Wellington Independent TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1871.

Wellington Independent, Volume XXVI, Issue 3294, 5 September 1871, Page 2

Wellington Independent TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1871.

The charges of " their Honors the Queen's Judges " to Grand Juries are deservedly regarded as of great practical importance. Few have better opportunities, and still fewer can pretend to more capacity for understanding the great social problems of the day. The opinions of other persons must often be received with an allowance for their social, religious, or political bias ; but those delivered by Judges, equally removed alike from popular and party influence, are accepted as decisions arrived at by trained intellects, based on inductions from numerous instances, and uttered without fear or favor. The charge of his Honor the Judge to the Grand Jury, reported in a very condensed form elsewhere, is a case in point, and we proceed briefly to refer to it. The first subject to which he directed the attention of the Grand Jury is the all-important subject of education. In his estimation it is " the most important question that modern society has to grapple with." The Education Bill before Purliament, therefore, is, in his opinion, the one of all others calling for the most earnest consideration of the Legislature and the public. As a measure emanating from one or other of the.. political parties into which the Assembly is divided, and viewed in the light of a party question, he has nothing whatever to say to it; but as a measure bearing on the repression and prevention of crime, it is clearly within his province as a judge to express Ins opinion on it. Did it contain anything which in his opinion is fraught with danger to the community, and did he refrain from giving expression to this opinion on the occasion which the charging of the Grand Jury gives him of directing public attention to questions of the highest social concernment,he would be as guilty of dereliction of duty as if he had allowed a guilty offender improperly to escape. Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur. In his estimate of what constitutes a really good Education Bill, he naturally looks only to its effect on society. How would this bill, if passed, is the question he asks, tend to prevent crime ; will the measure help to make good citizens, by supplying them with motives and principles inclining them to obedience to the laws, and deterring them from their violation ? On this point the Judge pronounces unhesitatingly that if the bill is altered to suit the views of the secularists, " it will fail in the objects sought." Religious and moral training are not, in his opinion, merely desirable — " they are absolutely needed to make good members of society." " Secular education only would never have the effect," and " any system of education based on this principle must fail in its object.'' This, he assures the Grand Jury is no hasty judgment— for he adds that in coming to this conclusion " he was guided by the observation and experience of many years." The letter of the Yen. Archdeacon Stock yesterday, and that of " Vox" today point to the same conclusion. It may be. that such opinions are not in the ascendant in the lower branch of the legislature, but we feel sure the more thoughtful (ultimately the more influential) classes of the community firmly hold them. It may be well for lion, members seriously to weigh the whole subject before seeking to modify the provisions of tho bill to meet their views either in the one direction or the other. Advocates of religious education think the bill docs not go far enough, while secularists think it goes too far. This only proves that it is a fair compromise, equally obnoxious to the extreme adherents of bolh parties. The Premier, in moving the second reading, most happily showed the difference between a doctrinarian and a states man. Laws and institutions wisely directed may do much towards the promotion of the required end; but they cannot do everything, and it is only when framed with a judicious reference to the state of the public mind that they can do anything towards its improvement. In a- country possessing the blessings of representative instilulions (he maxim of the ancient legislator should never be lost sight oJ — "To mak<\ not the best laws possible, but the best Unit the people will re ccive." It may be a matter of regret to sec a worse measure preferred to a better ; but the better would not produce the most good unless it could be generally confessed to bft the better. If secularists, on the one hand, therefore, by carrying a bill moulded to their views, provoke a powerful and organised opposition which would have the sympathy and support of such leaders as 61 Vox" and Archdeacon Stock, and the powerful prestige of such independent thinkers as the judges of the Supreme

Court, they may rest assured that their victory will be but short-lived, and that there will be an interval of strife and turmoil during which the good effects of their favorite measure will bo all but neutralised. Should the advocates of religious education, on the other hand, succeed in moulding the bill more into harmony with their cherished opinions, then the contention and rivalry of opposing sects, as well as the hostility of secularists, would create against it such influences as would deprive it of all its power for good and very soon wipe it out of the statute book. The bill, if passed as at present drawn, if it is not satisfactory to extreme partisans, will certainly not excite any determined opposition. If administered in the same spirit in which it has been framed, it cannot fail to enlist on its side the support of all who are not blinded by religious or irreligious bigotry, that is to say the majority in number and influence of the colonists of New Zealand.