The Verdict of the Electors.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXIII, Issue 13, 30 March 1905, Page 3

The Verdict of the Electors.

By some extraordinary mathematical permutations and psychological assumptions, they undertook to show that ' Yes ' in the minds of great numbers of the electors meant ' No,' and 'No ' meant ' Yes.' But, in face of the clear and unequivocal meaning of the first question; of the Premier's authoritative interpretation of.it, given before the elections ; of the disitincfl and repeated newspaper statements ; of their own impassioned appeals to the electors to answer the first question by an emphatic -negative, or the cause would be lost for a generation, it is simply trifling with the whole Referendum to hold that in Scaling ivith the ciAi'cial question the voters meant one thing, but by a decisive majority expressjbid the opposite. In saimm'onirig external evidence in favor of their forced interpretation of the resmlt of the Referendum, the Scripture Camipaign Council have fallen into a deep pit. They go far afield, and claim the sanction of the Sydney ' Daily Telegraph ! ' Are there no papers in Mel^pujrne ? Is • noti this an important anid domes'toe question which has been often, and keenly, discussed in our Melbourne papers ? Or is the authority of the ' detached ' Syldney ' Daily Telegraph" so great as to override the verdict of the ' Argus ' and ' Age ' and ' Heratd ' and ' Australasian ' and ' Leader ' and 'Weetoly Times ' ? Nothing could show the weakness of their case more forcibly than that unfortunate appeal to the ' detached ' Sydney ' Daily Telegraph.' That aptpeal, too, Suggests and justifies the quotation of press opinions such as have recently appeared in a Victorian newspaper which is in no way under Catholic mtanagement or control. In a sub-leader, the writer states :—: — ' The Bishop of Melbourne is sending round a piece of chop-logic to prove that the State schools can remai/n secular and yet include in their State programme the Scripture lessons prepared by some of the religious sects. - t A number of parsions are teaching the same doctrine in relation to tho Bible They say it is? a Divine revelation secularly inspired. Very ingenious, but it is only thimble-rigging, quite unworthy of the pulpit. The existing Education Act was fought for, and afterwards worshipped, as secular to the " backbone and spilnal miarrow " for the very purpose of excluding the religious lessons now being yearned for by Bishop Clarke. The idea then was that, by dethroning religious instruction as a school subject, the Roman Catholics would be compelled to give up their separate schools, as the laity would not support them. This policy having failed, owing principally to the "brutal franVness v of the author of the Act, the same| anvia'ble people tlhfriki that now all is quiet and forgotten in relation to the origin of the present Act, they can srnWggle in sectarfajn teaching under the plea that it is so ethical as to be secular Another section boldly claims that " secular," in a country where Protestants are in a maionty means evangelicalism of the sloppiest kind. This is the " only little one " logic nationalise^. The Scripture referendum business was disingenuous in its inception ; and in its answers ; and now it is sought to make it a justification for disingenuous legislative action. Every instinct of English fair play and straight-forwardness revolts 1 from the whole business, led though it is at present by a north countryman.' In Truth the Scripture Campaign Council and the Bible in State Schools League should bje satisfied with the facilities for giving religious instruction already afforded to them. The State school teachers 1 are used to a very considerable extent as the agents of tihe League. They are required to distribute amongst the children printed notices to ascertain whether the parents diesire that their children shcjuld receive religious instruction in school. The same has to be dome in connection with new children entering during the year, and of children promoted to higher classes 1 . They have to keep a list of the children whose parents desire them 1 to receive religiolus instruction, and furnish the religious teachers with soich lists. When the religious instruction is given before school hours, the teachers are required to be present and march the children into the room*, or room®, set apart for religious instruction. Tjie head teacther is expefcted to prevent \>he children not receiving religious instruction from playing in the stehool yard. He is alsio expected to provide assistant an r d pupil teachers to keep order in the classes for relSgioius in.strtuction, ain'd to dismiss the children in due form. The head teadher is also expected to unite classes of absent religious instructors with others when siuich absences are notified, and to report to the organiser of the League the names of religious instructors who d\o not take up their work, or who are continuously absent.

Finally, the head teacher is required to hang up in every room where religious instruction is given, a copy of the Religious Instruction Chart, containing the name of school, day, class.es,'-' instructors, room, assistants in charge, etc. Every one will see that all this means a very serious tax on the time and attention of State school tdachets, and makes the religions instruction almost a departmeot of the State school system. And as religious instruction may now be given from 9.15 a.m., or from 11.45 t.o 12.15 p.m., or from l.so p.m,. to 1.50 p.m., oi horn 3.30 p.m. to 1 p.m., according, to the convenience of the religious instructors, it is manifest that the order and discipline of the schools must suffer by the unduly and unnecessarily mjuUi^lied opportunities for giving Religious Instruction. If, however, Catholic children were not liable to suffer by these arrangements, and If State school teacher's were willing to carry them out, we should not complain. But there is one part of these regulations ■which has proved a source of danger and annoyance to Catholic children in the past, and which is likely to give more trouble in the future. The regulation to which I refer is expressed in these terms in the memorandum addressed to the siead teacher or assistant in charge :— 1 Head teachers are reminded that the department Idoes not insist on the children all being dismissed from school at 3.30, but concedes that those remaining for religious instruction will retain their places, children of objectors being TUsmisised. 1 Whem the announcement is made by the head teacher : ' Children of objectors may depart,' how will it fare with with our Catholic children ? Will they, if they know that the head teacher favours the religious instruction about to be given, stand up in his presence, and in presence of the religious-instructor, and brave the insults of their fellow pupils, or will they remain and have to listen occasionally to gross and cruel caricatures of their religion ? Catholic children have been called opprobrious names for daring to retire before religious instruction was given ; Catholic parents have had great difficulty in getting their children exempted from attendance at such instruction ; and Catholic assistant leachers have had to remain to T<eep orderj while dome of the most sacred tenets of their faith were assailed. Our natural fear is that what has happened in the past will, with the increased facilities now afforded, happen more frequently in the future, and that the State School System may be converted, at our own expense, into an instrument of oppression and proselytism.