BISHOP MORAN IN REPLY.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XII, Issue 5, 23 May 1884, Page 17

BISHOP MORAN IN REPLY.

The following letter has appeared in the Dunedin daily papers. TO THE EDITOB. Sib,— The speech of tbe president of tbe Benevolent Institution at the adjourned meeting of subscribers on Monday last, compels me to ask you to permit me to say a few words in reply to that part of it which refers to me. Tbe president, in answer to a question put by Dr. Stuart, is reported to have said that my statement in regard to the Institution was without foundation. Let us see first what was my statement. I stated that in the Benevolent Institution Catholic children had been taught to hate their religion and reject it. Is this without foundation 7 I stated again that the Committee, when appealed to for redress, refused such redress. Is this also without foundation ? I stated, in the third place, that the Benevolent was a proselytising Institution. It is this, it would appear, which the president designates as without foundation. But, sir, this is the strictly logical conclusion from the fact, which is not denied, that Catholic children were taught in that Institution to hate their religion and rejecb it, and that the Committee of Management refused redress. In answer to me it has been said that the Committee never gave any directions to proselytise. I did not say they did so ; bat I now affirm that the Committee, which, on complaint being made to it, refused redrts?, is fairly open to the charge of conniving at the offence complained of, of condoning it, and of indirectly encouraging proselytism. In the course of the years 1872 and 1873 the Catholic clergyman who usually gave instructions in the Institution, complained ttiat some one had tampered with the faith of the Catholic children ; that these were taught Presbyterianism iv the morning, and were handed over to him in the evening for Catholic instruction. .Nay, more, that before his face they were led from the Presbyterian instructor to him. This priest complained to the superintendent, and the impertinence of some of the officials was punished by the Committee. Nevertheless, the tampering with the faith of Catholic children continued, After maturely considering the case we ultimately came to the conclusion "that, after having borne many insults, for nearly three years and done no good, we should disconnect ourselves from the Benevolent Institution. We were also convinced that to go there wo'ild not only be useless, but calculated to make hypocrites of poor little children ; aud that auy Catholic children sent there would certainly lose their faith." Nevertheless, after the lapse of some time, owing, I think, to the influence of some gentlemen who promised that the htate of things of which we had to complain should never again be found to exist in the Benevolent Institution, I consented to make a trial once more of it, and sent the priests stationed in Dunedin to give instructions there. But the improvement anticipated lasted only a very short time. Complaints similar to those formerly marte were renewed. I went to the Institution myself, and to my sorrow found that the state of things had nob been in the least exaggerated. Once more appeal was made to the Committee. But this time the Committee was defiant, and returned the curt and discourteous answer to which, I have already called attention. Under such circumstances I ask a candid public to judge between me and the Benevolent Institution. Judging by the past my conviction is that if now, for the third time, I sent a priest to give religious instruction in the Benevolent Institution, he would after a little time be treated precisely as his predecessois had been treated — that means would be employed to mar his work by undermining the faith of such Catholic children as might be there, and that in the end, after borne insults and laboured in vain, we should as before, be obliged to retire from the place.— l am, etc., Dunedin, May 20. * P. Mokan.