The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, MAY 2, 1879. MORE EXPENSIVE.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume VI, Issue 315, 2 May 1879, Page 13

The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, MAY 2, 1879. MORE EXPENSIVE.

A.NY writers, amongst them the gentleman who is engaged in writing short treatises on Education in the Hawhe's Bay Herald, tell us that denominational education is more expensive, and must be more expensive to the State, than secular education. Again and again this assertion has been disproved in the most conclusive way. Nevertheless these writers return to the charge ; and in order to lend some appearance of probability to their platitudes, coin definitions to suit their own purposes. In discussing this question, therefore, it will be well once kinore to define what we mean by denominational and secular ; although for candid, straightforward people, such a proceeding is not at all necessary. By denominational education we understand that system, under which the various religious? denominations of a country, aided by grants from the Government, establish and maintain their own schools ; and by secular education we understand that system under which all the public schools of the country are established and supported exclusively by the Government, or partly by Government grants and partly by rates levied on all without exception. From these definitions it seems perfectly evident that a denominational system of education cannot possibly be so expensive to the Government and ratepayers as a secular system. This is as evident as the proposition that a part cannot be greater than the whole. How can schools, partly supported by Government, be as expensive to the Govern-

ment as schools entirely maintained by the Government ? It is no answer to say that the Catholic people of Victoria demand for their Schools a capitation grant equal to that given for Government schools. This demaud, even if made, does not, under the circumstances, touch the argument in the least. The Catholic people of Victoria do not, and never did, approve of the principle of the secular system as established in that colony. But as they arc compelled to pay their share of the education grant, they insist on their right to have an equitable share of it spent on their own children. So long, therefore, as a majority insist on the present system, they will continue their present demand. But it does not follow from this that they advocate such a system of denominational education as would imply an obligation on the part of Government to support it entirely. Nothing of the sort. Their demand has been from the beginning for a system of denominational education, under which all denominations aided by the State might establish and maintain denominational schools. And this is the system we advocate, and demand in this colony ; and we do so because it is the only system possible which secures justice to all and is within the means of the Government. This is the system which prevails in England, and with the very best results. Some few years ago the secularists of Great Britain made a great outcry im reference to the subject of education, charging the denominations with neglect of this important question, and demanding the establishment of a free, secular, and compulsory system, instead of the denominational then existing. The Imperial Parliament, under the guidance of liberal statesmen, met these demands, it may be said, half way. The denominational system, aided by Government, was not to be changed or disturbed ; but an Act was passed enabling the appointment or rather election of School Boards to establish secular And compulsory education wherever the denominations had failed, no matter for what reason, to overtake the educational requirements. And what is the result? Most striking indeed it is. And in the first place let us see what this result is financially. This cannot be explained in more fitting or convincing words than those employed by the Vice-President ot the Council in moving the education estimates on the sth of August last. He says : " When the Bill of 1870 was under discussion, many gentlemen on the other side were in favour of a more drastic measure for the extinction of voluntary {denominational) schools, and the substitution of an uniform rate-sup-ported school-systein — supposing such a measure had passed and been successful, and that now there were no voluntary I (denominational) schools, they could accurately estimate the cost of the experiment. The annual grant to schools, excluding all assistance to training colleges, grants under Acts of Parliament, &c, was £1,851,790. The School Boards spend now three and two-thirds times as much from the rates as they get from the grants. If they had the whole of the grant they would be levying £0,750,000 in rates alone." This speaks for itself, and would put to shame secularists who never tire of shouting the palpable falsehood that denominational education is and must be more expensive to the State and the ratepayers than free, secular and compulsory education, if they were capable of feeling shame. What amount have the denominations saved for the ratepayers of England in one year alone ? No less than six millions sterling ; and yet secularists persevere in saying that secular education is cheaper than denominational ! Nor "does this, as we are told by the " Quarterly Heview," represent tho total cost. The total amount of rates, were all the children in Board Schools, would, it appears, be about £13,000,000. If then there be added to t-lris the aid given by Government, we should find a total of £15,500,000, yearly, as the cost of secular education in England and Wales. What a crushing 1 load of taxation do not these figures imply. And yet under denominational education the same educational results, so far as secular education is concerned, with many additional advantages, great and most desirable, can bo obtained for less than £3,500,000. It is evident, then, that under the denominational system the youth of England can be better educated than under the secular system, and that under the denominational system £12,000,000 annually are saved to the ratepayers. Away then with this absurd argument : secular is not cheaper than denominational education ; but, on the contrary, at least three and two-thirds times dearer. There is one other passage from this speech of the Vice-President of the Council to which we wish to draw the particular attention of our legislators and governors. It is this :—": — " Supposing, therefore, that this enormous increase to

the bunions of the poor rate-payer hnd been couple*! with the compulsory .'ittendiuicc of his children sit school, so that he could at c.iice trace an arbitrary interference with his rights as a parent as the cause ofhis increased taxes, would there not at once be a spontaneous and übiquitous outcry, ami "would not a r< cuth.n against ul neat ion have set in, "which would have Hindi 1 it almost impossible for the education department — nay even fur Parliament itself — to have rigidly enforced such a intßsure ?" L When the enormous expense relatively to our rovMiue of our new system in this colony is considered, the abo\e Winning .should be taken to heart by our statesmen. We shall return to this subject.