Voluntary Schools and Rating

New Zealand Tablet, Volume L, Issue 39, 4 October 1923, Page 17

Voluntary Schools and Rating

(By P. J. O’Regan.)

In the article on, this subject which appeared in the Tablet recently, I indicated the possibility of further reference thereto, and this article is penned' accordingly. My desire is to impress readers with my own view as to future action, namely, that any further threat to withdraw the modicum of justice at present extended to voluntary schools in the matter of rating, should be met by a plain intimation that the injustice, if carried out,' would meet with sustained and stern resistance. In other words, I am an advocate of passive resistance in this connection, and I am of the opinion that if the exemption is ever withdrawn the Catholic body will be primarily to blame.

In New Zealand, as in Australia, the expense of education is a charge upon the consolidated revenue, and is accordingly voted annually by Parliament. No part of the expense is paid out of local rates, and as the greater portion of the ordinary taxation is indirect, the average citizen does not know that he bears any burden, and accordingly, he takes no interest whatever in the matter. Even if he did, however, he would have no alternative but to pay, inasmuch as indirect taxation, as its name implies, is invariably collected by tradesmen and shopkeepers in the form of increased prices. Had ship-money been an indirect tax, John Hampden had never been heard of, for he would have found it impossible to resist payment of the impost, however odious.

Although the subject never seems to have been discussed, I am quite certain that the advocates of secularism in this country and in Australia did not make education a charge upon general taxation without a purpose. I have noticed from time to time that the propagandists of .the Rationalists Press Association in England favor the abolition of local rates for education. They desire to make education a charge upon the consolidated revenue, the money to be voted annually by Parliament, and I have not the slightest doubt that they have in view the fact that the present system of rates in aid of education afford dissentient minorities such an effective means of resistance that their activities in favor of the so-called secular solution are rendered nugatory. In the United Kingdom, as in Canada, the expense of education is largely borne by local rates, and it is significant that in both countries pure secularity in education has not achieved the measure of success which it has in this country and in Australia.

As a matter of fact the strongest precedent in favor of passive resistance to the collection of obnoxious education rates has been afforded by the Nonconformists of England in connection with the Education Act of 1903. Less than twenty years ago, Mr. Lloyd George and his friend, Dr. Clifford were giving their benedictions to Nonconformist passive resisters, and were calling up the memory of John Hampden. The Act has not been repealed, but it is a fact, nevertheless, that it is now being administered with a greater regard for the feelings of Nonconformist ratepayers. Accordingly, I maintain seriously that if the Parliament of this country should ever become so dead, to every sense of fair-play as to abolish the rating exemption now enjoyed by voluntary schools. Catholic ratepayers should be organised to meet the affront by solidly refusing to pay any rates at all. ,

History is replete with instances where passive resistance has been successful in ameliorating the grievances of minorities. We have it on the authority of the historian, Josephus, that when the Romans proposed to introduce images into Jerusalem and to place the statue of the Emperor in the Temple, the Jews assembled in their thousands before the Procurator, Pontius Pilate, to protest against the proposed outrage of the Mosaic Law. Pilate threatened to invoke the aid of the soldiery, whereupon

the Jews bared their throats and invited him to put every one of them 4 A death. The historian tells us that Pilate Olio ox Ulicm .tv/ uva tii. me iiioiA/i iclli ftJlltt US LIIUU JT llctlU was very much , affected by this display of conscientious objection, and' that the images were not introduced into the Holy City. Subsequently, a similar attempt on the part of the Procurator, Petronius, was met by a like demonstration, and with the same result. '

In modern times Ireland has given at least two instances where orderly passive resistance defeated English tyranny. The Government of England stopped at nothing in its endeavor to crush the magnificent Land . League agitation of 1880-81, and although it did not publicly acknowledge defeat, we know now that it was completely worsted, and that the fruits of victory were only lost by vacillation on the part of a leader who is still held in honor by many Irishmen. The policy of coercion, adopted by the Liberal Government under Mr. Gladstone, broke down completely and Liberal opinion in England was completely alienated therefrom, and we learn from Morley’s life that Mr. Gladstone, in utter despair, wrote to Cardinal Newman appealing to him to use his influence at Rome with a view to prohibiting the Irish clergy from supporting the agitation. Cardinal Newman courteously but firmly declined, whereupon the British Government had recourse to diplomacy of another kind,,and the result was the notorious Kijlmainham Treaty whereby Mr. Parnell agreed to slow the agitation down and to abolish the Land League. Had Mr. Parnell remained as inflexible as the rank and file of the nation was prepared to do, most undoubtedly the agitation would have succeeded. The fact that it failed because it was betrayed, does not detract from the efficacy of passive resistance as a method of procedure. Coming to more recent times still, we have the attempt of the British Government to enforce conscription in Ireland. Never was there a more splendid illustration of the might of a minority when inspired by a just cause. The people of Ireland, to their credit be it said, did not play into the hands of the enemy on that occasion by offering armed resistance. They simply refused as one man, and behold the might of the British Empire was rendered powerless! Here, Ireland gave a splendid object-lesson to the world, and one that will certainly not be in vain.

Some years ago a New Zealand Minister of Education suggested that the time had arrived when local rates should be levied in aid of education. The proposal did not find favor, however, and was not proceeded with, and I remember that at least one critic pointed out that such a policy would be disastrous in that it would enable the Catholic body effectively to adopt a policy of passive resistance. This goes to corroborate what I am endeavoring to make clearthat the ratepayers are really masters of the situation. I have no doubt whatever that secularism would never have got this country by the throat in matters of education had the expense been even partially borne by local rates. Accordingly, I invite the readers of the Tablet to realise that if the Parliament of this country and the representatives of local bodies are made to realise the fact that further to penalise voluntary schools by withdrawing the present exemption from rates, will be met by an organised refusal on the part of Catholic ratepayers to pay any rates at all, they will hesitate to accept the challenge. I am aware, of course, that the payment of rates can be enforced, that judgment can be obtained in courts of Jaw, and that the property of recalcitrant ratepayers can be distrained upon and sold. It is none the less certain, however, that the arm of the law can be rendered powerless to enforce injustice if the objectors really mean business and are united and determined, for no government and no local body can afford to quarrel with a sturdy and determined minority.

Finally, I am 'quite aware that a policy of passive resistance would be denounced by certain Catholics of the type generally denominated “respectable.” We are all familiar, of course, with the “Cawtholic” who strenuously proclaims his loyalty to the Empire, who thinks himself too good for the rank and file of his co-religionists, who reluctantly sends his children to Catholic schools, and who often sends them to more “select” institutions. People of that type are always with us, and one can only add that it would appear a great misfortune for them that the Saviour of mankind was born in a stable, and that he chose his disciples from simple peasants and fishermen. . The shoneens, however, are really, a numerically'insignificant part ,of the Catholic body, and I have no doubt that if steps have to be taken on the lines indicated in this article the great majority will be as united as the importance of issue would require them 1 to be. . \ •