The Evening Star TUESDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1904.

Evening Star, Issue 12381, 20 December 1904, Page 4

The Evening Star TUESDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1904.

On November 24 we published a letter

signed by the Rev. Dr Gibb, Where Is traversing some criticisms of that Apology! ours in relation to the report

presented to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church by the Bible-in-schools ' Committee. A portion of the letter was couched in very offensive terms, which, lwyever, we were disponed to pass over lightly, in consideration of the fact that the writer promised (upon certain .conditions) to withdraw the entire diatribe and forward an apology. Dr Gibb, it may bo remembered, had scoffed at the notion of our being in fayor of a referendum on the question of religions instruction in the State schools. "The 'Star' a supporter of the referendum—fudge !" He added, however: I did not see your comments on the manifesto, of the Roman bishops, but if • you protested against their contention that the question of Bible lessons in schools is one that, must on no account be submitted to the decision of the electors, I shall withdraw this letter and apologise.

We took Dr Gibb at his word, doubting not that a plain promise would be conscijiitiously •kept. On the same date (November 24) wc reproduced a lengthy passage fiom our comments on the manifesto of the Roman Catholic bishops,'furnishing ample proof that we had, in unequivocal terms, : protested against the contention that the question of Bible lessons in schools was one that mnst on no account be submitted to the decision of the electors. To this detailed proof we added the remark—" We await Dr Gibb's promised apology." In order that there might be no mistake, a marked copy of the newspaper was posted to Dr Qibb at Wellington.

Well, we have waited for nearly four weeks, and the promised withdrawal and a PQ-ogy still tarry. Consequently we take leave to jog the rev. doctor's memory. No doubt he is a busy man, but we certainly expected that he 'would regard this matter as urgent. Our readers evidently were of •the same mind, for we are continually being asked (by adherents of both sides) whether the apology has arrived. That Dr Gibb does not intend to keep his plighted word we refuse to believe. Such dereliction, apart from the personal aspect, would put an indelible stain on.the history of the Bible-in-schools movement. So once again— Wc await Dr Gibb's promised apology.