BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Otago Witness, Issue 3101, 20 August 1913, Page 4

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

ATTITUDE OF OPPONENTS. DEPUTATION TO MR MASSEY. WELLINGTON, August 9. A very large deputation, representative of the New Zealand National Schools' Defence League, Women’s Christian Temperance Union, New Zealand Teachers’ Institute, various churches, and organised Labour, waited on the Prime Minister at noon to-day. The points made by the delegation (as expressed by Mr A. R. Atkinson) may be summarised briefly as follows :

That the neutrality of the State on all religious matters was essential. That this principle would be violated by the programme of the Bible-in-Schools League.

That Parliament could not evade its responsibility by granting a so-called referendum. That it had first to determine whether the particular issue was a proper subject for a referendum.

That this issue, which would violate the religious neutrality of the State, and allow a majority to dictate to a minority in a. matter affecting rights of conscience, was. not a proper issue for submission.

That in particular a referendum granted next session, presumably for a poll two or three months later, would put the defenders of the Act under an enormous handicap, since the Bible-in-Scliools League would be already organised, and that no time would bo afforded the Defence League to prepare its forces.

Mr Atkinson finally emphasised the full facilities under the present Act, which—with the exception of Nelson and a few other places—the churches had refused to use.

In reply, Mr Massey said : “I would like to say how very glad I am to meet this large and very representative deputation and to hear the views of the speakers on this very important question.” Reference had been made to what was called a political agitation and to the operation of the Bible-in-schools League. He wanted the deputation to thoroughly understand that the Government had never been approached unofficially or officially, directly or indirectly, by the league with the object of influencing it on the matter of the Bible in schools or of taking a referendum. The question had been raised in the House in the form of a query to him (the Prime Minister) by Mr T. M. Wilford, asking whether it was intended by the Government to introduce legislation this session to enable a referendum to be taken on the matter of Bible lessons in schools. The answer he gave was that the Government did not intend to introduce legislation this session to enable such a referendum to bo taken. He (Mr Massey) had not the faintest idea of what was in Mr Wilford's mind, but his question was a straight one and he had given it a straight answer.—

(Hear, hear.) Then the deputation asked the Government what attitude it intended to taken on this matter next session. That question seemed a little unfair; hut lie could toll them that the matter had never been considered by the Cabinet yet in any shape or form. If they wished to find out the Government’s mind he thought the proper thing was to think of the. attitude of individual members of the Government. “If you do not know my attitude on this question you ought to,” declared Mr Massey. “I stood -for free, secular, and' compulsory education before I entered Parliament 20 years ago, and I stand for it now.”—(Hear, hear.) Probably he was not as good a Christian as he ought to be.—(Laughter.) It was not a joking matter, but he believed in the Bible and he stood for the Bible every time. He was utterly opposed to what might he called sectarianism in the schools. He thought he had good reason for saying that so long as the Government remained in power nothing would be done by the Cabinet which would not be consistent with the principle of free, secular, and compulsory education in the dominion.

STATEMENT BY CANON GARLAND WELLINGTON, August 11.

Canon Garland, replying to the statements made by the deputation against the Bible-in-schools, stated that the deputation voiced a new doctrine for the Englishspeaking community when it declared that the majority should not rule in religious matters. The deputation sought to prevent the people of the dominion from having access to the ballot-box on this matter. “Why are they so afraid of the ballot-box?” he asked. “We are not.” The deputationisls spoke of the functions of Parliament. What was that but the recognition of Parliament as the tribunal or court to provide the necessary machinery to allow the people free access to the ballot-box. r l'he principle which applied to accepting government by Parliament is the principle that the government of the people by the people for the people shall prevail above everything else.