MR MASSEY DEFENDS HIS POSITION

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 8783, 13 July 1914, Page 9

MR MASSEY DEFENDS HIS POSITION

NOT A NEW THING. Air Alassey in replying to tho deputation, said:—Ladies and gentlemen, I have been very pleased to hear your representations this morning, though they have been much more lengthy than I expected or intended. However, I thought it would be a pity to interrupt you or refrain from hearing you to the end. One speaker has found fault with the 'Government. Ho said the Government had not treated the National State Schools Defence League properly in this matter. (Hear, hear.) There is another side of the story. He referred to what I said last year. As it happens 1 have every word I uttered. Take one passage:— ‘"Perhaps ho might not be as good a Christian as ho ought to be, but he wanted to tell the deputation this: that ho believed in the Bible, and stood by tho Bible every time. In saying that he was opposed to anything that could ho called sectarianism in the’ schools of the country.” I say so now (Hear, hear.) And wo have this very sorry state of affairs: that in a Christian community representatives of the Christian sects combine to keep the knowledge of the Bible out of tho schools. Let mo put it as I put it yesterday. It is a sorry state of affairs when tho representatives of the sects don’t see their way to join and arrange a system by which Biblical instruction may be imparted in tho public schools. (A voice: ‘‘Out of school hours.”) In school hours or not. (“Religion taught by the State.”) Don’t iput words into my mouth. I stand by 'what I said. What I said then is quite, consistent with what I have said since. A DIVISION IN 1905.

This is not tho first time the matter has been before ■ the Parliament of this country. In 1905 a bill was introduced providing for the Bible lessons in schools. The title was “Bible Lessons in Public Schools Plebiscite Bill.” It' was introduced by one of the Otago' members. There was a long and interesting discussion. But the division jlist is very interesting. ; Now, it has been said that tho members of the Roman Catholic section of the community aro opposed to a referendum, being taken. I want to call attention' to the way in which members of Parliament who belong to the Roman Catholic sect voted on that bill. I will give you the whole list:— “Ayes 39—Allison, E. G. Allen, Arnold, Baume, Bedford, Buddo, Eavey, Duncan, Ell, Field, Flatmap, W. Fraer, Graham, Hall-Jones, Hanan, Hardy, Hawkins, Herdman, Herries-, Houston, Jennings, Kirkbride, Lang, Laurenson, Lewis, Mander, Massey, McNab, Moss, Reid, Rhodes, Tanner, J, C ; Thomson, J. W. Thomson. Vile, Ward, Willis. Tellers: Aitken and Sidey.”

Mr Herdman: “Hadn’t that hill a conscience clause?”

Mr Massey: But there was tho principle.. It was not the question of Bible" reading in schools, but it was whether a plebiscite should be taken. It was not a conscience clause or anything else. I don’t profess to. know the religions of all members of the House. It matters nothing to me what a man’s religion'is so long as ho Is a decent fellow. But it is well known that Sir Joseph Ward, for Instance, is a Roman Catholic, and Mi Jennings is a Roman Catholic. These two gentlemen voted for the second reading of the bill. These two gentlemen of the proposal that tho question of Bible reading being allowed in tho schools should be referred to tho public. /A voice: Read thomoes. Mr Massey: The noes were 22-Bar-ber, Bennett, Carroll, Fowlds, Hall, Harding, Hoke, Hogg, Kidd, Lawry, Lethbridge, Major, McGowan, T. Macikenzie, McLaohlan, Millar, Parata, Remington, Wilford,' Witty. Tellers! Fisher and A. L. D. Fraser. The pairs wore: “For Buchanan, Duthie Steward. Wood. Against—Pere, Rutherford, Symes, Colvin.” A voice: Wds that not for undenominational education?

Mr Massey: There is no use quibbling. The question was for a plebiscite. Tbo question was whether the public should have, an opportunity of expressing _an opinion oh the very same question that is agitating the public mind now. A voice; Very different now. Mr Massey: No. A voice: Was there a right qf entry Under that hill? PLEADINGS PROM THE WORKERS. Mr Massey: There is tho position. It is not a new subject. Fault has been found with the Government for allowing Parliament to express an opinion on tho question. Why not? I have in my possession dozens of letters from workers in different parts of New Zealand supporting and asking for tho re* ferendum. Mr McLaren: As individuals.

Mr Massey: But still they aro prominent trades unionists—many of them. Wo have introduced the bill because tho members of tho Government who support tho Bible in schools and those who aro opposed—members of both shades of opinion agreed that under tho circumstances—seeing that it had been asked for by-140,000 or 150,000 people—it would not bo right to stand in the way if Parliament feels inclined to givo the opportunity. The bill is in charge of Mr Allen not because ho is Minister for Education. It is not a party question. No pressure will bo brought to hear on any member, and when tho division takes place—and I am not able to predict what the result will be—l think it will be found that

os many members of tbe .Cabinet will vote against as for it. A voice: I hope so. 'QUITE A HARMLESS PROCEEDING

Mr Massey: All we are doing is to say to Parliament, “A largo proportion of the people of the country have asked for this opportunity; we are giving it, and if you think a referendum should be taken, then it is for you to eay, and the referendum will be held' accordingly.’' Both Houses have to agree to it, and the thing is not settled when tlio referendum is taken. A voice: It was in Queensland. The Government in Queensland could not move from the position. Mr Massey: I say you must not imagine the question is settled when the referendum is taken, because it will be for Parliament to arrange the details of the Act. Professor Hunter: Then it is no referendum.

Mr Massey : Most certainly. Strictly speaking, the word “referendum ” is wrong in this instance. It is a plebiscite. The referendum is generally applied to legislation already dealt with by Parliament. It is only a difference in terms. I say if three-fourths of the people of the country—and 1 don’t think they will do so—if they vote for it, it would bo for Parliament to arrange every single detail. I can assure you my hands aro not tied. The Rev. Knowles Smith; If the plebiscite is taken on the question which is submitted by the league you don’t give us a fair chance. Mr Massey: Parliament, if it feels so inclined, can alter these questions. The first division will bo taken on the second reading of tbo bill. After that it goes into committee, and 'every line and every word can bo considered. altered and amended. The Rev. K. Smith; Our position is that in this question you don’t give ue the right to vote. We aro tied up. Mr Massey: I am not going to express an individual opinion. It is for Parliament to say in what form the question shall be put to the people of the country. Another point was that the National Schools Defence League were being taken unawares—(hear, hear)—that they had mo time to educate the people of tho country, and the same speaker went on to say that tho Bible-in-Sohools League had not gone the length of holding public meetings. I think they have. A voice: No, supporters only. Mr Massey: I am mot prepared to argue that point, hut the point I was making was this: tho National Schools Defence League have held a number of public meetings. Who then has been educating the public? Professor Hunter: But they have been two years in tho country districts.

Mr Massey: I did notice that a big meeting had been, held in Auckland, I thought it was a public meeting. A voice: Supporters only. Mr. Massey; You may be right, but you prove my contention. PARLIAMENTARY CHURCHES.

A voice: They have been practically turning their church services into pubic meetings. - . Mr Massey: You say you have not time to educate the public. The bill is not yet passed. We are five months jaway from the election, and every jmombor of Parliament, who is working Eero to-day will have only a month to dncate his constituents. Surely a great organisation can .do what they (want in five months.

A voice: We have no churches; Mr Massey: 1 know nothing about (the financial position of the organisafdon.. but it seems to me there is as ptiucii money on one side as the other. t-(“No, no.”) Professor Hunter: The churches are •used by parties as political organisations, and they don’t pay rates and (taxes. Mr Massey: Do you suggest that they should do so. Professor Hunter: Certainly. They are political organisations. Mr Massey: It is getting away from the subject when such an argument it Professor Hunter: Colleotions are used for propaganda work. Mr Massey; I don’t think that is (correct. I believe you think whav you say is correct, hut I know something about church organisation, and I never, heard of such a suggestion. I don’t believe it is possible that collections are used for any other purpose than the maintenance of the churches. Professor Hunter: Special collections have been taken. Mr Massey: That is a different thing. There was a suggestion that pn opportunity should he given to the National Schools Defence League to go before a Parliamentary Committee. iThbre is' no difficulty about that. It is already arranged. I noticed quite a [number of petitions were presented to the House dealing with this very subject—for and against and mostly against. They will be referred to a committee. Evidence will bo taken by the Education Committee, and you will have an opportunity of putting your side of the question. Don’t imagine that there is any intention on the part of the Government to take advantage of either one side or the other. All we propose to do is this: to give the people a straight run and an opportunity of saying whether they are going to have Bible reading in Schools or not. And if - they agree then I hope such arrangements will bo made as shall keep sectarianism out of the public schools of this country. It seems to me a simple and perfectly straightforward matter. I was pleased to notice the knowledge of the Bible indicated by the different speakers. Remember one passage which was quoted—the golden rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” (Applause.) The interview terminated with the thunks of the doputatipn for their reception.