Che Cram

>

Wer.

A WEEKLY JOURNAL OF POLITICS, LITERATURE AND NEWS.

EDWARD WHELAN]

ae, VI. :

Jociry.

PAPA, WHAT IS A NEWSPAPER? AND WHAT DOES IY CONTAIN?

;

Organs that gentlemen play, my boy, To answer the taste of the day, my boy, Whatever it be, They hit on the key, And pipe in full concert away, my boy.

News from all countries and climes, my boy, Advertisements, essays and rhymes, my boy, Mixed up with all sorts Of (f) lying reports, And published at regular times, my boy.

Articles able and wise, my boy,

At least in the editor’s eyes, my boy, And logic so grand That few understand

To what in the world it applies, my boy.

Statistics, reflections, reviews, my boy, Little scraps to instruct and amuse, my boy, And lengthy debate Upon matters of state, For wise-headed folk to peruse, my boy.

The funds as they were and they are, my boy.

The quibbles and quirks of the bar, my boy, And every week | A clever critique

On some rising theatrical star, my boy.

The age of Jupiter's moons, my boy,

The stealing of somebody's spoons, my boy, The state of the crops And the style of the fops,

And the wit of the public buffoons, my boy.

List of all physical ills, my boy, Banished by somebody's pills, my boy, Till you ask with surprise Why any one dies, Or what’s the disorder that kills, my boy.

Who has got married to whom, my boy, Who were cut off in the bloom, my boy, W ho has had birth On this sorrow-stained earth, And who totters to the tomb, my boy.

The price of cattle and grain, my boy,

Directions to dig and to drain, my boy, But ‘twould take me tgo long To tell you in song @&

A quarter of all they contain, my boy.

Colonial Legislature. HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY. : Frivay, March 20.

AFTERNOON SITTING.

THE BIBLE QUESTION. ( Continued.)

Hon. T. H. HAVILAND.—TI rise to explain. His state- ment that the clause which I have submitted will render the reading of the scriptures compulsory, is altogether wrong. It is no such thing as compulsory. It is if the parents or guardians of the children desire that the Scriptures shall be used. There is nothing compulsory in the matter whatever.

Hon. COL. SECRETARY.—I would like to ask the hon. member what is to be done in those schools where one half of the children are Catholics and the other half Protestants. What are they te do in a stormy day ? are they to be turned out in the storm? They may as well read the Seriptures themselves as remain in the school while they are being read by others. Though Catholics are not opposed to the use of the Scriptures, yet they think they are not fit to be put into the cook of children, and that children are not capable of understanding them. They think it is better to keep them in the hands of the clergy than give them to every Tom, Dick, and Harry. We know that Teachers throughout the Island are of every denomination. Still, I would like to know what is to become of Catholic children in a stormy day, if attending a school in which the seripturesare used. They must either be deprived of instruction a portion of the day, or be turned out of doors, because, forsooth, they do not think proper to join in the reading of the Scriptures. If the Scriptures are forced into those schools where the children in attendance are pav*ly Protestant and partly Catholic, then if there are only two Protestant children in attendance, the Scriptures must be read in the school. But, are the rest of the children attending such a school to sit and hear the Scriptures read, if they disag prove of it? They may as well read them themselves, If the children attending a school were wholly Protestant, I do not think any one would oppose the reading of the Scriptures init. It appears to be dreaded that the Board of Education may to-morrow rescind the resolution which they have nowcome to. That resolution is plain, stating that the Scriptures may be freely used in those schools where the parents or Trustees desire it. I believe that resolution will be the cause of introducing some ill feeling, if the majority, of the people are of one or other of the denominations in question ; for should the majority be Protestants, the Scriptures may be read in the school, and

thaps the Catholics may withdraw from it. I am glad, and I feel proud, that Lam a little more liberal than to force religious instruction on any portion of children attending school, or to drive them out of school in stormy weather, or leave the school altogether. Now, I contend it is sufficient for the Legislature to legislate for the secular education of | the youth of the Colony. There must be a Jitile control | over the schools left in the hands of the Board of Education. | I speak my mind freely on this question, because I think it. is right that it be put fairly betore the country; and my_

Teacher himself wrote to the Board, stating that he would, on the last day of the week, impart religious instruction to the children of those who desire it, those children to remain, for that purpose at the close of the other duties of the day. That is the way they accomplish it; we must yield a little in this mixed community. The Catholics, 1 believe, wish religious instruction as much as any, but they will not have the religious instruction of Protestants crammed-down their throats. When we make an Act on the subject, we must provide that no compulsion be used towards any party, which I think is the proper mode of settling the matter; but I think if we were to introduce a clause of this kind into the Act, it would distract the schools throughout the country. After all the agitation—and God knows there has been a great deal—the Catholics have not at least shown any strong feeling on the subject. Up to this time, Catholics and Pro- testants living together, have never used a hard word towards each other, but in attending school, go in and out as if they all belonged to one denomination, but perhaps on the Sabbath go different ways; and there has been no animosity at all. But there has been an attempt now made to raise religious feeling throughout the community, ‘There has been religious feeling excited in other Proviaces, but I would call upon them to keep it at home; and they have called upon Pro- testants to protect Protestant rights. They have troubles enough of their own, without endeavouring to introduce them here too. But Catholics and Protestants have lived long enough here, and have such friendly feelings among them, that they are not going to be disturbed for the sake of a little political popularity. [The hon. member here read a part of the conclusion of the proposed amendment.] That is the clause which is denied to be compulsory, yet, by the reading of it, it is decisive, at least for the Central Academy and Normal School. The hon. member for Princetown, (Hon. Mr. Taviland) has stated that this agitation bas arisen from the Bible being excluded from the Normal School. It is true that the School Visitor, the Superintendent of that School took upon himself to say that the Scriptures should be read and expounded, but the Board of Edueation had at that time made no regulations at all respecting it. At their first meeting after that, they agreed what books should he used in it, and that they should be the same as those used in other Schools throughout the Island. Of course, they did not say the Bible should be a class book, and if not put- ting it in was excluding it, that might be done. But who was present at that meeting held on the 30th October? We find two gentlemen who seem to be very prominent now in the agitation against the exclusion of the Scriptures from the Schools—we find them present, and, sir, we find there was no division—that they all agreed to the rules of the Normal School that- were laid before them. The Roman Catholic Bishop wrote his letter on the 7th November, more than a month efter the Normal School was opened ; and we heard nothing about the exclusion of the Bible from the School at that time. It was the Bishop’s letter that seems to have raised them up to having the Bible in theschools. Why did they not come forward to the Executive Government and state they had been defeated in adopting proper regulations for the Normal School? But it was two months before we beard a word about it. Well, Sir, the Bishop’s letter un- fortunately was written under the apprehension that the Scriptures were to be readin the Normal School, and that, of course, they would be lectured upon the same as a parson from the pulpit, and, therefore, that it could not be for the benefit of the Teachers attending there to be taught a diffe- rent system of teaching, if religious instruction was to be communicated in that way. He then wrote a letter asking if such were the facts of the case, and when he understood that the system of instruction was not to be carried out as Mr. Stark had stated, he was satisfied. I am sure, from his Lordship’s letter, addressed to me, that he was afraid that the system of Education established in the Island would be disturbed; but when he learned that there was no inten- tion to change the existing system, he was satisfied to let the subject drop. Lut there was a determination not to let it drop, and it has created a great excitement. I think, how- ever, it is better to allay it. Itis not only since the I’ree Education Act came into operation—when the subject was not interfered with—that the question of the reading of the Scriptures in the Schools was agitated. Some twelve or thirteen years ago, a resolution was proposed to make the reading of the Scriptures compulsory in our Schools, but it was notcarried. If, then, with an experience of twelve or thirteen years, we find the present system answers well, we should not be moved by a little excitement. People will soon find that the Scriptures are not tobe excluded from | the Schools, and then they will be satisfied. But ina mixed pSpulation there must be a great deal of giving and taking, and we whoare Protestants, ought not to say, because we are the majority, we will make the reading of the Scriptures compulsory in school. I think we ought rather to restrain ourselves in that respect, because we may come to be in the minority in a fewdays. Ido not say that hon. members who support the amendment intend to enforce the reading of the Scriptures in school, but if the proposed clause be introduced, and if the Board of Kducation have to arbitrate in the matter, agitation may be raised which may be difficult toallay. There has been much said on this question which I might be expected to explain, but I do not wish to go into the matter at all; I wish to treat it calmly and coolly.

Mr. YEO had received no petitions from any place, re- lating to the subject under discussion, and understood that the Board of Education bad come to a resolution that the Bible should be read in Schools wherever the parents of the | children in attendance desired it. He had been in the Is-) tand a sufficient time to be acquainted with the matter, and |

in the part of the country where he resided about two-thirds | said, the Hon. Col. Treasurer attempted to throw ridicule upon | this qnestion was agitate

of the pepole were Roman Catholics, yet he had never heard |

of any complaints on this question : the children took what- | Scriptures into the schools, they should have the Koran and do not like to he

ever books they pleased to school. There need be no diffi-| culty respecttmg the reading of the Scriptures in mized | Schools; for if forty children were in attendance, tweuty |

might read separately. If Protestant children took their)

Chis is true Liberty, when Free~born Men, Having to advise the Public, man speak free——euRirrpes.

SY aE 4 or

CHARLOTTETOWN, PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND, MONDAY, MAY 4,

tion money, aud he wished that could be done, as, if practi- cable, it would be the best plan. He thought the best system would be to allow the schools to be conducted as_ heretofore, and that children be permitted to take such books to school as they pleased, and to read the Scriptures where their pa- rents desired it.

Mr. LALRD had not much to say on the subject under discussion, but he did not see why some hon, members should be so much afraid of the amendment proposed by Hon, T. {f. Haviland, for he saw it was much the same as the resolution adopted by the Board of Education on the subject. Hedid not know what was the reason that the Board eame to that resolution at the close of their term of office. He had read a good many of the petitions, and the prayer of them was that the reading of the Scriptures might he permitted in school where desired. The amendment pro- posed might be strongly expressed in some places, still there was nothing compulsory in it. His hon. colleague (Hon. Col. Secretary) need not be so much alarmed at the proposed amendment, for it differed little from the resolution of the Board, which was now the law of the land, and he supposed that hon. gentleman had given it his sanction. All that was required then, wus that the resolution of the Board be embo- died in the Act, that the Scriptures be permitted to be read in school when desired. That, too, was the opinion of the ma- jority of the people in his neighbourhood. Some of the Acadian French had called upon bim desiring information on the subject, and he had explained to them that nothing com- pulsory was intended, which appeared to satisfy them. Some of the Irish Catholics had also spoken to him on the same subject, to whom he had given a similar explanation, and they had nothing to say against it. Nothing more was required in the Jaw than mere perinission to read the Serip- tures in school by those children whose parents or guardians desired it, and no compulsion at all. He would support the amendment proposed by Hon. T. Hl. Haviland, which, he thought, would give general satisfaction. Respecting the Board of Education, they were only servants of servants, they were dependent upon the Government and the Govern- ment were dependent upon the House of Assembly, which could dismiss them at pleasure. Since then, it was the members of the Llouse of Assembly who had to say what was to be done in the matter, and that the resolution of the Board might also soon be repealed, he thought it was very proper that such an amendment as the one proposed should be inserted in the Education Law.

Mr. CLARK thought if the hon. member had read the amending clause, he would have seen a wide difference be- tween it and the resolution of the Board of Education. That resolution permitted that the Scriptures might be read in the schools where the trustees and parents agreed to it; but the amendment proposed by Hon. T. H. Haviland went to say that they shall be read daily by those children whose parents or guardians desire it, Now, if the parents or guardians of vhildren attending »ny schoo! considered it ne- cessary that they should read the Scriptures, and supposing the Teacher of that school were a Loman Catholie, that reading of the Scriptures would either drive him from the school, and the same would occur with a Protestant teacher, if obliged to teach the Douay version, or compel bim, in either case, to teach what he did not believe; and there were many Catholic teachers in the Island. But the resolution of the Board was quite different ; it said the reading of the Scriptures would be permitted where the parents desired it, and parties might have that understanding when a teacher was engaged. He could by no means support the proposed amendment to make the reading of the Scriptures in school compulsory, because it was against his principles to force religion into the schools where the parents did not wish it. They knew that the system of education in the Island was intended to impart secular education, and it was never con- templated to communicate religious instruction at all. He believed that no good whatever would arise out of the pre- sent agitation of the question, but that much harm would result from it; and he believed that where there was noth- ing about the reading of the Seriptures in schools before, there would be disputes and divisions now. He would vote against the amendment, and leave it entirely to the Board of Education to say what books should be used in the public schools, and he would never consent to the compulsory use of the Scriptures in them. ’

Hon. the SPEAKER.—Though I shall not oceupy the time of the Committee on this question, yet to test the sincerity and liberality of the mover and supporters of the clause before the Committee, that is, to make a clause what- ever it may be that may be considered as little obnoxious as it possibly can be made, I shall move that after the word “that,” in the thirteenth line, the following be inserted : “both the Protestant and Douay versions of;” and that after the word “ consider,” in the cighteenth lire, the words “that both the Protestant and Douay versions of,” be in- serted. I shall move that amendment, in the first place, at the same time I do not wish to deceive the supporters of Hon. T. H. Haviland’s amendment; because if my amend- ment be not carried, I intend then, after endeavoring to make the clause as perfect as I can, to vote against the whole of the amendmeut, as [ consider that my alteration of the Act is wholly unnecessary.

Hon. T. H. HAVLLAND.—I shall second it.

Hon. COL, TREASURER thought as some people believed the Koran and the Mormon Bible to be a Bible, if the House were going to introduce so many versions of the Scriptures into the schools, as was proposed, they had better stick them in too. He was decidedly opposed to the amend- ments, and would vote against them.

Mr. T. HEATH HAVILAND (amidst some confusion) the subject by saying, if they intruduced both versions of the

Mormon Bible too. He considered it was throwing ridicule

upon it to mention the word “ Koran? upon that question, |

especially when it was a momentous and deep question, which was to be solved by them. But he thought the hon. mem-

opinion is that where the Legislature undertake to give New Testament to school, that would not be a canse of of-| ber would have spoken in a different manner; for there was

education, they must confine it to secular instruction; and |

fence to the Catholic childrep. Allusion had been made to |

a greater difference between the Koran and the Scriptures

and empower the Board of Education to settle disputes that ‘the Bishop’s letter, but from his familiar acquaintance with | than between the versions of the Catholics and Protestants. way arise; because I contend if the Scriptures be read in that gentleman, he did not think he would be disposed to| He considered Prince Edward Island to be a Christian

mixed schools, quarrels will arise requiring the interference cause any disputes relating to the use of the Scriptures in country, and that in the great essentials of Christia

of the Board. Where religious instruction is imparted, it should be at the closing of the school, and the other portion of the day should be devoted to sceular instruction. It is’ freely granted that there may be a religious lesson; and the’ Trustees have in their power to provide for that, when they

Tloraecre =“ 7... ¥ ° 2 ee . . . ° 2 id ar « engage their Teacher, but not to the detrim nt of the Roman if’ so compelled, the schools would be broken up in some juadice for political purposes ; but if such has | That is the way in places where there were disputes. Some of the Roman Ca- I am ignorant of it. I shall not give my vote fu

Catholic portion of the community,

school. It was to be regreited that excitement had been | raised on the subject, but he did not see any harm in the amendment proposed by Hon. T. H. Haviland. Let chil- dren take whatever books they pleased to school, yet let not. Catholic children be compelled to read the Scriptures; for |

nity, all the inbabitants of it were agreed. { Dropping this point he continued.]| This is a question, Mr. Chairman, that I con- sider every individual here should give his opinion upon before voting. The Hon. Col. Secretary says, that a great agitation has been got up out of doors to fan religious pre- yeen the case,

r political

hie » subieot i . r 7 " ° a vpn Cai i hea i : ‘ —— cenacee Which the subject is managed in the Normal School, The tholic clergy wished very wuch that there was a division purpeses, but solely for religious purposes. I ety of opinion,

[EDITOR anv PUBLISHER.

1857. Sor, ea”

ee = SS A

Board of Ndacation made no arrangement about it; but the} made to every denomination of their own part of the educa- | and long have been, that secular education without religious

instruction, docs more harm than good; but at the same time, I would be very sorry to attempt to force the Bible or any other book into the hands of any individual of a different opinicn from myself. All I want is equal religious rights, and as equal political rights. I would not tyrannise over Catholics ; yet, I want to say this afternoon, that if we are in the majority, we ought to have such books used in school as we think proper. I wish to have my children taught what I please to dictate ; and I consider that the education of my children will do them more barm than good, unless it is religious. I wish to have a clause in the Act providing for ‘such instruction. Why, itis very strange, that the Govern- ment are not willing to have in the Act what the a of Education agreed to; for it is now the law of the land. | fully agree with what the hon. member, Mr. Laird said, that we are here to say what should be done. We are the people’s representatives, and let us take the responsibility ; and now as we have the Act before us, let us put into it, that the children may read in school whatever books their parents wish them to read; but let none be used at the dictation of the Board of Education ; for it is clear if they make a rule to day, they may undo it to-morrow. Then, too, this Act may continue five or six years longer before we can repeal it.

Hon, Mr. LORD.—1 do not rise to support either the clause proposed or the amendment to it, nor do I intend to do so. When I look at the Education Act for the past three years, and see the harmony of its working, [ cannot for a moment think of altering—either of adding to, or taking from, the old School Act. I am not bound up by my con- stituents, nor by those in the part of the country in which [ was born; aud I believe they are not so casily excited as some others on this subject. Lf the question is debated in the House of Assembly, and hon. members can show me the necessity for altering the Act, | do not refuse to alter it ; but Lam of the same opinion this evening as I formerly was, that I shall not support the compulsory reading of the S¢ériptares in the school ; and in doing so, I believe I shall please both Catholics and Protestants. “They want none of this agitation. 1 recollect some years ago there was nothing but wars, and rumors of wars; but [ am happy to say that such things are now done away with, and Responsible Govern- ment has done it. The question at the hustings now is, not what is your religious belief, but what are your political principles. Why stir up all this agitation? I was astonished when | arrived at Halifax, and took up an Island news- paper, to see such a discussion got up in Prince Edward Island. All going on swimmingly—all becoming religious ina moment! L[ am not one of those who think much of suddea converts. I was astonished when I heard the Schoo! Visitor’s report respecting the reading of the Scriptures in schools, that they were read in so few Protestant schools. Time indeed for reform; but why interfere with the subject uow, When the system has wrought so well before? 1 shall oppose both the clause submitted by Hon. T. H. Haviland, and the amendment to it.

Hon. Mr. MONTGOMERY.—The concluding remarks made by the last speaker, and by some others on the same subject, [ shall perhaps be able to answer. You are aware that this order bas been made by the Board of Education at a very late date. Many of the teachers were under the im- pression that the Scriptures were not to be read in school, which [ kuow to be the case in the district in which I live. L asked the teacher why he did not use the Scriptures in school; and he was under the impression that he was not permitted todo so. ‘This may account for the fact that many of the district schools in the country have not had the Scriptures in them. The Board of Kducation have now issued their order, and have there permitted that those children sheuld be allowed to read the Scriptures in school whose parents or guardians desire it. Now, the clause pre- posed only follows out the views of the Board of Kdueation ; and that clause does not go to compel any person to read a version of the Scriptures which he does not wish to read ; but it allows the Catholics to read their own versions, and the Protestants to do the same. I do not, then, see how any person can object to the clause before the Committee. To say it is a compulsory measures it is no such thing; it only says that the reading of the Scriptures shall be practised - where desired.

Hon. COL. SECRETARY.—Who then is to be the judge what version is to be read. I know that the Speaker docs not wish his amendment to be carried. Well, taking it for granted that bis amendment is carried, what is the result ? In a school where one-half of the children are Catholies and the other half Protestants, both versions must be read, which could never be carried out. With reference to what ffon. Mr. Montgomery said, that this resolution of the Doard of Education is a new one, it is no such thing. The Visitor of Schools appears to understand, that the Scriptures may be used in school, when he says, the people take it for granted that the Scriptures are not forbidden. He goes on to say, “In my first inspection visit in 1853-4, L inquired in each school whether the Bible was used as a class-book, and received an affirmative answer in 63 schools out of 172 dis- trict scheo!s then in existence.” Now, what is the con- clusion of this gentlemin, who was brought out here, as many wish to make it appear, to give religious instruction ? It is, that the books are so excellent, that they have taken the Bible from the schools. He says:—* Since then, the ex- cellent series of school books has been introduced, and the proportion of those schools where the Bible is to be found ‘has considerably diminished. The general impresston in the country is, that the Free Education Act does not admit the Bible ;” and then immediately, he says :—* While those who do use it, reason thus: that since the Lible is not ex- pressly forbidden, it is tacitly permitted.” I dare say when d, they found out some of the schools ‘not using the Scriptures, and that some of the teachers who } ar the Scriptures read, made the exeuse that ‘the Bible was not on the list of books to be used in school. ‘The Board of Education then thought it much better just to istate what was their opinion as to the manuer in which the ‘schools should he conducted in reference to the reading of ‘the Scriptures. The hon. member for Georgetown (Mr. ‘f. 'H. Haviland) has stated, that he thinks secular education,

religious instruction with it,does more harm than Then, where has the hon. member been, since he was

| without | good.

‘tm the House of ‘Assembly when the Education Act was ;

passed ? and if he thought such education did more harm ‘than good, why did he not then offer to introduce a resolution ‘in amendment of the Act? I believe the hon. mover of the ‘amendment was one of the Trustees of the Central Academy at the time the Bille question was agitated formerly, od threatened to resign, because there was an attempt made tu introduce the Bible into that institution, The hon, member fur Georgetown (Mr. T. H. Haviland) says, we are now <0

2 A 7 rT.

ee 1s i esau aceon (ae ; : ug % a

Rete gt 2 Feet it

SEY a SY WY a ED a Bin eT es