out of registration charges in respect to unpaid land tax. There was a further clause in the Bill which empowered the Commissioner of Taxes to make special assessment of land tax in certain cases where deemed necessary. Provision was also made for the granting of certain income tax concessions to dairy companies as forecasted when a deputation waited upon him (Mr. Nosworthy) and the Prime Minister in regard to the matter some weeks ago. Another clause granted insurance companies relief from income tax in respect of sums spent in reinsurance. Mr. W. A. Veitch (Wanganui) urged a revision of the existing incidence of taxation. The dairy .companies’ exemption clause would have the effect of exempting from taxation companies which were co-operative in name only and capitalistic in effect. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) said the Bill was only meant to deal with cases of hardship. No good purpose would be served by sending the Bill to a committee. The Prime Minister (the Hon. J. G. Coates) said he thought it was anticipating matters to suggest that the Bill, should go to the Public Accounts Committee before it was printed or read a first time, but the question of so considering it could be taken, if necessary, before or after the second reading. The Minister of Finance having spoken to a similar effect, the Bill was read a first time. /

The Land and Incomes Tax Amendment Bill, introduced by GovernorGeneral’s Message, is designed to provide relief for various, existing and possible cases of hardship. The Gover-nor-General-in-Council may appoint a commission under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1908, to report upon cases of alleged hardship arising from the operation of section 11 of the Land and Income Tax Amendment Act, 1924, by which unpaid land tax may be made a charge on the land affected. If payment of tax by a successor in title, tenant, or mortgagee would, in the opinion of the commissioner, entail serious hardship, the commissioner mav release such person wholly or in part from payment. All charges registered against land for default in the payment of taxes before the commencement of the 1924 amending Act are cancelled if registered more than six months after the latter date. A special assessment of land tax mav be made if the owner of a piece of land disposes or intends to dispose of it between March 31 preceding the year of assessment and the due date of payment. The income of co-operative dairy companies is to be exempt from income tax if and insofar onlv as the rules of the company provide that such income shall be distributed , solely among the suppliers in proportion to the quantity of milk or butter-fat supplied by them. The provision for reductions from the assessable incomes of insurance companies in respect of reinsurances is extended to include persons as well as companies.

THE VESTEYS COMMISSION REPORT NOT YET BEFORE CABINET The report of the Vesteys Commission though due to be presented at the end of July, has not yet been made public. Air. W. D. Lvsnar, as one intimately concerned, asked a question about the matter in the House of Representatives yesterday, and was told that the report would be made public as soon as Cabinet had perused it. Air. Lysnar asked the Prime Alinister (Hon. J. G. Coates) whether he would have the report made available immediately to the public or laid on the table of the House. He remarked that the inquiry had concluded on June 13, and the report had been presented to the Governor-General, on July 31. There was no justification for the protracted delay in making it public. “I have not seen the report tnvself vet,” replied the Prime Minister, “but when I have seen it and Cabinet has seen it I shall be glad to make it public. I see no reason why that should not be done.” FEILDING TOBACCONISTS’ PETITION Following a petition which was presented to the Alinister of Labour (Hon. G. J. Anderson) from a majority of the occupiers of all . the hairdressers and tobacconists’ shops in Feilding requesting that the sale of certain goods comprised in the trade of the petitioners—cigarettes, tobacco, and cigars—be prohibited from sale during hours when their shops are required to be closed, the Alinister has directed that on and after August 31 the sale of such goods shall be prohibited at certain times. It will not be permissible after that date to sell tobacco, cigarettes, and cigars after 6 p.m. on Afondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays., and Saturdays. On Fridays, sales will be permissible up till 10 p.m. Certain exceptions are provided for On Christmas Eve, New Year’s Eve, and the night preceding the first day of the November race meeting, sales will be permitted up to 10.30 p.m., and on the night preceding a day that is generally observed as a public holiday sales will be permitted up till 9 p.m.

Tlie Wellington City Empowering Bill, which empowers the corporation to construct water mains under private lands or buildings, was read * third rime and passed.