The Catholic Bishops and the Education Bill.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXX, Issue 22, 29 May 1902, Page 1

The Catholic Bishops and the Education Bill.

Whilst there is considerable difference of opinion amongst English Catholics as to the precise way in which some of .the minor provisions of the new Bill will work out in actual-prac-tice, the view commonly taken is, as expressed in our leader of last week, one of general and cordial satisfaction with the measure. It is true, as we have already pointed out, that the permissive clause, leaving it optional with the local authority whether they will assume control of the school or not, will, if it is allowed to remain, be a very serious blot on the Bill. It is true also that the removal of some of the Catholic grievances under the new measure is counterbalanced by a very special and unwarranted concession to the Nonconformists. The Bill provides, as we pointed out last week, that in fu'ure wherever there are a reasonable number of Catholic children (say t'lirty), the Catholics of the district will be free to build a school at t eir own expense, and then to have it regarded as a public elem?ntary school, for the maintenance of which the local authority will be responsib'e. A similar provision applies to Nonconformists, but with a very important difference. If a sufficient number of Nonconformist parents in a parish where the only school is a Church of England school declare that it is unsuitable for their children, tin y may, with the permission of the local authority and consent of the Department, call fora separate school to be built at the cost of the ratepayers. In o her words, the Catholics must build the'r owii schools : the Nonconformists wjjlhave theirs built for them. It is probable, howjvtr, that owing to^,their internal divisions t'le Nonconformists will not take advantage of this clause to any great extent, and, in any ca^e, Catholics will be generous mough not to quarrel over allowing them the benefit of this concession. Altogether the Bill is, for the Catholics, a great step in advance, and they will accept it in the fair and reasonable spirit" in which it appears to have been framed. The attitude of the Chu rch has been officially expressed in the following resolutions passed by the Cardinal-Archbishop and Bishops of the Province of Westminster at the annual Low Week meeting.

' The Cardinal Archbishop and Bishops of the Province of Westminster having examined the Education Bill recently presented to Parliament, without at present going into details, commend it in general as a measure deserving the cordial support of the country. By co-ordinating Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Education it offers in outline a comprehensive national system, sufficiently elastic to allow of healthy variety and of expansion in all its branches. While placing the syllabus of elementary secul.ir instruction, with choice of subjects, under direct local popular control, and meeting the cost of teaching the same out of public money, the Bill also recognises the sicred right of parents to secure a religious education for their children, though it does this by means of a financial compromise. By this compromise the representatives of such parents are to provide the sites, school-

buildings, and the up-keep of the same, and the cost of administration, at their own expense. It will be seen that this is as far from placing the supporters of denominational schools on a perfect equality with those of board schools, as it is from placing the cost of religious education upon the rates. By the provision of this Bill we shall still have to collect, by voluntary subscriptions, a large sum of money in diminution of the public burden, as the price we are to pay for teaching religion in our schools. Nevertheless, under all circumstances, we are well satisfied to accept this compromise (provided it be vvoikcd in a fair and reasonable spirit), as a settlement of the Elementary Education difficulty.'