LEAGUE REFERENDUM METHODS: A CHALLENGE

New Zealand Tablet, 21 May 1914, Page 23

LEAGUE REFERENDUM METHODS: A CHALLENGE

.The following letter, by the Right Rev. Dr. Cleary, Bishop of Auckland, has appeared in the public press, and has been mailed, registered, to the League Executive ; —With soul, heart, and purse, Catholics are staunch supporters of Biblical and religious instructions in schools. In Auckland alone, in about three years past, they have flung some £61,000 into that sacred cause. They object only to specified League methods of .introducing State Biblical teaching, as being violations of sacred rights which God gave, and which no League, Government, or majority can lawfully take away. The League is now strenuously endeavoring to force the Prime Minister to ' come to heel with a so-called Referendum Bill, to decide this question of religion, religious liberty, and rights of conscience,, by counting noses. The League bases its demand on the statement that about a. fifth of the Dominion .voters have signed League cards demanding a ' referendum 'on .'.the system of religious instruction '.prevailing, in Australia.' At most, only a numerically insignificant minority of those signatories can have' understood the Australian' sys-

tern in its true sense, or in the same sense. This for two reasons: ... .'..■••" • (1) By what it says—and, still more, by what it conceals—the League card is a substantial misrepresenta*. tion of the plain facts of the system of religious instruction ' prevailing in Australia.' ' (2) In the vote-catching campaign, League publications and advocates flatly contradict each other on practically every detail, and even essential feature, of the ' Australian' system which opponents have assailed. They have appealed to sect- • arian passion, provoked antipathy to opponents by amazing misrepresentations, and generally,, made it impossible for the vast bulk of card-signers to understand the facts of the system on which they demanded a misnamed ' referendum.' i The great body of these hundreds of contradictory and misleading statements have, doubtless, been made in good faith or under controversial stress. But that in no way alters the practical result. It is the practice of civilised parliaments and law courts to Tefuse effect to documents signed through substantial (even though innocent) concealment or misdescription. I intend to prove such substantial misdescription before the public and the Petitions" Committee of the Dominion Parliament. Pending-the latter development: 1. I offer to lay my abundant evidence (chiefly from League, law, and Blue Book sources) before a committee of experts in the law of evidence, to be jointly chosen by the League and me; the committee's report thereon to be published throughout New Zealand at the joint expense of the League and me. 2. I offer the Auckland Town Hall, free of cost to the League, for friendly questioning and discussion relevant to the facts of these and other methods and proposals of the League. 3. I offer (if invited) to detail or discuss these matters of fact—or to reply to questions—before the League's usual packed meetings of ' sympathisers.' Such friendly discussions would greatly interest and enlighten the general publicespecially those who signed the League card, and the considerable number of signers who (as alleged) in a short time abandoned the League and petitioned against it. The League maintains that it is ensconced on the rock of truth and rectitude. It claims as supporters three out of every four in a meeting of the general public. Yet it has hitherto found running away much healthier exercise than thus publicly confronting ' Australian ' facts with x its own version thereof. I shall probably receive again the droll ' disproof ' that my proffered League facts attack the honor of sundry estimable people, for some of whom I entertain a warm personal regard. Innocent and unintended misrepresentation spells no dishonor. I am offering chiefly League facts or fancies. If these catch the League 'on the point' (of honor), that is the League's fault or misfortune. It cannot alter the facts. With altered superscription,' etc., this letter has been mailed, registered, to the League Executive. There is more to follow.—l am, etc., * HENRY W. CLEARY, Bishop of Auckland. Mav 12.