A Lesson for N.Z. Legislators

New Zealand Tablet, Volume L, Issue 30, 2 August 1923, Page 21

A Lesson for N.Z. Legislators

Says the Universe in its issue for May It: Just when, recently, we were recording Mr, T. P. O’Connor’s disappointment at the ill-luck which attended his motion in the House condemning the inequalities under which Catholics still labor in regard to their schools, that motion, on its resumption after adjournment, had been passed. The Cardinal-Archbishop and several of the Hierarchy have written warm letters of congratulation to Air. O'Connor upon his successful action. The following is the full account in Hansard under date May 2 ; Order read for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [lßth April]. “That the present system of imposing upon the Catholics of England the burden of building their own schools is contrary to religious and economic equality, and that the system of complete educational equality existing in Scotland should, with the- necessary changes, be adopted in England.”—[Mr. T. P. O’Connor.] Question again proposed.. Mr. T. P. O’Connor: I would appeal to hon. members not to object to this, motion. There was a discussion upon it on the - last occasion, in which it was made evident that hon. members of all parties are desirous of meeting the grievances to which it refers. Sir Sydney Russell-Wells: I would join in the appeal to hori. members to allow this motion to go through without objection. * ’ Question put, and agreed" to. . ’ We heartily congratulate the Father of the House on this culmination of forty years of Parliamentary services —forty years spent in the, strenuous support as well of Catholic interests as of the political aims of Mr. O’Connor’s party. . Without exaggerating the significance of a private member’s motion on a point not immediately in practical consideration we are entitled to congratulate the - Catholic body as well as Mr. O’Connor. For. the meaning of the incident is at least this that the House has set upon its

records a protest, nomine contradicente, against what Mr O’Connor lias described as “not only a form of religions inequality, but also of social and economical discrimination against what is admittedly the poorest of all the religious communions in the country.”