IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3)

/.

V C^^

7

^

^

't ^'y'^

(< ^

f/.

	1.0	•IT 1^ III 2.2 1 «- IIM 1.4 1.6
	I.I
	1.25
	t"	►

V]

<^

/a

v:

"^ ^>>'

7

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

■O'

f^^

4V

^\

*%

V

- y* #% >^ ^<\

^

'f\

■ 4?^

%f> _ MP^

CIHM/ICMH Microfiche

CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below.

D

D D

D

Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommag6e

□ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculde

j I Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

Coloured maps/

Cartes g6ographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

D

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/

La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6es.

Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires;

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dessous.

I I Coloured pages/

n

Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes

Pages restored and/oi

Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages ddcolordes, tachetdes ou piqudes

Pages detached/ Pages d^tachdes

Showthroughy Transparence

Quality of prir

Qualiti indgale de I'impression

Includes supplementary materii Comprend du matdriel suppl^mentaire

Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible

I I Pages damaged/

I I Pages restored and/or laminated/

I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/

I I Pages detached/

I I Showthrough/

I I Quality of print varies/

I I Includes supplementary material/

I I Only edition available/

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6ti film«^es d nouveau de fapon A obtenir la meilleure image possible.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est U\m6 au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

7

26X

30X

12X

1IX

20X

24X

28X

32X

i

tails i du odifier ' une mage

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of:

Library Division

Provincial Archives of British Columbia

The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in Iteeping with the filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover whan appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"!, or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies.

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method:

L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce A la gAnArosit* da:

Library Division

Provincial Archives of British Columbia

Les images suivantes ont 6ti reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettet* de l'exemplaire film«, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimie sont filmAs en commenqant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second ijtiat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commengant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derni^re page qui comporte une telle empreinte.

Un des symboies suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, seion le cas: le symbols — »- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN ".

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmAs A des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 A partir de Tangle supirieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode.

rrata to

pelure, nit

n

32X

1

2

3

1	2	3
4	5	6

r.

V. ? -

S<ii

THE MANITOBA SGHOOk QUESTION.

BY JOHN S. EWART, Q.C.

'S

In the July number of the Canadian Magazine, I pleaded for libeity of thought and opinion. As one argu- ment, I suggested that possibly even the cockiest bigot might be wrong; and I mentioned a few out of the mil- lions of o|)inions that had already gone to the ditch. Might his not go, too ? " I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mis- taken." After seven pages, I sum- marized the proposition to which I had " been endeavoring to win as- sent," as follows: — "(I) That human thought is, even the best of it, upon social and religious questions, far from infallible; (2) That other people of equal intelligence, who honestly differ with us, are as likely to be right as we are ; (3) That religious and irre- ligious opinion is in the category of the debatable . . .; (4) That the true policy, with reference to all 8uch <lue8tions. is that of perfect liberty; for the onw,s ot proving the harmful- ness of opposing opinion cannot be tiischarged." Then follow four pages wherein I applied these principles to theschooh.

The Rev. Dr. Bryce, in the Septem- ber number, makes reply, and that in the very simplest manner possible. He puts into my pages opinions and con- tentions that are not there, and, so far as I am aware, I never entertained ; and then, without much eflfort, victori- ously confutes them. He might have spared himself the confutation, for the poor, miserable things, with all possi- ble shifts, straddles, and devices, could never have stood upright, even if left alone. The worthy Doctor would have accomplished all his purpose, had he contented himself with saying, in a single sentence, "Mr. £ wart's whole article is a foolish defence of the geo-

centric theory." Mydiscomfiture would thus have been sufficiently apparent to all men, without wasting pages to disprove the antiquated absurdity.

Not that Dr. Bryce had the slightest intention of misrepresenting me. He is merely a singularly good example of that " incapacity to appreciate and sympathetically understand an opinion contrary to his own," to which I re- ferred in July. Instead of either un- derstanding my argument, or telling me that it was something " no fellow could understand," he flings a heap of wretched inanities at me, saying : Your opinion is that "my right is your wrong ; my wrong is your right. One for me is as good as the other for you. There is no fixed right. There is no hope of reaching a common standard . . . Plainly Mr. Ewart believes there is no common standard of opinion; that there can be no con- census of right ; that there can be no invariable principle in man which can serve as a basis of agreement, and hence of truth. That being the case, then each must be allowed to believe and act as he likes. Absolute, unre- strained liberty to do as he may choose must be given him. He might just as well have atlded, "And Mr. Ewart believes that alligators are Divine em- anations, and ought to be protected with forty-five per cent." He seems to say : —

" As for you, Say what you can, my false o'erweighs your true."

In order to justify his ascription to me of these absurdities. Dr. Bryce quotes four passages from ray article. They are as follows (numbered and italicised) : —

First Passage. — "// we cannot d«- cide (and Mr. Ewart nays we cannot

f«ovi,\ci.^L kmms of

ftc.

IO«

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

(i<;ride)whefJier the. opinions arc harm fid or innocent, A has as much riijhl to have his way as Ji, has he not f" What opinions was I alluding to ? Whether alligators are emanations, or not ? Whether A. is to have "abso- lute and unrestrained liberty to do as he may choose," or not ? No, neither of them ; but whether atheistical opin- ions are so certainly harmful to society as to warrant the State in suppressing them. That is what I said could not be decided. Was I not right?

Second Passage: — " Vour opinions are not entitled to one whit 1/ rente r deference or respect than are the opin- ions of others." If Dr. Bryce refuses to admit "that other people of equal intelligence, who honestly difler with him, are as likely to be right as he is," then, in all politeness, I shall make nn exception in his favor. With tins qualification, I believe the statement to be perfectly accurate. Nevertheless I will reverse it entirely, if he wishes, and say that every person's opinions o,re entitled to 'greater deference and respect than are the opinions of others." But it must be understood that the (change was made to oblige Dr. Bryce. Plato, more modest than the Doctor, would have said: (a) "To be absolutely sure of the truth of matters concern- ing which there are many opinions is an attribute of the Gods, not given to man, stranger; but I shall be very happy to tell you what I think."

Third Passage: — "Religions and irreligious opinion is in tlie category of the debatable ; the true policy with reference to all such questions is per- fect liberty." With the same under- standing I will reverse this, too. I shall say: Religious questions are not "in the category of the debatable;" that from the time of Elijah and the prophets of Baal, down to the time of Prof. Briggs and Prof. Campbell, they never have been debated. 1 slxall further say that " the true policy with reference to all such questions is" not

(o) Laws, Bk. I.; Jowett's Trans. IV., 172.

that of liberty at all, perfect or other- wise ; but that of the Doctor's ( 'onfes- sion of Faith in the words following : " The civil magistrate . . . hath au- thority, and it is his duty, to take order that unity and peace be preserved in the church ; that the truth of Ood be kept pure and entire; that all blas- phemies and heresies be suppressed ; all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented, or refcjrmed; and all the onliuances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. For the better effecting thereof, he liath power to call .synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is tran.sacted in them be f^iording to the mind of God."

It must, however, again be most distinctly understood that the change was made to oblige Dr. Biyce. (I tind my.selt still muttering .something like "H pur si muo>\'. ')

Fourth Passage:^"/?}, the name of liberty, I tvould say to the parents : Certainly you have the right to teach, or have taught, to your children any- thing you like, so long as you can agree about it." Robbed of all its own context, and surrounded with a totally different one, this sentence might be taken to mean, that I thought that parents were acting quite properly, did they teach their children "False- hoods, thieveries, iniquities, injustice, disloyalty, anarchic tendencies." With its own context it is plainly limited to Imperial Federationisui, Militarism, Pietism, Sabbatarianism, Anti-alco- holism, and every otiier ism of -iack like you can think of.

These are the four quotations to prove that one of my principles must be that " absolute, unrestrained liberty to do as he may choose must be given him." Of course they are laughably worthless for that purpose ; but they serve excellently another (probably not intended), namely, to show with what extraordinary fitness the Doctor selected, for his opening page, the words "Lord, thou knowestgif I dinna gae richt, I'll gang far wrang." In

fut

th

KU< ll

lia

T

IJ'

9

THE MANITOBA SCHOOL QV EST ION.

109

ihcr- ifes- m^ : aii- take "ved Ood las- sed

li.Iy ved.

future he can apostrophise all Canada aK well.

liut he goes much further " wrang " than this. Having tripped up quite huowrh^fully the rickety Aunt Sallys, that the first passing butterfly would have tumbled over, he proceeds to enunciate three propositions which he hsiya are "in opposition to these views." Three propositions — every one of them H.H certain, as well known, and as br'«<l-l)«sed as Ararat, Blanc or his own Nevis ! Three propositions — and not one f»f them in opposition to any- thing— so far as my views are con- cerned. On the contrary, while the first of them is as irrelevant as would \jti any proposition in Euclid, the other two are among the foundations of my July argument. These are the three ''numbered consecutively and italic- ized):—

r "That the State has a right to form, and enforce, an opinion, at <:o.r'm.i,r.e vjith. the opinions of many of 'iXh "^'^'jeilH" Why this platitude, rather than any other — " Some things are gfx>'l to eat," for example — I cannot imagine, "The State has a perfect right to form, and enforce an opinion" t'lM/n Home, mattera "at variance with the opinion-s of many of its subjects," w, surely, what the Doctor intends. He do*,-?* not mean that the State ought U> form, and enforce, an opinion ujton <M matters — upon the literary value of the Fsalms, upon the use of meat on fast-days, upon attendance at church, etc. He does not advocate (probably) the return to Acts of Con- formity, and Test Acts. His proposi- ti'm, if intended to be universalis un- questionably wrong. If intended to U; litniU;d, it is perfectly correct, but at the same time perfectly worthless; for there always remains to be proved, that the matter under discussion is one of those upon which the State may form aiifl enforce an opinion. " Far « rang : "

n, 'The writer fwrther rontend-f lliiU the State, being founded onjastiee,

may not give sper'ud iirivilegex to ninj class of its siilijeilH." Most certainly. Doctor ; that is what I was hitting at, and you were objecting to, when I said: "A has as much right to have his way as B., has he not?" "Your opinions are not entitled to one whit greater deference or respect, than are the opinions of others;" and "The true policy with reference to all such ques- tions is perfect liberty." A few pages ago you said that "these are the ele- mentary principles of anarchy." What do you think of them now? "No special privileges to any class of its sulijects," — let us adhere to that, for it is good.

And it is not in the least opposed to my views, as the Doctor .«eems to think. He says: "What does Mr. Ewart pro- pose? He proposes that the people of Manitoba .should have their public schools, and that one denomination should be singled out, and Vje allowed to teach their 'isms,' in certain schools, to be controlled by them." To which I can only reply that I never proposed any such thing; or anything having the faintest resemblance to it, and that the whole drift of my article is entirely opposed to any such notion, and di- rectly contrary to any such contention. "Far wrang!" "Far wrang I"

The Doctor tries in another way to make it appear that my purpose is as he alleges. He says that I " was most strenuous, when pleading the Jioman Catholic position l)efore the courts, in insisting that Episcopalians and Presbyterinns had no rights in the same way." Which is to say, that be- cause I argued as to the meaning of certain words, in a certain statute, therefore my contention must be that that statute, with that certain mean- ing, upon abstract principles is just and good. Far, "far wrang" again! A lawyer might argue as to the mean- ing of one of Dr. Bryce's sermons surely, without Ijeing compelled to justify it '. But the J>oct<jr is wrong, not only in his logic, but in his facts. I did not so argue, for I was not even

1B34!)4

J iO

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

fcnf,'iiged in the case in which the ques- tion was debated. Once more " far wraag ! "

Why does not the Doctor tell me that my real object is to destroy all belief in an isosceles triangle ? And why, at all events, does he not doggedly adhere to that method of arguing, rather, at all events, than change to another very much worse ? For, on the whole, I would much rather be told that I had said something that I did not, than have it alleged that tl:e " mild, gentle-faced tolerance that Mr. Ewart pleads for, is not the reality for which he is arguing." This means, either that I am endeavoring to mis- lead, or that I do not know what I am arguing for — sufficiently uncomfort- able horns both of them. I take com- fort, however, in the fact that it is the " far wrang " Professor that so charges me, and the chances are infinity to one that he is " far wrang " again.

But what is this dreadful, or evasive, *' reality, for which " I am arguing — this thing too horrible to mention, or too elusive for common apprehension ? Veritably this : a desire to place the schools " under the control of the church " — that is, under the same kind of control as is the college in which Dr. Bryce has spent th*^ best part of his life, as a most wortl./ and estima- ble professor ! He sees nothing im- proper in his school being governed by a church, but deems the design of a similar government for other schools, a |>urpose altogether too heinous for public acknowledgment. Were he the Profe.s.sor of "far wrang" (and I do not think he ever did lecture on ex- egesis), he could not go much further " wrang " than this, surely ? He may endeavor to distinguish. He will say that his school is sustained by private subscription. The distinction does not appeal to me as having much validity. Some of my income goes directly to the support of his school, and some of it indirectly (through the tax-collector), to the support of the other schools. To me, it is either well, or ill, that all these

schools should be under church gov- ernment— well or ill, that is, for the pupils. Whence como the salaries, can, by no means, affect the benefit or dis- advantage to the children. He may urge, too, that theology is taught in his college, and that there is, therefore, for it, a necessity for church-govern- ment. But I do not refer to the theo- logical department of his college, which, in numerical proportion, is but an ad- junct of it; but to the larger body of the institution, the part in which the Doctor himself laboi-s so successfully — to the ordinary every-day school for general education. Is church govern- ment for such schools well, or ill. Doc- tor ? You spend a little of your time arguing for the suppression of them, because (1) " the only hope for the pro- vince was to * * have a vigorous effort made to raise up a homogeneous Canadian people ; " and (2), " in order to make us a united people, a patriotic love of our province demands this ex- pedient ; " and you employ the main energies of your life in working in, and seeking support for, a particular school of that very class. I know that you can distinguish again, and that your church is always right, and the others always wrong; so do not tell me that. But, " I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be " gone " far wrang ! "

I say that this, the second of the Doctor's propositions, is not only not opposed to my views, but that it is one of the foundations of my July ar- gument ; and I further say that it is entirelj'^ opposed to the action of the Manitoba Government.

Let us suppose that there are in a community three classes of persons, each with desires and ideas in refer- ence to education. There are (A) those who desire it to be purely secular ; (B) those who desire to have a certain spice, or flavor, of religion in it ; and (C) those who desire to have it dis- tinctly religious-history-taught, as in the Old Testament (God acting all the time), and not as in Gibbon (chance

an<i |)oc

\i

IHE MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION.

Ill

I'Ch frov-

for the rie.s, can, t or dis- He may

ami circumstance at play). And now, |)f)ctor, what I want to know is : How, upon the " no special privilege " plan, you pick out B, and determine that Ae must have his way ? Do you say that B is in the majority ? Very well, then we must amend our principle, and say " that the State may not give special privileges to any class of its subjects," except the muijority. Is it right now ? If you think so, take it down to Que- bec, set it to work, and watch it a little while. You will change your mind !

III. The last of the broad-based propositions (said to be opposed to my contentions), for which the Rev. Doc- tor contends is, " That religion is out- side of State interference, unless reli- gion invade the State's domain." But this is not opposed to my contentions. On the contrary it is one of them, and the one to which I constantly make appeal as against the action or the Manitoba Legislature. What did that Legislature do ? There were two sets of schools in existence — in one was a little religion suitable to Protestants, and in the other a little more religion suitable to Catholics. Under such cir- cumstances, if the Doctor desires to know " What could patriotic Manito- bans do ? " I can have no objection to say, that if in the name of patriotism (or of all biology), they felt bound to aboILsh the one set of schools, and to strengthen the other, they could not have hit upon a more stupid reason for their action than that " religion [all religion that is] is outside of State interference." Any flrst-come law of dynamics (the science which treats of the action of force), would have been much more appropriate. Surely, far "far wrang! "

For religion has not been removed from the schools. Episcopalian and Presbyterian Synods thank God an- nually that it is still there ; while Ro- man Catholics bemoan its character. At present religion is taught, but taught perfunctorily, indirectly, cir- cuitously, and as though people were ashamed of it. This may be taught,

and that may not. The Bible may be read, but it must be read " without note or comment." The meaning of words probal ly cannot be given ; the local customs, or notions, must not be referred to; the connection with the previous chapter must not be pointed out. Christ's life is to be read in this foolish fashion, and in detached snatches, with a minimum of ten ver- ses at a time ; but no one must say a word to help the children to under- stand or appreciate it. All which, to my mind, is worse than making a fet- ish of the Bible; it is making a bore and an annoyance of it Why doe.s not .some Educationist propose that History or Philosophy be taught in the same way ? There must be no note or comment on the Bible ; but, on the other hand, some of the means to be employed for " instruction in moral principles," are "stories, memory- gems . . . didactic talks, teaching the Ten Commandments, etc." Should the Professor again write upon the School question, I beg of him to tell us, (1) Whether, working under these pre- scriptions, religion is, or is not, taught in the schools ; (2) Whether religion ought to be taught in the schools ; and (3) If yea, how it comes that his maxim, " that religion is outside of State interference," leads to State-dir- ected religion in State schools. And let me anticipate one of his replies: " Yes, there is religion in the schools, but it is purely of a non-sectariaji character." I shall still (1) ask him to apply his maxim, or to submit to its amendment, so that it shall read "Reli- gion, o<Aer than non-sedarianreligion, is outside of State interference ;" but further, (2) 1 shall beg him to remem- ber (as said D'Israeli) that, " a non- sectarian religion is a new religion." " Non-sectarian " is it ? Look at the " Form of Prayer," and tell me if any Jew or Unitarian would join in it. Read at one sitting a Presbyterian and a Roman Catholic catechism ; and see what they would respectively make of '■ teaching the Ten Commandents."

112

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

Will J)r. lirvcu say tliat lie would con- sent to Uonian (^'atholics, in their way, " tuacliing the Ten (Jomniandments" to PniU'stant cliililren ? Of course he will not, but he thinks it quite right in the name of " patriotism," and of " homogeneity," and of " a united peo- ple," to re(iuire Roman Catholic child- ren to take their ideas from Protestant teachers. As he says, " a patriotic love of our province demands this ex- pedient." "Far wrang!" "Far wrangl" Toujours perdrix !

One more etJbrt to make myself understood. In my July article, quot- ing from Dr. Bryce, I said, that of the Catholic school districts, " all but a very small percentage, are in localities almost entirely French." And I a hied, "Manitoba has said to a large section of her people": Unless you undertake to stop teaching 3'our own religion, to your own children, in schools to which no one goes except those of your own faith, we will not permit you to organ- ize yourselves together for the instruc- tion of those in whose education the whole couimunity has a decided inter- est." This is too true to be denied, and the Doctor does not deny it. He con- tents himself with denying the motive which actuated it. Let the motive go; there is the fearful fact. Catholics are thrown upon voluntary effort, and subscription, unless they will abandon that which, is to them a sacred duty. If this be not intolerance and persecution, then the world never .saw those horrid monsters and never will see them.

Dr. Bryce helps me splendidly here: " Probably most would say that should Roman Catholics or others desire to educate their children in private schools at their own expense, so long as illiteracy does not result it would be well to allow it." There are three conditions — (1) "private .schools"; (2) " at their own expense ; " and (3) " so long as illiteracy does not result." The difference between private and public schools (apart from expense) is that in the latter there is public in-

spection and oversight, a connuon standard, control by the vote of the people. It could be no reason for not allowing Roman Catholics to educate their children that they were willing to permit public inspection and over- sight, to adopt the common standard, and to substitute control by the pooi)le for control by the church. Upon the contrary, this would evidently re- move an objection (juite formidable to many minds, and make Manitobans all the more willing, one would think, to allow the Roman Catholics to pro- ceed in their own way. Shall we, therefore, rub out the first condition '. By so doing we shall also dispose of the third, shal! we not ? Where are we now ? We have Catholics in pub- lic schools, under public regulation, governed by the pcoi>le, working up to a common standard. Well, then, the only condition left is — "at their own expense," and they (mirabile dicta) unanimously reply, "Why, cer- tainly ! We do not want a sixpence of anybody's money but our own." What do they propose ? Merely this, (they are not beggars, although most of them are poor), tliat they should be allowed to organize them.^elves for the purpose of taxing themselves to raise money for their own schools.

Take an example. In the district of X. there is an exclusively Roman Catholic population. Up to 1890 there was a State school there. To- day there is none. (This is what is known as providing " one public school for each hjcality.") The peo- ple, therefore, pay no taxes for school purposes at all. They contribute voluntarily, but not in a sufficiently systematic way, for the purpose of providing private education for their children. They want power to tax themselves, in order better to support their schools^ — schools which shall have all the qualities of public schools. And Manitobans (" us Mr. Ewart knows, are a generous people ") reply : " Certainly you may do .so, but upon one condition. You must promisi; to

THE AfAXnO/i.t SCHOOL QUESTION.

11?

ininoii of tlie or ant. tlucato williiifT

over- ndaid, poo|)le on the

y 'e- able to tobaiis

read the bd)lc ' witliout note or coni- tnont ' of any kind, and either refrain troni teaching; religion altogether, or else adopt and teach tlii^ enittHCulaled thinj,' called ' non-sectarian religion.' This is our ultimatum. Accept, or go and bo hanged — you and your child- ren." " A patriotic love of onr pro- vince demands this expedient, " coolly adds Dr. Bryce, seated comfortably in his .study, and continues to act on the exact contrary of " this exped- ient."

In addition to the right to tax themselves, and as something which Manitobans may or may not, accord- ing to their sense of justice (no one asks for generosity), withhold, the Catholics further propo.se this : Out of public funds there is paid to each .school a certain sum in aid of the amount raised by taxation. These public funds belong to the peo|)le, Protestants and Koman Catholics alike, and " the State, being founded on justice, may not give special privi- leges to any class of its .sulijects." The people of district X say : Give us our share. We will conform to all your secular requirements, to inspections, to regulation.s, to standards; "Religion is outside of State interference ; " leave it, therefore, outside of your regulations. Pay us our share, if in every respect we do the proper and efficient work of a secular school. And " generous " Nfanitobans reply : No ; your school may be the best in the Province, but you will not get a cent if you comment on the Bible. When we said that " religion was out- side of State interference," we meant that the State could quite properly in- terfere with the teaching of religion, and that, by one of the most drastic of penalties, namely, the threatened illiteracy of your children, it could with the most perfect justice, indeed, in the exercise of much generosity, prevent Catholics teaching Catholic children the Catholic religion in the only way in which Catholics believe it can effectively be done.

Let us dissect a little this .seem- ingly simple propi sltioii, " Religion is outside ot State • 'terference," and let us distinguish, because in r?o/ under- standing it, simple as it is, lie many dithculties fur many people. Cuizot says" that Chixrch and State htive maintained four forms of relations to one another: — (1) "The State is .subordinate to the Church ; " (2) " It is not the State which is in the Church Vuit the Church which is in the State ; " (3) " The Church ought to be independent, unrestricted in the State ; the State has nothing to do with her ; tHe temporal power ought to take no cognizance of religious creeds ; " (4) " The Church and the State are di.stinct societies, it is true, but they are at the same time close neighbors, and are nearly interested in one another; let them live separate but not estranged ; let them keep up an alliance on certain conditions, each living to itself, but each making sacri- fices Tor the othei' ; in case of need each lending the other its support."

Many people apprehend clearly enough the two first situations, but the last are usually jargogled together. And yet what a wide difference between them. Under the one principle, a man- of-war goes to sea, and many of her crew go to their graves beneath the water, without the services or ofKces of a clergyman. Under the other, the State recognizes the (avi of religion (although refusing to .'<ay anything as to its truth), and, among each ship's officers, places one of the spirituality. The State in this case iias regard to the wantsof the crew. Even as provision is made for food and raiment as wants, .so provision is made for dc facto spir- itual wants. It may be consideretl by many to be a very foolish thing to wish to have a clergyman with you on a battle-ship ; even as others think it very absurd to want " baccy " or grog. But the State recognizes the existence of these wants (not their wisdom), and

rt Civilization in France, l^ei't. 3, Vol. I, p. 817, and see Uct. 12, Vol. II, p S!.

V.[iO\':i\iL:L /uJliiiVci Ot. b. U

114

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

refiixex the men noitlicrtlie onenortlie otiior. A<,^iin, imkIit tlie one piitifiplo, till' tmnio of (j()(l, and oveiytliiii}^ wliicli could 8iij:jf(.'st tlio fact ol ro- lii,n()n, is excludoil iVoiii tlie schools. VVhilo under the other, the State takes co^'niz'ince of the existence of religion ; find tilt! WMnts ot the parents rospect- int( it aie, so far ns |)ra(!ticaV)Ie, recog- idzed and iicceded to. Tin- distinction is now, I think, sufficiently clear. Which of them is eorrect ? To my mind, he who is actuated liy the true spirit of liherty will undoubtedly choose the lattoi-.

With this understanding, let us re- turn to Dr. Bryce's proposition, " He- ligion is outside of State interference.'' By this is properly meant tlmt, re- volving as they do in different orbits, they oui,dit not to collide with, or clash, or oppose one another. Jt does not mean that one can deny the existence of the other, or act as though it did not exist, or invade the territory of the other, saying, " Make way, for we nius not collide." It means, so far as the State's action is concerned, that the fad that religion exists must be recoir- nizcii ; and that in so far as its orderly observance and propagation are con- cerned, it is "outside of State inter- ference." Doctor Brj'ce himself con- cedes that "on the whole, the trend of modern thought is to allow as great liberty as possible to religious opinion."

Let us go back to District X. Prior to 18!)0, the .school there was under State control and governance ; the people taxed themselves to support the school ; and, according to the secular work accomplished, they obtained the same assistance from public funds that other schools received. In addition to secular instruction, the children were taught the way of salvation, as be- lieved by the parents of every child in the school. The State, true to prin- ciple, interposed no obstacle. It al- lowed as "great liberty as possible." It did not interfere. It did not oppo.se. It did not object. Then Manitobans ("as Mr. Ewart knows, a

people ") informed these \wov parish- ioners, that unless they would cease telling the cliildien aliout Jesus, they would be deprived of tlxir organiza- tion, they would lose their share ui the publie moneys, atKi might get idong as best, 'or as worst,) tliey could. Since then, I lie Government (the people have not yet approved the step) has hail the astounding hardihood to send ai'euts to these poor people to sympa- tliize with them, and to urge them to forego their conscientious convictions, in order that they may have the pe- cuniary advantages of which, for their religion's sake, they were deprived. Than this,history records nothing more intolerant, and, but that it is done without proper reflection, more base. I use the word deliherately. These people have been taught to believe, and do most thoroughly believe, that it is their duty to provide a certain kind of education for their cliildren. It is not proposed to remove this belief by argu- ment. It is proposed to tempt these peoi)le with money to act contrary to their belief If the word " base" is not too strong to apply to the Judas who exchanges conscience for mere cash ; does not the tempter who, to accomp- lish a base betrayal, appeals to the bas- est of motives, also richly merit the same word.

And is it not in the last degree ex- traordinary, that of all principles, social or scientific, mundane or divine, or other whatsoever, the one which most strongly and clearly condemns such gro.ss interference with religious lib- erty— Religion is outride of State in- terference— is the very principle select- ed byDr.Bryce to support it ? We must leave him, venturing and proffering this suggestion, namely, that if at any time he does " heartily join in the piayer of that fellow-countryman, who pleaded for heavenly direction, .saving, ' Lord, gif I dinna gae richt. Thou knowest I'll gang far wrang,'" the proper hymn for the occasion would be, in my humble opinion, " For those at sea" — far, far at sea. Failing relief

THE MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION.

"5

' paiisii- l<l cease ms, thev I'gariiza- liaie of j,'lif- get !y rould. e people i'|»; has to send syrnpa- tlii'in to victions, tlie pe- Tor their priveij. iiir more is (lone J base. I These eve, and lat it is kind of Jt is not )>' (irgu- )t these [laiy to e" is not ias who •e easli ; iiccoinp- tlie bas- erit the

by tills uietliod, I aui afraid nothing remains but the traditional surgical operation !

Si (|uid per jocum dixi, nolito in scrium convertere ; for

Though they may gang a kennin wruog, To step aside Ih human.

The few passages of my July article wliich escaped misconstruction at the hands (S Dr. Bryce, have, at those of Mr. Lo , .ueur shared the general fate. This latter gentleinan seems to tliink that one of my contentions was, that because opinion might be erroneous, therefore we ought to " shun the re- sponsibility of putting any of our opinions into practice." Tiiis is not my "therefore," nor the proper "there- fore ; " but this rather : that as our opinions mui]) be erroneous, we ought not tivvecfssarily to ride rough-shod over the opinions of other.s — that while acting upon our opinions, we should proceed, not as if they were certain to be right, but aft if, pi>xsihlj/, theij iniglit be wroTiC; ; and that, therefore, if, in our economy, sco|)e can be left, or made, for the free play of contrary opinion, left or made it ought to be. A general may be of opinion that the enemy is 40,000 strong. He ought to act upon that opinion ; but he would be a foul if he made no provision for a sudden reversal of his idea.

Suppose that the city of London determined to establish a number of public hospitals, and that there came to be determined the question of t. . t .system of medicine to be adopted. Alderman A proposes the allopathic .system (which he knows to be the best), and has the majority on his side. Alderman B, who is an hom<eopathist, urges that many of the people are of his way of thinking; that, possibly, the majority may be wrong ; and that both kinds of hospitals ought to be estal))ished, so that people of both opinions may be accommodated. Alder- man A says. " Certainly not. The majority must act upon its opinion, and not be deterred by the fact that

they may bo entirely wrong. If homcL'opathists want special treatment they can have it at their own expense, and at other places." In such case, Alderman B, in my opinion, is, most undoubtedl}, i /lit. A is wrong, be- cause he acts ipon his opinion a.s though it werf t'le " ultimate infallible credo." ^- my meaning now clear ?

This igineu case ir.i,y bo made further useful. Allj^^athic hospitals may be taken tr. lepresent Protestant .schools, an'' homoeopathic hospitals. Catholic schools. In such case Alder- man C proposes that, ina.<Bmuch as the people are not agreed upon the ques- tion of medicine, there should not be any practice at all, of a sectarian character, in the hospitals. " We are all agreed," he says, " upon surgical matters; we are all agreed that nurs- ing and low diet are beneficial in fever cases; there is much about which there is unanimity. There is a national mandate tliu' far. Let us, then, have non-sectarian ho.spitals, and if any patient wants more than that, let him pay for it out of his own pocket." Then, quoting Mr. Le Sueur, he adds : " Do not ask that the hospitals, which all agree, are not only useful, but necessary, shall be made subservient to the propagation of your peculiar ideas in these matters." Manitoba has established non-sectarian hospitals (as she choo.ses to call them), and many of the people will make no use of them. Could not Alderman B have given them a better idea ?

Mr. Le Sueur gives me credit, also, for tbe " idea of handing over local minorities to local majorities, without any check from the general law of the land." My article was, as I under- stand it, one long argument against this idea— ac«i7(.s'^ the exercise of the power of majorities; and I am in- debted to my critic for the great sup- port which he gives me. The single sentence in my article which has led Mr. Le Sueur astray refers to unan- imities, and not to majorities and minorities at all. " Practical unanimi-

Ii6

THE CANADIAN MAGAZINE.

ty," or the disregard of merely " ec- centric, or isolated opinion," I, fur one, can by no means translate into a " majority vote." And if I am asked, " What power does ho look to, to check a school-district which, dispensing with practical unanimity, wants to introduce some fad into the school by a majority vote ? " the answer is very simple : I look to the " check from the general law of the land," which my critic makes me say that I do not look to. I must have some little license to speak for myself.

Passing from these misconceptions, Mr. Le Sueur .says that "the State may, therefore, be said to get a mandate to establish secular schools. Does the State get any bimilar mandate to teach theology in the schools?" I beg to recommend these sentences to Dr. Bryce, and to Manitobans in general. There is more point in them, I venture to say, than will be admitted ; for they avoid the inconsistency of arguing from the principle of entire separation of Church and State, to the practice ■of teaching some certain limited re- ligion in the schools, and the exclusion of a few degrees more of it. But Mr. Le Sueur is speaking beside the facts. If there was any mandate about which Manitobans were moie emphatic than another, it was that the schools should not be secular. For the rest, the mandate of the majority was to con- tinue non-sectarian schools, and the mandate of the minority to re-estab- lish the old system. Mr. Le Sueur's argument, leading, as it does, to secular .schools, therefore, may for present purposes be disregarded. The subject is interesting, but purely academic, so far as the pending controversy is concerned.

I have to thank Mr. Le Sueur for an- otber sentence : " Lil)erty consists in being as Utile governed as possible, and in having the largest possible scope left for private initiative." Ap- ply this to district X, and .some scores of other districts in Manitoba.

In them, the Catholics, if "governed as little as possible,' will be required to keep their schools up to certain secu- lar standards ; and will not be forbid- den (for it is unnecessary) to comment on the Bible-reading of the day, if unanimously they desire to do so. Am I not right ? Is it in the name of lib- erty, or of tyranny, that all such com- ment, when unanimously desired, is by law stringently prohibited ? Is this imposing the will of other people upon them, or is it freedom to act as they like?

Mr. Le Sueur is more successful, if I may be allowed to say so, when he advocates the rights of the Catholics to " be allowed to count themselves out," as he expresses it. Suppose this was done, and that the Catholics of district X applied for a charter under which they could organize themselves for the support of education. Tiiis would not, surely, be refused them, so long as every other good ])urpose is be- ing aided in similar fashion. The char- ter having been granted, suppose that the Catholics in district X all became members of the Association, and agreed to pay certain rates per annum into the exchequer, and to charge their properties with the amounts, Mr. Le Sueur would, I think, see nothing wrong in all this. How far would he thon be away from the separate school system ? He will .say that the arrange- ments would be purely voluntary. He is aware that in Ontario every Catho- lic must support the public schools un- less he ooluntivnly supports some separate school. Make the law the same in Manitoba, and give each school district a separate charter, or provide for all by one general law, as you wish. Thatditteronco, if insisted upon, would not cau.se much grumbling or discontent. Mr. Le Sueur is, I think, more with me than with Dr. Bryce to whom, nevertheloss, he say.s, " Well done."

Winnipeg.

»»