ISITT’S BILL.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 18 July 1924, Page 3

ISITT’S BILL.

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS. DEFEATED BY ONE VOTE. (in Tia.KOHAHII I'HICSS ASSOCIATION.! .WELLINGTON, July 17. the second reading of tlie Religious Exercises in Schools Bill was moved bv Mr. L. M. I silt (Christchurch North) in tko _Hou.se this afternoon. Ihe Bill, lie said, was absolutely a non-party measure. He denied that it \vas in any sense his Bill and that he was ploughing a- lonely furrow, for it embodied resolutions nassed by a comchurches. Ihe Bill‘provided for Bible reading and ‘ not Bible teaehing, while a conscience clause was proHied ior both teachei\s and parents alike. He denied the Roman (Jat'holic suggestion that it was introducing sectarianism, and he declared the Bid was so fiamed that no one could introduce sectarianism without violating its principles. He denied Bishop Cleary’s assertion that it would cost the State £IOO,OOO per annum if school children repeated the Lord’s Prayer, sang a hymn, and read and listened to a passage from Scripture each morning. Mr T. M. Wilford (Leader of the Opposition) said he was returned on the principle that our present system of education, free, secular, and compulsory, should he maintained, and if he voted for the Bill he would be breaking that promise. He would therefore vote against the Bill.

The Hon. C. J. Parr (Minister for Education) said he would support tlie second reading of the Bill. It was true our education system was originally made secular, hut that was because there were then wide differences of opinion on subjects of religions teachlng. dogma and creed. AIL that was changed now, and so far a.s the Protestant ehnrehe.s were concerned they were now practically agreed upon these points so far as religious instruction in schools was concerned, and that was a great step in advance. He could see no harm in the simple religious exercises proscribed in the Bill. Either New Zealand was a Christian country or it was not, and there was ample opportunities for exemption. Speaking with a full sense of the responsibility of the high office he held, he declared* he was in favour of doing what the Bill proposed. The Minister regretted there was such ignorance amongst children concerning the Scriptures and the story of the Scriptures, and, as parent’s would not teach them, he thought there could be no harm in the State teaching them some of the most beautiful pas“ sages in our literature. Private schools were springing up all over New Zealand which were coming into serious competition with the State schools, and that was because parents felt the State school excluded God from their teaching,, and that was distasteful to them. He recommended the Bill to the serious consideration of the House, and if it passed the second reading it sflould go to the Education Committee, because he would wot bind himself to all its details. It- was also most important that it should receive the cordial support of teachers.

Mr T K. Sidey (Dunedin South) said he would vote for the second reading of the Bill, reserving the right to suggest amendments in committee. Mr G. Witty (Riccarton) said he had alu ays opposed similar pleasures, and he would oppose this. one. There was too much religion and too little Christianity in the world.

Mr H. E. Holland (Leader of the Labour Party) said it was a nlahk in the Labour Party’s platform that the education system should be free,- secular and compulsory, and he and his party would vote to maintain that plank. The proper place to teach religion was in the home.

The Premier (Mr W. F. Massey) said he believed in the princiole of the Bill, and would vote for it. *lt was proposed to prepare a Scripture text book, compiled on a strictly non-sectarian point of view. This non-sectarian characteristic was one which he insisted on. The Bill now before the House was, in his opinion, non-sectarian. The debate on the Bill was continued till after ' midnight, when the second reading was rejected by 32 votes to 31. Following is the division list:

For the second reading (31).—Anderson, Bitohener, Bollard, Buddo, J. M. Dickson, J. S. Dickson, Edie, Field, Girling, Glenn. D a when, Hockly, Hudson, Hunter, tsitt, Lysnar, McLeod. McMillan. Massey, Nash, Nosworthv, Parr. Pomare. Ransom, T. W. Rhode's. J. C. Rolleston, Stewart, Svkes, Urn, \\ right, Young. Against second reading (32). —Armstrong, Atmore, Bartrain, Bell, Coates, Corrigan, Forbes. Fraser, Haban, Holland, Jordan, Langstone. Lee, Lve McCombs, Mcllvride, McKay, McKeen Macpherson, Masters, Monteith, Munro! Murdoch, O’Brien. Parry. Poland, Savage. Smith, Sullivan, Wilford, Williams Witty.

Pairs.—For: Potter, Sidov, Linklater. Against: Perelle. Veitcli, Howard.