Current Topics AT HOME AND ABROAD.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XII, Issue 43, 13 February 1885, Page 1

Current Topics AT HOME AND ABROAD.

*y y Or the fairness with which it is usual for good »' ktangilical " Protestant Christians to deal with Catholic matters, honesty. we obtain another example from a newspaper published in Chester, and which we fiDd quoted by one or other of the religions non-entities whose weekly duty it is, among ourselves, to circulate a farrago of goody-goody rubbieh, relieved by the stale anti-Catholic clap-trap that is the natural language of Evangelicalism. The Chester Chronicle, which is the newspaper referred to, quotes a few passages from the letter of a correspondent signing himself " A Dublin Priest," who writes to the Dublin Freeman strongly condemning the customs that prevail at wakes, and calling upon the Government to second the efforts made by the Catholic clergy to put an end to them. " Each Lent," writes the correspondent, " the Church publishes her condemnation of wakes. Oar Bishops are repeatedly calling on us to use every effort to suppress them, ' as insulting to the dead, and subversive of Christian morals.' These condemnations and our constant exertions are not effective generally." The Chester Chronicle, however, sajs not a word of this, but quotes some of the cases of disgusting conduct mentioned by the writer, and then lays the whole blame of the matter upon the Catholic Church. " Such," he says, "is the terrible degradation to which the Romish priesthood has brought one of the finest peasantry (peasantries ?) in the world." The presumption is f ' nevertheless, that the priesthood which bad brought the people to such a pitch of degradation would be content thai they should remain in it. rather than condemn and make efforts to put an end to it. That the habit of waking the dead riotously, moreover, did not originate in Catholic Ireland, a pious editor might be expected to have sufficient knowledge even of the Scriptures to inform him. He might hardly be expected to have snmcient honesty to induce him not to hide the truth when it was laid undeniably before his eyes — for honesty is not among the attributes of pious editors as a rule. The Frcomarfs correspondent, tten, in reference to the necessity that he finds for a law to second the efforts of the priests', speaks as follows :— " Until then we must only imitate our Lord, 'who (Sr # Matthew's Gospel, ix., 22 scg 1 .), when He was come into the house of the Ruler (whose daughter lay dead; saw the minstrels and the multitude making a rout, and said ' give place,' . . . and the multitude was put out.' Had He not raised the dead to life, on His departure the multitude would have returned, and «o they do now." So much for the manner in which good Protestant Christians consider themselves authorised to deal with Catholic matters? But let us hope that they limit the gross license taken by them to this particular, and in all the other affairs of life are tolerably honest men. We must make allowance, besides, for the position in which they find themselves placed, for it is very necessary, in order that the Church may seem inferior and the various evangelical conventicles obtain some degree of credit, that falsehood should be strongly, plentifully, (and unscrupuously made use of. Meantime, as a just means of contrasting the work done by Protestantism with that accomplished by the Church, let us compare the following figures— as contrasting Catholic and Protestant Ireland they are especially valuable. The returns of the Registrar- General for 1881, then, give us the percentage of illegitimate births in Ulster, the most Protestant province* and in Connaught, the most Catholic province. In Protestant Ulster it is 4*l, and in Catholic Connaught oB per cent. We find, moreover, that in the Protestant county, Down, of 5,671 births registered, 328 were illegitimate, while in Catholic Mayo there were 29 illegitimate births out of 6,013 births registered. We see, therefore, that pious editors are very sorely put to it when they feel obliged to condemn the Catholic Church, as they very often do. If, under the circumstances, they take refuge in tricks and dishonesty, let us, at least, make all the excuse for them that their necessities demand. Good Protestantism very consistently, as well as constantly, acts upon that motto which it has itself- invented for the benefit of the Jesuits— ' The end justifies the means."

THE SECULARIST'S ARGUMENTS.

In the Month for Dec. the Be*. James F. Splaine publishes aa article on primary education in wjjich we find much that is very p'sitineat to the subject which at presant forms the cßief Interest of Catholic* in this Colony. The writer begins by referring to'the stale of the religious question in England, and points out how religious freedom Has been brought to mean freedom from religion. He goes on to show that all the provision made mjr education in the past was due to denomioationalists, and declares that had secularists done as much an immense expenditure on Board Schools would have been avoided by the ratepayers. He then goes on to explain the injustice of the attempt to force on the whole community the system that is pleasing to secularists aloae. " There is no greater fallacy," he writes, " than that which underlies this make-believe theory of being the" same to all. Denominationalists see a 'distinction between the being educated and the being perhaps brimful of facts and processes. They are possessed of the idea that although a child were not only perfect in reading, writing, and arithmetic, bat were also an adept in geography, domestic economy, and history and had also gained a smattering of the sciences, he would not for all that necessarily be educated. They believe that these attain* ments by themselves would in many, if not in most cases, be positively injurious, and that to be really beneficial they mast rest on a sub* stratum of morality. They believe also that to talk of building up a code of morality without religion is to talk'nonsense; that a morality which is not founded oa the first and greatest: Commandment of loving God above all things, and all else for His sake, which is not, in other words, looped up to the supreme will of One who taketh thought for all men must be founded on selfishness ; that under such a code man's motive for action must ever be in its ultimate analysis, love of his own body ; and that his aim ia life whun traced through and past all his wordy and high-sounding professions, can be no higher than that which impels the beast of the field, namely the nutrition and well-being not oE his soul, not oE his mind, but of that in which these, according to the apostles of such morality, are mere phenomena, namely, his body. Fiually-they believe that in such a code there would be nothing to hinder man from turning all his attainments in whatever direction he thought might most conduce to his own temporal pleasure or profit, however great an injustice he might thereby be guilty of towards tha rest of the world." "We are not concerned at pres3nt," adds the writer, "in proving that Denominationalists are right in believing all this. We only state, as a fact, that they do. Is it wojdjrful, therefore, that they should 03 dissatisfied with the offer of the Secularist ? The 'education' which he speaks I of is to them a maimed and truncated abortion, and his attempt to thrust it upon them is an unwarrantable interference with freedom of conscience." The Secularist, however, answers that be has no intention of forcing his views on the Denominational ist, but that he cannot 03 expected much longer to contribute to the support of religions,, with which he has no sympathy. " This answer, by ita coolness, seems to have deceived some even among ourselves," says the writer " Let us therefore consider attentively what it amounts to. We Denominationalists have laid out enormous sums in building our own schools, furnishing them, and supplying them with staffs of teachers. Then we have been taxed to do the same for our Secularist. Having thus been set upon his legs, the first announcement which he makes is that he will not subscribe any longer towards the support of our religions. Any longer! Why, he is not doing it now. It is difficult at first to guess what he alludes to, but his meaning is that he objects to our being allowed to compete with him for certain prize 3 called Grauts, which are voted by Parliament out of the national income, and by Government thrown open at present to all certified schools." The writer, then, proceeds to examine into the secularist's objection, and to the passages in which be does so, as being of especial importance, we desire to call the particular attention of our readers. " But what are these prizes offered for 1 " asks the writer. "Is it for religion as he (the Secularist) insinuates 1 Is the grant that lie geti given for religion ? And is not the grant that we receive awarded on precisely the same conditions, and for precisely the same thing? Should we get a penny less if we were to cease from teaching our children a creed ? The grant is given, as he knows perfectly well for success in teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic. Beligion has nothing in the world to do with it. We Denominationaliets have

indeed, some reason to complain, for in paying rates to Luild Board Schools we really are paying for the satisfaction of the Secularist's 1 religious ' views. Bnt as for his grievance, it is wholly imaginary, not to say disingenuous, and it is the very effrontery of his insinuation that has sometimes screened its falseness from detection. If he had any sense of justice he would speak as follows. , Those who do not believe in Secularism ought not to be obliged to build our Secularist Schools, or to eupport them. If a tax be levied Inpon the whole community, the whole community onght to reap the benefit of it. The school fafes,, therefore, instead of being handed over exclusively to us, ought to be distributed amongst all the certified schools of the districtM which they are levied. This is the kind of speech we have a rigt||&> expect from him now. But if he persists in reiterating his cproplaiDt, we shall know that his is no mere theoretical objection toireligion in the abstract, but a very practical antipathy to those wl profess it, and consequently that he, while parading as the champion of freedom, is really an insidious, but Tery commonplace advocate of religious intolerance."

INHERENTLY FAXJLTY.

The writer in the Montn goes on to inquire as to whether, apart from all questions of religion, the uniform state system may be looked upon as satisfactory. " The Board System, or, as we may now call it, the State System," be says, "is a creature of but yesterday. The vigour of youth is still throbbing in its limbs, and yet we already descry symptoms of that decadence to which all things sublunary •re obnoxious. We speak not of mistakes or errors, attributable lo that wanton exuberance of spirits which characterises the springtide of life, mistakes which we might hope to see rectified by experience and the prudence of maturer years f bat of vices inherent in the constitution, such as age can/only tend to develope and intensify. To show that it is open to great abuses we need not go so far back as the closing by the Home Secretary of St. Paul's Industrial Board School, for gross mismanagement. It is sufficient to turn to last year when the London School Board issued a circular, by which we learn that it had been possible for their head teachers to sign requisitions for, and distr ibute, prizes which had never been merited, and to have carried on this practice for a considerable time without being caught. And that it admits of such abases being quietly bushed up by the managers is proved by the extremely lenient measure of justice dealt out to the culprits. The severest sentence amounted to what nautical assessors would term a suspension of certificate for twelve months, and this was inflicted in only one case. To the rest a pretty little moral serm on was preached, but preached privately to each one, to save them the pain of a public exposure, although in this way the innocent have been left to bear" equally with the guilty the ignominy of un truthfulness and dishonesty — hard words, it is true, bnt they are not exactly ours ; their equivalents occur in the Board's own Circular." The writer, nevertheless, does not deny that such a state of things might possibly alsoocc ur in connection with the voluntary System. "," The point we wish to make now is this, that under the State System, in the metropolis under the very noses of the authorities, and while £30,000 a year was being swallowed up by the salaries of Inspectors, it was possible for we are not told how many school teachers to carry on this organised fraud, for how many' months or yeaijs before the managers found it out. This fact alone is enough to prove a general remissness on the part of responsible people, and a constitutional vice in the system such as warrants the gravest misgivings, 'and ought to deter every prudent person from making it the sole depository of all his educational hopes. Rival systems working side by side would afford mutual support in these matters. The vigilant eye they would keep on each other would be a guarantee for honesty in both. We shall, perhaps, be told that means will be found, as time goes on, to eliminate these abuses, or, at least to reduce them to a minimum. But considering that the system is still, as we have said, in its first fervour, and in the vigour of youth we are not sanguine about that. If these things can be done in the green wood, what may we expect in the dry ? "

MISMANAGED.

But even admitting that the faults of the Secular System may be rectified, its superiority over the Voluntary Schools would still remain to be proved 11 It is true that the average percentage of passes for England and Wales is slightly higher in Board than in Voluntary Schools. Various causes combine to produce that effect. In the first place, the Board Schools, though, built especially for the needy, attract by their luxury the children of the well-to-do middle classes, who crush out the poor, and drive them into the comparatively deserted voluntary schools, to bring down their standard of efficiency by their lower intelligence their irregular attendance, and the injurious effect of intercourse out of school hours with illiterate people at home. This argument has special force in the case of the Catholic schools, the children in which are almoet uniformly of the pjorest. Then, secondly, we must take account of the difference of expenditure, which is out of all proportion with, the difference in the percentage of passes, the cost of each child, under the Voluntary System being only £1 14s. 10fd,»

while under the State System it funs up to an average of /562 Is. 34d. for maintenance alone, and, when all expenses are included, to £3r3 r sb. 6jd. a child." The manner, again, in which to compare the two systems is to take an example of each, working in identical circumstances. There »re, then, in a certain Midland town three Board Schools and one Voluntary School . " The children in this school are □otorionsly the poorest of all. The average attendance is about two hundred and fifty, and among their parents there are hardly a dozen who rank above labourers. They are in many caseß badly lodged, fed wretchedly, and clothed in rags. Yet -at the Inspection .they beat the highest of the State Schools by eight per cent. We must no* omit to mention also that they take the same number of extra sub* jects as the best State School, while the second and third State Schools do not take any. They find the three R's as much as they can manage." But it may be eaid that the Voluntary School is an exceptionally good one. "This supposition might very fairly be disputed, for there are in the country many other Voluntary Schools equally, or even more successful. But apart from this, while the plea might have some force if it were a case of school against school, it is very weak where there are three against one, and as an explanation of the inequality of the three State Schools among themselves f it is, of course, absolutely worthless. Nor will it do to say that the case is an isolated one, and that a similar one might be found in which one State School beat three Voluntary Schools ; for although that might betray a weakness in the Voluntary System, it would not prove that the State System was strong, and this is the point which the advocates of a State monopoly ought to make good. Here, then, we have the two systems, subjected to a fur trial, under circumstances which, if not identical, lean to the advantage of the State ; yet the result not once only, but year by year, is praciically the same, the Voluntary pressing hard on, or out-stripping the best State School, while the other two State Schools are wholly out of the race." Neither difference in social status, then, the children, of the Volunrary Schoolbeing in this respect below those of the State Schools, Dor difference in the ability of teachers, since inferior teachers would not be em* ployed in the Government schools,nor difference in locality, all four schools being within a short distance of each other, will account for the state of affairs that obtains. <: We are driven, therefore, to the conclusion that there must be something faulty in the system itself a Precisely so. It is the management. But what difference does that make ? It is the management that differentiates the systems, and therefore to blame the management is to blame the system." The writer then goes on to examine into the nature of the School Boards, and concludes his examination as follows. "So wonder that the setting up of State Schools is a popular thing ga certain class. 'Wheresoever the body shall be, there shall the eagles also be gathered together ? Selfimmolation on Boards is not a very common virtue, or to speak more in accordance with modern philosophy, not a very common folly,and when we see one member using, his position to solicit the votes <Jf his com. rades in order to secure for himself a contract, a secondv returning the compliment, on the principle that one good turn deserves another, a third packing the "meeting in order to'have himself elected to the humble post of visiting officer at a salary of £40 a year ; when we witness these doings we caniiot help suspecting that the intellectual elevation of the masses is hardly the object which Boards'have most at heart." * •

TOO DEABLY FUBCHASED.

It may, nevertheless, be replied that- the mismanaged State Schools produce, on the whole,- better results than the Volun tary Schools. Let fore see to what extent such is the case. The percentage of passes in reading, writing, and arithmetic for 1883-4 was. lespectively, for the Voluntary Schools 89*14:, 82*03, 77*51 ; and for the State Schools 89-96, 84*61, 81*23. The percentages in the three subjects combined were for the voluntary schools 82*89, and for the State Schools 85*26, leaving a difference in favour; of the State schooler of 2*37. The cost, meantime, of c ach child in average attendance at a State school was £3 5s sjd, that of each child in average attendance at a Voluntary School being £1 14s lOf d, or a difference in favour of Voluntary Schools of £1 10s 7d. "We find, then, that to secure a superiority of a little over two per cent, in the passes, the State incurs nearly eighty-eight per cent, more in outlay. This can hardly be: looked upon as a brilliant feat, and we do not begrudge Schooll Boards any of the consolation they derive from it." But as to the part that the managers have in this superior work, it is only indirect, t ( It (the work) comes in reality from the severe competition carried on among teachers, and this competition is kept alive by the principle of paying on results. The managers, therefore, can be said to cause it only inasmuch as they leave the teachers practically uncontrolled, both in money matters, and still more in the pressure put upon children. It is by their permissive will only that success comes. Their efficacious will, as theologians would say, has nothing to do with it. They are the cause of it, not by active interference, but by passiveness." Again, as to the success itself, the advantage of it may very well be questioned since it is obtained by over-pressure on the children— the inevitable efforts of payment by results not properly

~Hnf rein S? ","* f ° m M im P°* toQfc **» *° «*»■ educSiona?^ D< ""I?* 16 ° nght to *in e ™7 well-devised educational scheme something analogous to the governor in a steamSesld reV bT tt r tbi % Pl i nC . iple frOm leadiD * tethers toovertaTSe SS£ dabllltie ! of their POP*'*, and in the State System this moderating power is wanting. We are not accusing the teachers. ban their fault. The loud protest which the.y have already made and wl r nya r ngtbemor ° e *P e »* n <*<* are aware, f tin evil, YanZt ? WM V t> But anirrPßis «We influence drives them on 811^ 6 IabOUP bef ° r * them -itb all the energy of ZrtlLT '' rCady answerßof tb « *iM»n at examination adv 1 a *"* the W ° Tk * " Ot to ° heav * 'in "■ zeal °* tether 6 ' B6 '' whatever *• oWer and more prudent teacher may think he must either advance with the rest or retire to nunll\ It 8 ° c CrUel machine moves on like the ca * of JuggerattaTned ,PrOCeBS, PrOCeBS by wb?cb the boaßted access has been £Sfi^£s? we for onr are iDclined to think via not

A PLEA FOB FAIB-PLAY.

Fathbb Splainb concludes his article as follows : " A modern historian bas written : ' There is no more fear of a reaction against freetrade in Engtbree' And ™» n ii i^*" tbCTe Uof a reaction a g a «st the rule of of thelat fift 7 e ° enelookß back at the commercial marvels kntth nf r yye - arßjoUe ° anßCarcely realiße that ifc » oDl y tbat cerL?n?LthP B ' DCe T belieVed in P^ction. But are we so bes^reJS , c^ D ° ° f * reaction? M <™P°li<» *t «•* best are bad, and they are nowhere worse than in education. Govern. ZITLTT^^ &nd «•*■!*■. P«*»l» even railways fa mtad tbaA '*r PriVate com P anic «- « however, to be borne ttTmSLSy ?"2 TiBBnCBB'T iBBnCBB ' a million throats wonld w^ up the authorities to their duty. But schools have no euch safeguard. ultS7 W r°^ adViße thoße who *»* on cramping, and wS v t r ? Oglmg com P etition *« school systems, to pause for a Sves\ n Yanvh ry CwßC w 8 Clearlr Bometbin * In SSf i!Sf°R^?° mßpeCted tbe W ° rk Of tbe Chrißtian BrotheM someth^l hl^ tloa . *m be ready to allow that tft* have also I?Tn» g J LfOTL fOT tbemseWeß - W^ refuse them a heating ? LvS ?"• T fideDt ° f the excelle °cc of your system, why fct to suZtl J m affOTd eeneroQ8 ' wh * l*y youwelveaVn to a?l cl ?? BmiS ef Commentß ? W^ ™* throw down the glove tent? T • n! . On T altermß ' and 8t °P the souths of malconthemJel^TT^ Ona [ iStB Me UDfairly wei^ hted - They must tax bvThesSt^ k™£ 8 ? OOlS fortb^ own children; they are taxed tod aSn fi° X ll h °° 1S fOT 70UrS ; fOF both theße Workß the y S Hl ' by tbe Banitary aut borities, and then by tbe guard ans of the poor. Lastly they are taxed to keep schools going, but allth^moneygoestoyou. Give us a chance on even ground. MonoSi*? tt v? ° £ v he PaSt; they are OQt of joint with the S • V M W WC iVP ' Thiß "an a ° e of e * hi °ition 8 , when all who exhfb^ 00 k l D .° PBa matket ' and be gets tbe P rize medal who exhibits the best fabric, be he Jew or Gentile. As to religion, l-ll i * mentioned on either side. What bas religion to do lit^f V° gg * netß> Ot drain -^ a PB, or short-horns? Neither ought it to have anything to do with the verdict which is to be passed on the produce of our schools.-Shall we be heard ? that depends on hnnZ a Z et *° anofcber < * uestion - -b our liberalism to be the good old honest Enghsh type that enjoyed a stand-up fight on even gronnd or is it to be that of Paris mobs and Aston Park ? »

CHOICE AUTHORITIES,

IT would seem however, aa if it were the Parisian mob liberality of which Father Splaine speaks tbat we were to have with respect to education ia New Zealand. Our contemporary the Dunedin Mvetiing otar, at least, appears bent on reproducing among us the venom of the extreme revolutionists.and, producedat secondhand.it iseven worse that when put forth by those with whom it originated. The attempt for example to exhibit Victor Hugo in a word for word translation is particularly ludicrous and grotesque, and quite places it beyond the power of anyone capable of over-fatigue and disgust to read the matter so reproduced. What a series of suort after ;snort and gasp after gasp we find in Buch a production, and the sensation to be experienced when reading it would only be that of listening to someone speaking under theimpetus of asound thump between theshoalders —bestowed to bring out every two or three words at a bound. We confess, then, tbat we have found it simply impossible to read through that Bpeecb translated from the French of one, delivered on education by Victor Hugo in 1850, for our contemporary the Evening Star, and we are, therefore, incompetent fully to decide on the gems of wisdom or of rhetoric that it may contain. We perceive, however, that it contains an exaggerated edition of most of the anti-Catholic stock arguments and calumnies propounded by our Evangelical and atheistical, &c well as our Jewish, friends in common, and that' they have

evidently been declaimed in that screening style of oratory which distinguishes the poet when he speoka under the influence of excitement. Bead history says M. Victor Hugo, for example, in his own peculiar style, winch we shall ba far from following the Star's translator m an attempt to reproduce, and see how the Inquisition put to death 5,000,000 victims, all of them g»dmea and true of course, airanced scientists, or something superior to that if possible.— But we, for our part, say peeca fortiter, lie boldly, without calling ill-used history to your aid, and say ten or twenty millions, or even thirty, or forty, or fifty thousand— for, as the saying w, it is as good to be hanged for a sheep as a lamb, and why should the lying tongue be staggered by any sum of numbers whatsoever ? W« have heard Victor Hugo, then-that is those of us who could summon up sufficient endurance to read the extraordinary jargon and farrago put forth by the Evening Star under M. Victor Hugos name have lmrd him. Shall we not also hear Rochefort or Fel»x Pyar, or Fenonillas the Foul, or that educationist who expelled the Sisters of Mercy from their orphanage and turned it into a harem for himself and his fellow hell-hounds, as M. Maxima dv Camp relates in his history of the Commune-for all these fellows also may be cited as authorities on education and stern denouncers of the Chnrch as opposed, say they, to science and enlightenment, and we admit that their utterances will find a very consistent and becoming place of publication in the columns of the Evening Star. They will fit in with his frame of. mind and fortify his arguments, amazingly. But as for M. Victor Hugo himself, he also is a famous educational authority 1 What respectable mother of a family, for example, could desire a better monitor to instruct her bs to how she should bring up her daughters than the man who unblushingly claims it as bis mission to free the young girl from the wearing bonds of chastity, in which he conceives her to bs painfully bound -to enable her to hold up her head, and meet all men's gaze unfalteringly in the character of the emancipated/Me.»Mfo?, as he honourably calls her? Or what brave man need desire a better leader than the writer who has glorified suicide, and made it the method of death chosen by his most nobly-pictured heroes ? But have we not been told within the last week or so, by a certain French Deputy, that the transported recidivists would be an acquisition to our colonies, and that we colonists should be glad to receive them. Let us accept this as an explanation of the anxiety of our contemporary the Evening Star to cultivate among us beforehand the ideas of the.revolutionists as to education. The recidivists, as auyone who has* read M. Othenin d'Haussonville's description of criminal life in Paris must know, are all revolutionists, and we are happy to congratulate the Evening Steer on the part he has adopted of endeavouring to make things smooth for them. Nor would it be becoming in us to deny that he is admirably fitted for the task, and quite well versed himself in the liberality that distinguishes the Parisian mob— especially that portion of it about to visit us, if all goes well.