The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY. OCTOBER 25, 1878. DEFEATED AGAIN.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume VI, Issue 286, 25 October 1878, Page 13

The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY. OCTOBER 25, 1878. DEFEATED AGAIN.

§USTICE has once more to complain that the folly of men has been strong enough to defeat her claims. On account of justice herself this is to be regretted. But it is also to be regretted that it is our Legislature, or rather our House of Eepresentatives, that has stood between the people and justice. Parliament ought to be, and by a fiction is supposed to be the fountain of justice. But experience, unhappily, proves that -what ought to be the seat and home of justice becomes, not unfrequently, the origin and source of injustice. This is the case at present in relation to the question of education, so far as our House of Eepresentatives is concerned. Mr. Ouetis's Bill has been rejected there by a majority of gix.

Still, the case is far from being hopeless. On the contrary, the question of religious education has made considerable progress since this time twelvemonths. Last year Mr. i Curtis's project was defeated by a majority of twenty-five, this year it has been defeated by a majority of only six. This is satisfactory and very encouraging. In the Legislative Council an amendment embodying Mr. Curtis's clause was negatived by a' majority of one. This year the Petitions' Committee of the same House reported in favour of aid to Catholic schools. All this gives grounds for thinking that a concession of our just claims will not be much longer deferred. We must not, however, imagine that having achieved so much success we may rest on our oars, and abandon agitation. Such an idea would prove most disastrous. It was only firm and determined agitation that brought the question to its present position in the Legislature, and it is idle to expect iiltimate success by any other means. Our enemies on this question are numerous, blind, and rabid. Even' reasoning is thrown away on them ; and not a few amongst them are incapable of being moved to justice, by any other means than the fear of the eltction day. The block vote has, with many, been the strongest argument, and it is still as efficacious as ever. Great attention has, during this year, been paid by Catholics to registration of voters, and we are now .better able to make ourselves felt than ever. It is not improbable that there may be a general election next year, and at all events there will be an appeal to the country within the next two years. It is time Catholics began to prepare for such an event. The first thing necessary is to know who are our friends, who our enemies. For this purpose we publish to-day a list of those who, in the late division on the second reading of Mr. Curtis's Bill, voted against our just and equitable claims, and in favour ot continuing to subject us to double taxation and to indignity. This list will enable Catholics in all parts of the country to know how their representatives have acted in reference to their claims, and to resolve on the course they ought to pursue ' in regard to them. And we earnestly recommend Catholics to keep a copy of this list by them, to secure it in some prominent position in the most frequented part of their houses, lest they should forget or mistake their enemies. It would occupy too much space to pay marked attention to-day to the names of the thirty-eight gentlemen who recorded their votes in favour of a law which banishes God from his own creation, leads to the demoralisation and ruin of society and individuals, and places a yoke on the necks of Catholics, and all others who advocate religious education, and plunders them in order to propagate godlessness. It may, however, be permitted to us to call attention to some amongst these. In the first place, it is remarkable that all the present Ministers voted against us with the exception of Sir George Grey, who, however, did not vote for us. This lion, gentleman was absent. But as all his colleagues voted against us, his absence may be regarded as at least indicating that the Premier did not consider our claims deserving of serious consideration. Mr. Atkinson, the .late Premier, however, voted for Mr. Curtis's Bill, though last year he opposed the same principles which he now advocates. He has seen the folly of the course he so lately pursued, and consequently there are hopes of his amendment. His late colleagues, however, all voted for . the rejection of this Bill. The three members for Dunedin were in the majority, a fact which we shall never forget, and an attention to Catholic claims which we shall not fail to repay on all fitting occasions. The representatives of all the Coast constituencies of Otago and Southland opposed justice to Catholic schools. But it was otherwise in reference to the inland electorates. The members for Mount Ida, Dunstan, Tuapeka, Wallace, and Invercai-gill were in favour of the second reading of Mr. Curtis's Bill. But we miss the names of the member for Waikaia and the Lakes from the Division List. Mr. Horace Bastings and Mr. Maunders were conspicuous by their absence, a compliment which their Catholic constituents will no doubt return the next time they seek their suffrages. We notice, also, that religious Canterbury has been stronglyGodless on this occasion, led on by its late Superintendent and the late Minister of Works, from whose education and experience we had hoped better things. We observed, too, that the majority of six may be said to be made up of three Native gentlemen, a bad Catholic, the rationalistic Attorney-General, and the Native Minister's | keeper — the hon. member for Newton. Surely, though it iaj painful to see justice defeated, we have reason io feel rather, 1