IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 !f 1^ Ui *^ Ui 112 I.I 11.25 2.0 lli& .^^' ^. ?% ^j> / /w Sdmces CorpQFatiQn 13 WHT MAM f TRMT WIMTII.N.V. I4IM (>U)l7t'4M9 ^V^ 4" f. CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Inttituta for Historical IMIIcroraproductiont / Inttitut Canadian da microraproductiont hiatoriquas Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniqua* at bibllographiquas Tha tot Tha Institute has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy availabia for filming. Faaturas of this copy which may ba bibllographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagas In tha reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D □ n D D Couverture endommagte Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^ et/ou peliiculAe I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ D Cartes gtegraphiquas en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations mn couleur Bound with other material/ ReliA avac d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liuie serrAe peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intAriaura Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, thesa have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certainas pages blanches aJoutAas lors d'une restauration apparaissant dans la taxta. mais, lorsqua cela Atalt possible, ef^. National Schools FOR MANITOBA. '1 " Tta«t the tcbool qritmn of Manltotw it accomplishing much tcM than a national ■yattm should, Is no cause for surprise. Bvldcntly with those who legislated it into existence, the boma JIdt education of the people was a consideration secondary to making the public schools nurseries for the Roman Catholic Church." —Mr. W. F. Luxtom to tk$ Eltctors t^Roekwood in Novtmbtr 1874. -I 1 .WINNIPRO 1692. S<^-" !%• .«<■» •''ii "Thai than a na with thosi I of the pe schools nil to the Elei Bef there w public i Anglica they we church \ >i ^ ■# i.\: )/%i. ^ *i '*Ml "AL^t A u >y- %Af^ -j 4* '■'i^^* . IV ft » NATIONAL SCHOOLS FOR MANITOBA. "That the school system of Manitoba is accomplishing much less [than a national system should, is no cause for surprise. Evidently wth those who legislated it into existence, the bona fide education of the people was a consideration secondary to making the public schools nurseries for the Roman Catholic Church." — Mr. W. F. Luxton to the Electors of Rockivood in November 1874. I. Before Manitoba became a portion of the Dominion there were no school laws within its boundaries, and no public schools. Several schools were carried on by the Anglican, Roman Catholic and Presbyterian bodies, but I they were [irivate enterprises supported by fees and out of church funds. The schools of the various denominations wore as distinct from one another as private institutions I always are. After the union a public school system was created by which this separation was kept up so far as Roman Catholics were concerned, while all theotlier classes of the community became united. TA Board of Educa- tion was created consisting of two sections, one Protestant and the other Roman Catholic, with two superintendents, and two sets of machinery for the management of the schools, and each section was given absolute control over its own schools. While the Roman Catholic section of the Board was properly so called, the other section including as it did, not only all other denominations, but the public at large, should have been called public or national rather than Protestant. From the time that the two sections undertook their respective duties, undenominatiotial roli- igious exercises were carried on in the schools of the Pro- [testant section, and secitarianism and doctrinal teaching were carefully avoided. The Roman Catholics, on the con- .. itrary, condenmed undenominational religious exerci»ea and j/ * > t > (• « to 1 1 .'sfi4;5 4 insiBted on teaching the special doctrines of their church] with the utmost zeaQ "ISTURSBRIBS FOR THE RoMAN CaTHOLIC ChURCH." • « « • •tea •/••> • ■ • * «• •• The Archhishop of St. Boniface was placed at the head of the Roman Catholic section, and with him were always enough priests to control the vote. The schools were taught by the Reverend Sisters of Charity, the Reverend Sisters of Jesus and Mary, the Faithful Companions of Jesus, the Reverend Maristes Brothers, the parish priests, and other devout Roman Catholics. The inspectors con- sisted of priests solely. Religious instruction, in one form or another, formed a large portion of the school work. Vocal music, for instance, in the second division consisted of songs and hymns ; in the third, church chants ; in the fourth, plain chants ; in the fifth, hymns and psalms ; and in the sixth, anthems. Hiatory in the second, third and fourth divisions was conftned to the Old and New Testa- ments, and in the fifth to Canada under the French regime. British Canadian history could not be learned until the sixth division was reached, and English history was reserved for the seventh. As very few French pupils reached these divisions, VBritish Canadian History and institutions and English history remained unknown to the mass of children in the Roman Catholic schools. Those who knew anything of them gained their knowledge through authors friendl^ neither to England nor to British institutions in Canadi) A third division of the programme of studies consisted of " bienseance " or decorum, under which pupils were taught among other things how to address a letter to a prelate or a priest, how to terminate such letters, what titles to em- ploy in conversation in addressing such persons, how to behave in a holy place, order of precedence, the titles of dignitaries, and so forth. A fourth division of the pro- gramme consisted of religious instruction, in Butler's catechism, the creed, the sacraments ; in the fourth division the commandments and *' the unseen part of the catechism," and in the highest divisions, the catechism of per^ overanoe ; while the choice by the Catholic section of books on religi- ous and moral matters could be overriden by the Arch- 6 |ishop. Besides all this, the inspectors, who were priests, rere required by the regulations of the Catholic section report whether there was " a crucifix or some religious lage " in each school visited. Archbishop Tache con- knds that the school is the children's church. It will )e seen by the foregoing facts, which can all be found |n the reports of the Catholic section, that they were churches indeed, even to the extent of crucifixes and religious images. Romanizing thb Schools. The following are a few instances of the questions set Loman Catholic candidates for teachers certificates in L885 : " What is the Church ? Where is the true Church ? >ught we to believe what the Catholic Church teaches |us ? And why ?" " What is the mass ? What must be done to properly [understand it ?" " What sentiments ought we to entertain towards our [Guardian Angel ? " " What are the principal mysteries of our religion ?" " Describe the fall {a) of the angels (6) of the first [man. j> " What is meant by indulgences ? What must be done in order to obtain them ?" Us it any wonder that the Roman Catholic church should desire to perpetuate a system, which however little it may benefit education, does more than anything else can do in inculcating, not necessarily morality, but certain- ly Roman Catholicism, pure and simple, with all its creeds, formularies and observances; which teaches not only that the Roman Catholic church is the true church, but that all others are false and damnable. It was this sort of thing which the present Govern- ment determined to eradicate from the public school system. It was found that while the Roman Catholics insisted upon remaining apart from the rest of the community and despised all other religious, they did not show a like 6 anxiety to keep aloof from the public chest. They man* aged so well in fact that while the Protestant school disf tricts received but $197.56 each from the legislative grant, they received $347.03 ; while the Protestant teachers received $121.76 each, they got $195.05yS while on th« other hand the Protestant school districts taxed themselves $456.20 each, the Catholics taxed themselves only $277.96 per district ; in fine, while the Protestants raised 70 cents for each dollar of the cost of their schools and got but 30 cents from the public chest, the Roman Catholics raised but 45 cents for each dollar of cost and got 55 cents out of the public monies — for the purpose of keeping up children's churches, and inculcating Roman Catholic dogmas with the assistance of crucifixes and religious images. The School Act, 1890 — National Schools. . By the Public School Act of 1890, all this was changed. The Board of Education was succeeded by the Department of Education and the Advisory Board. The separation of Protestants and Roman Catholics waA done away with. It was provided that the religious ex- ercises in the public schools should no longer be sectarian, that they should take place just before the closing hour in the afternoon and should be conducted according to the regulations of the Advisory Board, and further that no child shall be allowed to attend the religious exercises if his or her parent or guardian is unwilling. The regula- tions as to religious exercises adopted by the Advisory Board require the reading, without note or comment, of any one of a large number of prescribed selections from either the authorized English version of the Bible or from the Catholic version, and the use of the Lord's prayer and another simple form of prayer which is also prescribed. It was considered that while religious exercises of so simple a kind could be objectionable to no sect nor individual they would at the same time fully subserve the purpose for which they were intended, that of keeping up religious observances in the schools, while at the same time prevent- ing our public schools from being used for the inculcation and diffusion of sectarian doctrines and dogmas. In the taxation of property for public purposes, and iu the distri- bution tional ( alike, had m to thes I of the i Catholi /i be clasi ! 1. ' schools ■ guaran \ with C I . 3. m to insisi - 4. not tai ' crime. i ^' I oppose( if schools bution of the taxes and of the legislative grant denomina- tional distinctions are no longer recognized, but all are treated alike. In a word, since the 31st of March, 1890, we have :had national schools established in Manitoba, and it is to these national schools, so acceptable to all other citizens of the Province almost without exception, that the Roman Catholics so strenuously object. The List of Objections. The objections which have been advanced so far may be classified as follows : 1. The Roman Catholics were guaranteed separate schools by law in the Manitoba Act. 2. The Roman Catholic settlers of Red River were guaranteed separate schools by treaty previous to the union with Canada. 3. It is a matter of conscience with Roman Catholics to insist upon having separate schools, because — 4. National schools, where Roman Catholic creeds are not taught, are ' Godless,' and lead to immorality and crime. 5. National schools cannot exist if the hierarchy is opposed to them, and it has been decreed that the national schools of Manitoba must go. 8 II. Arb National Schools Possible? Consider the last objection first. A few who are forced to concede that national unde- nominational schools are in the interest of the Province, but are loth to give the Government credit for any of its measures, condemn a national school system as being im- practicable. It is impossible, they say, to oppose the wishes of the Roman Catholic Church. It is useless to run counter to the desires of so great and so powerful an or- ganization. Undenominational schools may be established, but they must, they say, soon succumb to the vigilant and ever active opposition of the hierarchy. They advise us to give up the fight at the outset, and acknowledge that the state is beaten, that what the priesthood demands no one dare deny. They say that if the Church desires sect- arian teaching in schools supported either wholly or in part by public money, the Church will have it, let public opinion be what it will. The best answer to this kind of argument is experience. Take then, first — The Experience of other Countries. Switzerland. In Switzerland some cantons are almost exclusively Catholic, while in others Protestants constitute the large majority. Care is taken that there is no compulsion to attend religious services and no interference with liberty of conscience. The exercises consist in hymns, prayers, and reading the Bible, generally without comment. Sectarian education in the sense in which the Roman Catholics de- mand it is not found to be necessary. Belgium. While the Liberals of Belgium favor purely secular schools, the Conservatives have always strongly contended for denominational teaching. In the large centres of in- dustry, despite the interference of the clergy and the strife 9 of political parties, instruction continues to be secular. This is the case notwithstanding that "The Roman Catholic religion is professed by nearly the entire population of Belgium." (Statesman's Year Book 1891, p. 374.) Italy. In Italy " the priesthood claims to direct the education of the masses, but the changes which have taken place in the temporal rule have greatly restricted their influence. Speaking generally, religious instruction is only imparted once a week by laymen, and only to those children whose parents desire it. It does not form part of the national system, and, as in other Catholic countries, the clergy are bitterly opposed to education by the state as at present regulated." (" Subjects of the Day," May, 1890, p. 75.) France. " In France the struggle for priestly ascendancy has exercised greater influence over State instruction than in any other European country, and entirely to the disad- vantage of the clergy. The department of education professes complete neutrality towards the religious denom- inations, but it is by exclusion and not by the concurrent endorsement of education. Hence the State s^'^stem, which is purely secular, is usually designated "Godless educa- tion," and it is no doubt one of the results of the reaction against priestly interference in other than religious aftairs." —(Ibid.) Ireland. Under the National School system of Irelanvi Roman Catholics and Protestants are educated together. The conscience clause provides that when " once the religion of a child is entered on the register, the teacher, if of a difl:er- ent religious persuasion, must not permit the child, unless under the written authority of the parent on a certiflcate duly witnessed, to remain in attendance whilst religious instruction was proceeding." Bishop Doyle, the vehement advocate of Catholic schools, felt compelled to say : " I cannot refrain from expressing the ardent desire I feel of having the children of all Irishmen without distinction united in schools and in^every relation of life." The Pope, though at first opposed to the system, finally called upon his Bishops to thank the Government " for giving so much of its wealth to the poor children of che country.' — (Ibid, p. 59.) Australia. " The Australian colonies are essentially democratic, and so, like the United States, they all base their common SDhool systems on the pri!i'3iples of religious freedom, and the non-establishment of any particular form of religious belief."— Ibid. p. 109. The United States. E. E. White, LL.D., Superintendent of Public Schools of Cincinnati, in a paper read before the National Edu- cational Association in Topeka, Kansas, July 15, 1886, says, (p. 10) : " The great majority of American schools are religious without being sectarian t and it is high time that this fact were more universally recognized. It is doubtless true that the most impressive forms of presenting religious sanctions to the mind and heart of the young are prayer, silent or spoken, and the reverent reading of the Bible, especially those portions of the present human duty in its relations to the Divine Will — ;form8 still per- mitted and widelv used in four-fifths of the American schools." — (Papers of the American Historical Association, , Vol. 2, No. 4, p. 467.) The Experience of the Canadian Provinces. New Brunswick. In the i*rovince of New Brunswick the school system is purely national, and non-sectarian. Regulation 21 of the Board of Education provides that : It shall be the privilege of every teacher to open and close the daily exercises of the school by reading a portion of Scripture e I feel of distinntiou The Po})e, ailed upon \g GO much ^■'— (Ibid. emocratic, r common jdoni, and ■ religious ic Schools Dual Edu- 15, 1886, n schools ngh time d. It is resenting e young mding of it human still per- Lmorican ociation, BS. 1 system n *21 of be the le daily oripture 11 (out of the common or Douay version, as he may prefer), and by offering the Lord's Prayer. Any other prayer may be used by permission of the Board of Trustees. But no teacher shall compel any pupil to be present at these exer- cises against the wish of his parent or guardian expressed in writing to the Board of Trustees. The national non- sectarian system has been in existence in New Brunswick for more than twenty years, and there is not the slightest probability that it will be interfered with. • « Nova Scotia. Sectarian public schools are unknown in Nova Scotia. George lies, of New York, in an article on " The Separate School System of Canada," in " Education," a Boston pub- lication, in Juno, 1890, said -'In Nova Scotia one-fourth of the inhabitants are Catholics ; public sentiment has always sternly opposed a separate school system, and the Church of Rome has never seriously thrown herself into the attempt to plant it there." Prince Edward Island. Referring to the improvement of the national school law in New Brunswick, Archbishop Tache, in a pamphlet on the school question published in 1877, wrote, " all these hard- ships imposed upon the Catholics of New Brunswick are said by some to be nothing but ' fair play,' 'equal rights,' etc., so the good people of Prince Edward Island thought they could do no hotter than follow such exami>les. Out of a population of 94,021, Catholics number 40,442. The Non-Catholics took advantage of the small difference in numbers, the whole Island was agitated on the school question, fanaticism was oroused, war declared against Catholic schools, and as one and one-third are more than one the * non-sectarian system ' prevailed." Another way of putting this would l)e by saying that the people of Prince Edward Island were determined to secure national schools, and succeeded in realizing their wish. 12 British Columbia. Like the provinces in the east the province in the ex- treme west is favored with national unsectarian schools. Section 62 of Chapter 40 of the " Public School ot, 1891," provides as follows : " All Public Schools established under the provisions of this Act shall be conducted on strictly secular and non-sectarian principles. The highest morality shall be inculcated, but no religious dogma nor creed shall be taught. The Lord's Prayer may be used in opening or closing the school." Could any greater proof be required that national schools are possible, and that there is no necessity to bow to the Roman Catholic demand for sectarian education. The experiences of Switzerland, Belgium, and Italy, of France and Ireland, of Australia and the United States of America, and of nearly all the Provinces of Canada, go to show that sectarian instruction is not necessary, and that non-sectarian schools are not only possible but in every wa}' successful and satisfactory. •I Ta [been t public tions, against provin( credite four-iif schooh made i and ye marvel are in ministe Churcl While parishc United thousa church huudn parisoi those ( that r Unitei in the school ductiN glanci ing S( for in son, 1 land, 04; c 13 in the ex- n schools. t, 1891," bed under )n strictly fc morality reed shall pening or national ty to bow ducation. Italy, of States of ida, go to and that in every "7 ^* III. ) ■ : [Are !N"ational Schools Godless?' Take next the second to last objection. It has long been the fashion of Roman Catholics to stigmatize the public schools of the United States as ' godless * institu- tions, and the same charge has been foolishly preferred against the national school system now in vogue in this province. It is an old cry, and one that soon becomes dis- credited wherever national schools are put to the test, (in four-fifths of the schools of the United States, national schools of a non-sectarian character, religious exercises are made use of as in the so-called 'ffodless' schools of Manitoba and yet the progress of the United States in religion is the marvel of modern times. It has been estimated that there are in the United States 132,434 churches with 91,911 ministers of the Gospel and 19,018,917 communicants. Church property, it is said, doubles in value every decade^ While in large cities on the continent there are large parishes of 50,000 persons with a single pastor, in the United States there is on an average a pastor for every thousand members. While in Berlin there are but sixty churches for 1,200,000 souls, in New York there are three hundred churches for about the sanie population. A com- parison of the religious statistics of American cities with those of most other continental cities must serve to show that under the so-called '(Jodless' school system of the United States religion has flouriHlied as it never flourished in the world before. SOiME Intkrestino Criminal Statistics. rriie converse of the Roman Catholic claim is that the schools of that church are godly and in every way pro- ductive of morality. Will this claim stand the test? A glance at the Dominion criminal statistics for the year end- ing September 30tli, 18!K), shows the following convictions for inrovalent in countries where there is a superabundance of Roman Catholic influences. 15 11 Catholics, 30 ; Presby- against pro- II Catholics, 72; Presby- convictions tn classified ' deiiomina- lics, though "^ere respon- Bn cited as in 178,000 he Roman iers in the )portion to .," at page ore Roman rule than 18 stating ^4f to one gitimate ; rue, there- 8 regards >n. Any- of the igmatized Liction in be im- tenets of nd loads L'rime are )nndauee Prof. Schaff on National Schools in the United States. The venerable American historian, Philip Schaff, D.D., jL.D., in his " Church and State in the United States," says of the so-called " godless" system of the United States I" the State recognizes the importance of religion by allow- ing the reading of the Bible, the singing of a hymn, and Ithe recital of l^e Lord's Prayer, or some other prayer, as (Opening exercises of the school. I am informed by com- petent authority, that at least four-tifths of the public schools in the United States observe this custom. Most of the school teachers, especially the ladies, are members of Evangelical churches, and commend religion by their spirit and example. To call such schools " Godless " is simply a slander." The Board Schools of England. t Corresponding to our luitional and unscctarian schools are the Board schools of England. One third of the ele- mentary education in England \h supplied by Board schools, Jand the rest by voluntary schools. In a lioard school " no religious catechism or religious formulary which is distinc- tive of any particular denomination shall l)e taught," and in " Subjects\)f the Day," for May, 1890, Edward M. Ilance, ]VL.B., Clerk of the Liverpool Sciiool Board writes : — 'How far the Board schools, us a whole, are from being justly open to the charge ot giving ' (lodless ' education nui}' be gathered frt>m the following extract from the report of the late Koyal Commission on Education, (page 113,) viz : " We find that out of -J. 225 School Boards, ro- liresenting the judgnient of nu)re than Hixteen millions of our population only seven in Englaiul and fifty in Wales, iccording to the parliamentary returns ot 1879, 1884 and |188r), have dispensed entirely with religious teaching or [observances." The small Boards which shut out direct Ireligious teaching from their day schools is, it is iK>ii\ted put, in the most part in Wales where the Sunday School system powerfully affects the whole populatioji. The Hon. Edward Blake and the National Schools of Ontario. Probably the most conclusive reply to the cry of " Godless " schools is the fact that in the Public Schools of Ontario, where the religious exercises are the same as in Manitoba, 60,000 Roman Catholic children, two-thirds of the Roman Catholic children of Ontario, are being edu- cated in the National Public Schools. In his celebrated speech on " Provincial Issues — The Religious Cry," at Hamilton, during the local campaign of 1886, the Hon. Edward Blake pointed out that Principal Caven, the head of the Knox Presbyterian Theological College, Provost Body, the head of Trinity University, one of the Theo- logical Colleges of the Church of England, Principal Nelles, the head of Victoria, the Methodist University, and Prin- cipal Castle, the head of the Baptist College, had agreed upon the form of undenominational religious exercises in the Ontario public schools, of which the religious exercises in the public schools of Manitoba are practically a copy. " The churches " said Mr. Blake, " approached each other ; they agreed to co-operate with each other, and I thanked God for it. I thanked God for it because I thought it was an indication that we were beginning to sink, in some degree, our sectarianism, and to realize our points of agreement ; to recognize more and more how much there was that we all held together of the fundamental common truths of Christianity. I thanked God for it because I thought it pointed to a broader, more generous, more Christian feeling, which boded great good for the church, and for the world." He further drew attention to the fact that the late Archbishop Lynch, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Ontario, did not object to the introduction of these un lenominational religious exercises into the public schools of Ontario, although it was at those schools that two-thirds of the Roman Catholic children of the Province received their education. Td jitizen loctrin igains Iconscit jchool )ut th [educat [His pe [engraf He bh sometl it will [This c ;of spe fthe d( require (t 17 IV. A Matter of Conscience. Take next the third objection. The Roman Catholic jitizen states that his conscience requires him to insist upon loctrinal teaching in the public schools, and inveighs loudly igainst any interference with what he calls his liberty of jonscience. His objection is not that under a national school training his child will be taught anything offensive, (but that too little attention will be given to his religious education in the dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church. His persecution consists in this that he is not allowed to [engraft sectarian instruction upon the public school system. He blames the law not because it requires him to do [something that clashes with his conscience, but because lit will not do all that his so-called convictions required [This claim is not a question of conscience but a question )f special privilege. If this is religious persecution ithe definition of the offence universally accepted will require very radical revision. The Roman Catholic Conscience — What is it? When the Roman Catholic loudly declaims against [his conscientious convictions being interfered with, he cannot object to stating what religious convictions his [church allows him as an individual to entertain, j In " The [Vatican Decrees in their bearing on Civil Allegiance," the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, without "citing any of I the fearfully energetic epithets in which the condemnations are sometimes clothed," mentions a few of the propositions, " the holders of which have been condemned by the See of Rome during" the twelve or fifteen years previous to 1874. The following have been condemned : — 1. Those who maintain the liberty of the press. En- cyclical Letter of Pope Gregory XVI, in 1831; and of Pope Pius IX, in 1864. 2. Or the liberty of conscience or of worship. En- cyclical of Pius IX, December 8, 1864. 18 \ 3. Or the liberty of speech. " Syllabus " of March 18, 1861, Prop. Ixxix. Encyclical of Pope Pius IX, December 8, 1864. 4. Or that in conflict of laws, civil and ecclesiastical, the civil law should prevail. " Syllabus," Prop. xlii. 5. Or that any method of instruction of youth, solely secular, may be approved. Ibid, Prop, xlviii. 6. Or that any other religion than the Roman Catholic Religion may be established by a state. Ibid, Prop. Ixxvii. 7. Or that in "countries called Catholic" the free exercise of other religions may laudibly be allowed. Ibid, Prop. Ixxviii. The above are but seven instances out of eighteen given by Mr. Gladstone, whose list is but a partial one. ( In the face of these facts the claim of the Roman Catholic to liberty of conscience as an individual seems based upon little or no foundation. Tlie Church in whose name he so %iudly demands liberty of conscience has strongly con- demned liberty of speech, liberty of the press, liberty of worship, and the very liberty of conscience which he de- mands. If the Roman Catholic is deprived of liberty of conscience his quarrel is with his Church which deprives jch, and not with this Province absolutely ) A Priest-made Conscience. There is no use blinking the facts, and if the Roman Catholic citizen is candid he will admit that his quarrel with national schools arises from no conscientious con- victions as an individual, but from the attitude taken by his Church. Dr. Ryerson, who was Chief Superintendent of Education of Upper Canada and Ontario from 1844 to 1876, plainly perceived this state of facts, and thus explain- ed the position in one of his writings before Confederation : "Separate school education is now a dogma of the Roman Catholic Church, as much as the immaculate con- ception is. In 1 50 the Roman Catholic College of Thurles, ;,yin Ire 1 cation and Q fbeen I of the some isome [Roma !!atho [Gladst lastical It ready-] church consci time t(i Cathol conclu( I God t ^Himits ( for com thierarc jCathol [ordinal [such ti [matter 'years a In the I the ec lOttawf land th itrue dc led u cat! Ithat in kand £ 3hurch lis vol 19 March 18, December ilesiastical, . xlii. uth, solely LU Catholic pop. Ixxvii. ' the free ^ed. Ibid, iteon given e. \ In the ;!atbolic to ased upon D name he ongly con- liberty of ich he de- ' liberty of deprives which he na of the ilate con- fThurles, in Ireland, passed a statute condemnatory of mixed edu- Ication ; the Roman Catholic Provincial Colleges of Baltimore land Quebec have since done the same. These statutes have jbeen ratified by the Pope. This is therefore the dogma [of the Church, however much it may fall into disuse in [some places, as Sir Thomas N. Redington says it does in |Bome places in Ireland." The tight for national schools, then, is not with the [Roman Catholic as an individual, but wit^ the Roman Jatholic Church and its arrogant claim, as stated by Mr. [Gladstone, that in the conflict of laws, civil and ecclesi- astical, the ecclesiastical commands must prevaiU Stimulating the Roman Catholic Conscience. It is only natural that "convictions" thus impo.cd ready-made upon the adherents ot the Roman Catholic church, and not necessarily springing from the source of conscience, should require a good deal of stimulus from time to time. In January, 1871, for instance, the Roman Catholic Bishop of London, Ontario, felt constrained to ^conclude his pastoral letter by ordaining in the name of iGod that " no Catholic parent living within the legal limits of a separate school, shall send his children to mixed [or common schools, they being adjudged by the Canadian [hierarchy as dangerous to faith and morals. Should any [Catholic parent unfortunately persist in violating this )rdi nance, he shall be refused the Holy Sacraments until ^Bucli time as they shall consent to obey the church in this [matter." Archbishop Cleary's brimstone utterances two [years ago have not yet disappeared from the public mind. |ln the pastoral letter of the archbishops and bishops of the ecclesiastical provinces of Quebec, Montreal and [Ottawa, in April, 1891, the clergy, secular and regular, md the faithful of the provinces were reminded "of the true doctrine concerning the control of the church over the )ducation of the Catholic children in schools," and told that in Manitoba " they are trying once more an under- land and satanic prosecution against the rights of the jhurch," that the Archbishop of St. Bonifac e has raised lis voice against "this iniquity," has made known the 20 c " perfidious stratagem," and has allowed his flock to " see how odious it is." This shows that the Roman Catholic hierarchy of Canada is not far behind that of the United States in appealing to the adherents of the church to vin- dicate their "liberty of conscience," and put down the public school system. If they keep on we may hope to see the Canadian Roman Catholic conscience stimulated bj' words like these of priest Phelan, uttered at a St. Louis convention on October l7th, 1873 : " The children of the public schools turn out to be learned horse thieves, scholastic counterfeiters. The Catholics would as soon send their children into a pest house or bury them, as let them go to public schools. They were afraid the child who left home in the morning, would come back with something in his heart as black as hell.'' Similarly Bishop Baltes, of Alton, in his Lenten pas- toral of 1870, calls the public schools " seminaries of in- fidelity and fruitful sources of immorality." Thus it is that frenzied invective and the refusal of the Sacra- ment are brought into play to compel the Roman Catholic indiv'dual to entertain the " conscientious convictions " with which otherwise he would have but little sympathy. Church and State. It will be easily seen then, that the question is whether the church or state is to control in matters of education. Mr. Gladstone long ago clearly perceived this. "All other christian bodies," he said, "are content with freedom in their own religions domain ; Orientals, Lutherans, Calvin- ists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Nonconformists, one and all in the present day, contentedly and thankfully accept the benefits of civil order ; never pretend that the state is not its own master; make no religious claims to temporal possessions or advantages; and consequently, never are in perilous collision with the state. Kay more, even so, I believe it is with mass of Roman Catholics individually. But not so with the leaders of their church, or with those who take pride in following the leaders." Does the fact that the Roman Catholic church has decreed that its doctrines must be taught as a part of our |to obej ,3th e sta tect he Hons b tion ha iwe mn f*demna fining Bi tion wi inculca ', throng viction the Un what i : constit • sought nion 11 that tl sthe mi tion t< churcl " dami ligiouf [Chief toent ' i u I while ^opinio that 1 21 lock to " see lan Catholic the United urch to vin- t down the lay hope to imulated by a St. Louis n out to he ters. The into a pest lools. They ling, would ck as hell." Lenten pas- laries of in- Thus it is the Sacra- an Catholic evictions " mpathy. is whether education. ' All other freedom in IS, Calvin- I, one and illy accept he state is 3 temporal ver are in Bven so, I livid ually. ivith those tiurch has irt of our bublic school system necessitate our teaching them there ? [ust the state impose doctrinal teaching upon the public ichool system because the Roman Catholic church has so iommanded it, and its adherents dare not disobey ? If so, |ehat can the church command that the state must not t)bey, and where is the boasted supremacy of the state over |the church in matters of civil concern ? \rhe church, as ;8uch, it has been said, has nothing to do with the state but i|to obey its laws and to strengthen its moral foundations ; |the state has nothing to do with the church except to pro- . Jtect her in her property and liberty. These are the rela- Itions between church and state of which modern civiliza- tion has approved. Either they must continue to exist, or we must bow submissively to Pope Pins IX and his con domnation of all who assign to the state the power of de- clining the civil rights and province of the churchl) Individual Conscience and the Law. But even if it were a matter of conscientious convic- Ition with the Roman Catholic that he should be allowed to ■inculcate his religious doctriacs to the fullest extent through the medium of the public schools, must these con- victions take form in our educational system? In 1878 the United States Supremo Court was required to decide what is meant by religious liberty under the American constitution. Reynolds, a Mormon, charged with bigamy, sought to defend himself by proving that he was a Mor- mon and " that the members of the church believe that the practice of polygamy was dir-^ctly enjoined upon the male members thereof by Almighty God. in a revela- tion to Joseph Smith, the founder and prophet of said church," and that disobediance would be punished by "damnation in the life to come." A stronger case of re- ligious conviction could not probabl}' be adduced, and yet (/hief Justice Waite, while admitting this, delivered judg- ment in the Supreme Court as follows : " Laws are made for the govenmient of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. Suppose one believed t human sacrifices were a necessary part of religious 22 worship, would it be seriously contended that the civil government under which he lived could not interfere to prevent sacrifice. Or, if a wife religiously believed that it was her duty to burn herself upon the funeral pile of her dead husband, would it be beyond the power of the civil government to prevent her carrying her belief into prac- tice ? So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the profound doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government would exist only in name under such circumstances." The instance given fully illustrates the principles upon which the modern state is formed, and to which its success is largely due. Face th.. Real Facts. r. The conscience plea cannot bear examination. The fact is that the Roman Catholic Church, which is probably the richest, the most powerful, and the most determined in the world, long ago concluded to teach its doctrines in the public schools, for the double purpose of spreading Roman Catholic doctrines and preventing Roman Catholics from drifting into Protestantism, or becoming indifferent to the hierarchy and their doctrines. For this reason the so-called conscience plea was made a dogma of the church, so that it might be enforced upon its flock by a free use of all the terrors of anathema and excommunication. Tliat conscience is in no way concerned is clearly shown by the elasticity it manifests wherever the priesthood finds it difficult to enforce its so-called dictates, as in the Utiited States, Australia, and the many other countries already mentioned. ) The Th letter lis obj( (jDatholi* ,|)a8sed dr treat jfeettlers rovinc e set c ontainc "7, oney i gious opulati uebec. To ost far to giv On the Was in p tent, re e Fret itatemei videni ent wi pendii by sa; er bee #8 an hii Iti separate because Accordi of right iBDthing reed u ■%7, t the civil nterfere to ved that it lile of her )f the civil f into prac- of society States, it is wed. Can ause of his make the to the law to become it only in nples upon its success ion. The 8 probably ietermined octrines in spreading Catholics indifferent reaso!! the le church, free use of TJiat by the finds it tie United 8 already on. vn 28 V. The Alleged Treaty Rights to Separate Schools. The second objection may next be dealt with. In letter in the Free Press Archbishop Tacbe stated that is object was " to show that the rights claimed by the Catholics of Manitoba are not merely the result of an Act passed in parliament, but an integral part of an agreement or treaty made between the Dominion of Canada and the Settlers of Red River, previous to the entry of our rovince into confederation." To establish this statement e set out in his letter a bill of rights, clause 7 of which ontained the following demand : — " 7. That the schools be separate, and that the public oney for schools be distributed among the different re- gions denominations, in proportion to their respective opulations, according to the system of the Province of uebec." To say that this statement caused surprise to those lOiost familiar with the history of the country in 1869-70 p to give but a faint idea of the amazement that followed. On the 9th of January following Mr. James Taylor, who as in possession of the records of the Provisional Govern- ent, replied to the Archbishop through the columns of e Free Press, expressing his great surprise because of the atement made, and others followed in the same strain, vidently the Archbishop himself felt that his announce- ent would be news to the people of Red River, as in pending the bill of rights to his letter he apologized for by saying " the document is rather long, but as it has er been published before it may prove interesting to many an historical document." It is not necessary to answer at length the claim that separate schools were provided for by the Manitoba Act because " the settlers of Red River " asked for them. jLccording to Archbishop Tache's own statement the bills of right drawn up by the settlers at their convention had thing to do with the negotiations at Ottawa. " There were two bills of rights, he says, framed and i|freed upon in public meetings, one in November, 1869, and 24 ii t> Ihii fel I' w the other in January and February, 1870. Every one ac- knowledges that the first was not acted upon : the second was presented to Mr. Donakl A. Smith, was attached by him- self to his own report, but was never "handed to the dele- gates to be carried to Ottawa." Even if these bills of rights had been forwarded witl) the delegates to Ottawa neither of them contained tho slightest reference to separate schools. So much for tho treaty with " the settlers " of Red River. When the delegates went to Ottawa, they were fur- nished with credentials and the list of rights ostensibly in the main as adopted by tlie convention on the third ot February. This is what is called the third l)ill of rights, and is like the two former bills in containing no reference to separate schools, no treaty with " the settlers of Red River." 'Tampering ani> Duplicity in 1870J . lint mark ho^y the treaty with the ''settlers'' cam; into existence I " I will now give you some reasons, " writes Arcbbisho}* Tacdic, in his letter to Mr. Taylor, el Jan. loth, 1H70, j)rinte(l in the Fire Press, " to believi' that my bill was the one taken to Ottawa. I saw myself the document handed over to Rev. Mv. Ritcliot aiiii .Judge IJlack by the ollicdalsof the provisional government. I bad beanl some of the objections made by them to cer- tain articles in the first essav, and I saw some moilillcii- tions made in my presence by tiie said ollieials." IA e()m[>arison of the origiiuil list of riglits in tho handwriting of Thomas Ibinn, the late secretary of tiio provisional government, with that |)ublishcd by Arcli- l)iHhop Tacdie for the first time, shows that the Taidie bill differs materiallv from the otlier one in two (dauses, in one of whitdi a form of government which imdudes a semite is asked for, and in the other se[taratt» stdiools are de!nande(V And bow were these two imjiortant constitutioiuU demands made by "the settlers of Red Jliver"? '* I saw sonit modificatiotis nuide in my presence," by the "officials" of tho provisiomd government ! Who were tlie "otficialH," and liow was it that " my presence " liappened to bo bo 0pporti fhe in8< Ivhich tnakin^ In the' an inte peo[de will hei of rigli should slights ( any i»r( n><>b^ti I as a ti' 7l future, ,,wrio (1 i' 'I rights i i presse( i-t •»! school r An Ks W N his can the Mi to agrt that*"tl buted vince i Btate t not tl»( been r Bctdioii nuiy and ac in an' • privib 'class (1 the U 25 ery one ac- the second hed by him- to the dele- 'arded witb itainod tho leh for tho wore fur- stcijsihlv ill ho third ot 11 of riti'lits. 10 roforoiicc lors of Rod liM'H cam ' le reasoiiH, " '. Taylor, dl " to ht'lioxt Haw my sell ^itchot ai) eer- ie modiHoji- hts ill the tarv of tlu' by Areh- i Tju'l.e bill IHOH, in OIK a Menate is demande(V al demands Haw sonic "oflicials " "otHc'ialH, ' I to be 8(1 )portime ? Just what " my presence " had to do with le insertion of this demand for separate schools, a demand kdiich the people themselves never seemed to dream of laking, the prelate of St. Boniface may some day explain/ In the meantime anything so farcical as the pretence that #n interpolation of this kiiul expressed the will of the |)eople of Red River could not well be imagined. Who Will hesitate to say that a clause so introduc«>d into a bill ■iiDf rights, instead of being dignified jh a treaty obligation, fehould be condemned as an outrageous violation of tho rights of the i>arties concerned ? Docs it not follow that ?iany provision in tlie Manitoba Act based upon this inter- ^?3polatioii and looking to sei>arak' schools should be regarded as a fraud upon the citzcns of this country, present and future, as well as ujion those "settlers of Hed River," wiio did not know until nineteen years after the bill of rights liaretation of the Manitoba Act. If tho Dominion (government wished to agi'ce to a tleruiind "that the schools be scparati'," anroduced in the Afanitoba Act? Instead of that, lection 22 of that Act simply provides as follows: " Tn and for the said I'rovince the said Legislaturo lav exclusivtdv nuike laws in relation to education, subject ind according to the following provisions: — (I) Nothing ||n any such law shall prejudicially atfect any right or Iprivilege with respect to (lenominatiomil schools whit-b any Blass of persons have by law or jtractice in the Trovince at the Union." These are identical with the corn'sponding m 26 Mords of the British North America Act, except that the words " or practice " are omitted from the sub-section of tliat Act. Why did the Dominion ParHament refuse to iiipert a plain provision that the schools should be separate nnd tliat the monies should be distributed on the Quebec system, and instead of that, merely introduce the words "or practice"? Either some one desired to hoodwink Parliament by the insertion of these two words, innocent looking enough in themselves, or Parliament itself was un- willijig to enact in so many words that a system of separate Roman Catholic schools should exist in Manitoba, or which is not impossil)le, section 22 was passed without any reforeiu'c to the seventli clause of what may be called the Riel-Tache bill of rights. Speaking of the second bill of riglits, pro})ar(Ml by the "Convention of Forty," Archbishop Tachc himself says, in a letter in reply to Mr. Taylor, " I know perfectly well that tlie general impres- sion was that this last bill of rights was the one given to the delegates to be used at Ottawa. Lord Dufferin him- self was under that impression." Tn a despatch of Decem- ber 10, 1874, Lord Dufferin expressed his views on this question forcibly enough. "An attempt," he said, "has been njade to show that these delegates really held their aj>i>()intnient from Rcil, and are to be considerec' as com- missioned by his government. This, however, was not so; thev were selected and the terms thev were instructed to demand were settled before the election of Kiel to the presidency." It might be gatliered from Archbishop Taclie's statement — that the second bill of rights, though appended by Donald A. Smith to his report, was not hanf Deootn- V8 on this liid, "has lold their «' as coni- is not so ; ructod to ol to the 'c'hbishop i, though was not l»eon the nsidorod. chbinjiop liority to ppcndix stated as of the Bill of Rights. He replied by telegram dated 23rd I'd)., 1870, as follows: ITo the Right Rev. Bishop Tache : I " Bill of rights not yet received here ; will telegraph and write you when I get it." (Signed) Jos. Howe." " I then telegraphed the Bill of Rights to Mr. Howe. I received in reply the telegram of 25th Feb., 1870, as follows: Ottawa, Feb. 26, 1870. To Bishop Tache, St. Paul : Projiosition in the main satisfactory, but let the dele- gates come here to settle details." (Signed) Joseph Howe." I This statement of the Archbisho}) proves several -very important facts. First, the bill of rights of " the settlors of Red River," passed by the "Convention of Forty," was sent to the ( • ivernment at Ottawa. Second, it was sent by the [)relate of St. lioniface himself. Third, it Avas considered and ajtproved by the Government. Fourth, the delegates were invited to Ottawa to settle "the details" only. Fifth, there was nothing in any of its propositions eitlu^r directly or remotely referring to 8ep)arate schools or the Quebec system of riviloges witii respect to its schools by law at tlu' time of the union, for the reason that there was no statute touchiui; such seh.ools in Manitoba at the union. Had any denomination then a right or privilege which tlie rubjio Schools Act of 18i)0 has prejudicially aifected, and if so what was it? This is the question now before the Judicial C^onnnittee of the Privy Council in England, and it is a ([Ucstion of law which will be decided there in due course. In tlie meantime three of the Judges of the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba have decided thai the R(»nian Catholics possessed no right to denomiiuitional schools, which bus been affected. The Hon. Mr. Justice Dubuc held a contrary opinion, and five of the .ru«lges of the fSuprcme-Court of Canada wbo heard the appeal have adopted his view. Considering both Courts together, six .ludges have decided in favor of the Roman Catholic con- tention and tlirec against it. Of the six who supported the Ronum Catholic view, three — the Hon. Mr. .lustice Dubuc in Manitoba, and two of the Judges of the Supreme Court — are French Roman (Catholics.* The English Judges, therefore, stood three against three, and the two English Judges who read judgments in the Supreme Court differed radically in their reasoning, though arriving at the same conclusion. *Iti his "AnuTiciiii Coininfiilfi-ii, jmiiits out tlint ill till' UiiM-M 'rililcn prt'siilfiitiiil rrcouiit in IH7(I. (ivf ol W'.v in Ikrfmr Cimrl will) had lui'ii miulr iiU'iiilitTM of I he flt-rloti'l ruinniisKiuii, divltli'd on niirty lined mill iiiIiIh ihiit till- smiif UiiiiR IiiihiiIuii uci-iiiitfil in coimnlltus sitting jitilii.'iiilly In the llritisli Mniisi ul ConiniDiiM. Where Ihe i|iieHtioiis laiMid me enlreinefy intrieatc and diiiilitliil. the aiitliur hhns, iiid|{e!t miiNt iiecessmily he intluenccd liy their piiHoiial BvuipnthieB, niid tminot talrfy be repronched on thiit'nccouiit. ■I '& )1 Couil of tl| beinj astei long] and (juesi ,;; esch I the I whii § land ney- tion Suj case! sura the Lice (\)n The bv t .lu.l by 1 mat titU liuij dn poi coil tio by tai art rei eri nt sit of m it. Section »i(l for the exclusively find accor- »g in any r privilege ny class of It is ad- essed any I)y law at M'o was no tlio union, which the 'i'tvd, and hoforo the fljiiid, and 're in due I'i^ of the 1 that the iinafional :'. •ruMtico Udjrc's of •ciil have 'thcr, hIx lolii- con- • I'ported dustice Supreme Kngiish the two H' Court iving ut 1, imlntiiout lie Siipirtni" I party liiu-n ■lnll.V in the triiate and ir i)< isunni [ "What Avill the Judicial Committee of the Privy ^Council say ? Canadians cannot boast that the judgments ^of the Supreme Court have hitherto attained dignity by being supported by the Privy Coun"il in England. Dis- aster after disaster has attended them there. Mr. Mowat's long series of triumphs over the late Sir John Macdonald and the Supreme Court in the adjudication of constitutional questions is well known to every Canadian. In the escheats case (Mercer v. Attorney-General for Ontario), the streams bill case (McLaren v. Caldwell), the case in which liritish Columbia claimed the minerals in its pul>lic lai>ds which had been transferred to the Canadian Pacific Railway (Attorney-General of British (Columbia v. Attor- ney-General of Canada), antl the case relating to the taxa- tion of lands (Lawless v. Sullivan) the judgments of the Supreme (.ourt were absolutely reversed. In the insurance cases ((^itizon's Insurance Co. v. Parsons and C^ueen's In- surance Co. v. I'arsons) their judgments were reversed on the merits, and in the liquor license case (Fn re Li(|Uor License Act of 18H3 and Act amending) the Judicial Committee upset a portion of tiie Supreme Court decision. Till' only dei'isions on purely constitutioiuil law pn)nounced bv the Su[)reme Court which have been Ujdield by the Judicial (/ommitttM^ ar<\ one relating to indirect taxation ly law stam[»s (Queen v. Doutre), and the iniprojier elaiu) math^ bv the Dominion to lands in ()ntario the Indian titl«' to which had been surrendered (St. Catharin<>'s Mil- ling C'O. V. The (Jueeii). That the .Judges of tlui Supreme (^)urt havt^ decided ayainst the .fudtfes of Manitoba on a p(»int of constitutional law is not disheartening when it is considered that out oi' nim; ol" its judgments on constitu- tional (juestions seven have been reversed wholly or in [tart by the CVuirt of last resort and oidy two have been sus- tained. Apart IVom the fact that the Manitoba judgments ai'e said to tjive evidence of much more thoUii;ht itnd cjireful reasoninn" than thosi; of tlu( two Finulish .ludti:es who deliv- ei'etl judgments at Ottawa, (Hon. Mr. flustice Strong read no judgment and the Hon. Mr. .lustice Gwynne did not sit on tile case) the idiances indicate a prompt reversal of the Ottawa decision. I [l .AM \ 30 VII. The Necessity for National Schools. All that has gone before has shown not only that separate schools are unnecessary, but that national schools should be retained at any cost. The arguments bearing out this contention were concisely stated when the Equal Rights party was formed in Ontario a few years ago to resist the aggression of the Romish church ; in their address issued on March Ist, 1890, they assigned the following reasons for their opposition to separate rchools : — 1. On the ground that that system apportions public money for sectarian purposes, in effect the same thing as supporting church and clergy by public taxation. 2. Separate schools injure the state by vigilantly keeping apart those who should grow up together in a common citizenship. 3. The faith of Catholic children is in no way tampered with in public schools ; it being specially provided that if their parents so desire, t]iey need not be present at prayers or Bible reading. 4.rThe Catholic schools are admitted to', be inferior to the public schools, and from their smallness and fewness their inferiority is likely to continue, to public injury and loss. On the score of illiteracy alone priestly interference in education must ever be strenuously resisted. Where has illiteracy flourished most conspicuously in Canada, if not in Quebec ? Where are the people unable to read and write in Manitoba to-day, if not in the French Roman Catholic parishes ? And wherein is our experience in this respect different from that of the rest of the world ? The following figures speak for themselves : \ The Great Nurse of Ignorance. The census of the United States for 1880 showed that out of its total po])ulation over ten years of age only 9.4 per cent, were unable to write. In Victoria, in 1881, 92J per cent, of the pojmlaticm fifteen years of ago and over could both read atid write, and only 3J per cent, were en- tirely illiterate. In England, during the year 1890, oidy 7.2 per cent, of the males and 8.3 per cent, of the females Bignei only femall Thes( meth<[ butfJ count! or le^ of a in Irt 450,91 in pi when bisho and 2 no les cent. and establ churc 14,59 cent. ™ not e^ In P< only that lai schools ;8 bearing the Equal rs ago to ir address following :— 1. On noney for jpporting ■e schools lose who 3. The ! with in if their 'ayers or flitted to imallness to public priestly resisted, ously in ) unable i French porience ! world ? \ 81 signed by mark in the marriage registers. In Scotland only 4.30 per cent, of the males and 7.38 per cent, of the femalcp signed by mark in the marriage registers in 1889. These are countries where Roman Catholicism and its methods of instruction are not in the ascendant. Turn but for a moment and glance at the illiteracy prevalent in countries where Roman Catholics sve numerous and more • * or less nearly supreme. While in Scotland, in 1886, out " of a total vote polled of 447,588, only 7,708 were illiterate, ., in Ireland, in the same year, out of a total vote polled of 1^ 450,906, 98,404, or about 14 times as many of the voters ■M in proportion were unable to read or write. In Italy, where the Roman Catholics had 51 archbishops, 223 bishops, 55,263 churches and chapels, 76,560 parish priests and 28,991 religious persons to help enlighten the people, no less than 53.89 per cent, of the males and 72.93 per cent, of the females were, in the year 1881, unable to read and write. In Spain, where Rfunan Catholicism is the established religion, and Protestants dare not proclaim a church service, where there were in 1884, 32,435 priests, 14,592 nuns, 78,564 churches, and 1,684 monks, 30.64 per cent, of the males and 41.37 per cent, of the females were not even able to read when the census was taken in 1887. In Portugal and its islands, where the state religion is .; Roman Catholicism, and the Protestants do not exoccd 500 in number, the number of illiterate inhabitants ii\ 1878 was 3,751,774, or 82 per cent, of the total population, in- cluding children. All the above figures, and many more of like interest, may be found in the Statesman's Year- IJook of 1892, and cannot be successfully challenged. What has just been Haid about illiten\cy in Quebec and in the Roman Catholic parishes in Manitoba need not be repeated. ■a t it € I ■» 3 9 r A J 1 ' 3 1 ■■> )•> 1 ed that )nly 9.4 81, 92J lid over 'ere (»n- '0, only females The Greatest Reasons. y^>ut there are even greater reasons for the existence of national schools. It is necessary for the good of Canada and her people that her children should grow up together in her schools. As Canadians they must have common aspira- ,tions and common sympathies. The friendships of the ' •- < * t 32 I f < ( 1 1 1 • ( « « » I c youth of Canada must not be limited by race nor creed. Canadians must not be separated in the schools to become estranged through after life. Ever}' true Canadian must desire to throw down all barriers, whether of race or of religion, which can have but the one eftect of dividing our countrymen into two separate peoples not only without sympathy for one another but, hy a lifq-long training, saturated with antipathies and antagonisms^ Who is there who will not reeolutely set his face against separate schools and all other agencies so destructive to common citizenship and the pul)lic good ? Who can refuse, or even refrain from, joining in the fight for state rights, equal rights, and a system of education in every sense narional ? * I c f e nor creed. ( to become ladian must f race or of ividiiig our dy without g training, ''ho is there rate schools citizenship ven refrain rights, and 33 YIII. The Situation. The Supreme Court of Canada has decided that loman Catholics cannot be taxed to support our public fchools as at present constituted. Following upon this de- Jjision the Judges of the Full Court of Manitoba have held i;hat Episcopalians also are exempt from taxation for public iichool purposes. As the Presbyterians conducted denom- inational schools here previous to the union, they too must be exempt if the judgments already delivered are correct. The result is, that, il we are to have public schools in iManitoba, we must raise all our revenue for school pur- Iposes from taxes levied upon Methodists, Baptists, Con- Igregationalists and a few others. In a recent decision Mr. Justice Killam intimated that though Roman Catholics, Episcopalians and Presbyterians could not be taxed to support the pul)lic schools, they have a right under tlie Act to attend them at the expense of the Methodists, Baptists and Congregationalists. In other words if the decision of the Supreme Court in the Barrett case, and of the Full Court in the Logan case are sustained by the Privy Council, the integrity of the public school system will be V greatly impaired. The Fioht Is Just Begun. But even should the decision of the Supreme Court bo overthrown and that of our own Courts in the Barrett ease sustained, the fight for national schools will not end there. Although there are some persons foolish enough or dis- honest enough to represent that because the school (|uestion is now !)efore the Judicial Committee, it is therefore out of politics, few are sufficiently shallow to be led away by such an argument. Anyone familijir with the struggles that have taken place in other provinces must know that Manitoba's battles on the school (juestion have just begun. Mi 34 it*- A Foul Insult. It is only a few weeks since the Northwest Review, the organ of Archbishop Tache, and ot the Roman Catho- lic Church in this Province, quoted a statement that national schools " ignore religion and God," and editorially approved of the following disgracefully vile language with reference to them : — " What is the end and aim of nineteen out of every twenty young men reared in the public schools ? The Dol- lar, and it alone, his instruction has taught him to be almighty ; an Almighty God he knows nothing of. It is corrupting whole armies of the young womenof our present generatioji, orphan asylums and foundling and Magdalen institutions are being filled." Who ever penned a more stupendous and insulting lie than this ? Do not the statistics of all countries and peoples show that the opposite is the case ? But foul and abominable though the false- hood be, it seems to show how determined the unscrupu- lous opponents of national schools are to preserve what Mr. Luxton so properly called the " nurseries of the Roman Catholic Church. ' The battles yet to be fought will be as fierce as, if not fiercer than, a:.y that have gone before. If the people of Manitoba should not resolutely support the hands of the present Goverimient against which the hatred of the Roman Catholic Church is now directed, if the exist- ing administration should be returned by an English speaking majority so narrow that the members from the French Roman Catholic constituencies would hold the balance of power, what would be the result ? belie v( aimen( blind lepeat l^oma' •Us a ininor ibreseu ing U %ave iihunn A Hypocritical Opposition. It. is true that the Oppositionists in convention assem- bled have declared against sepanite schools, but did not all the Opposition members, eleven in number, oppose the third reading of the bill on the 19th March, 1890 ? Is it to be imagined that they would hesitate, if it were possible to attain office by selling national schools for the support ot the French Roman Catholic members ? • Does anyoux^ I. 85 west Revieu\ )man Catho- tement that d editorially iiguage witii >ut of every ? The Dol- him to be ig of. It is our present d Magdalen ned a more he statistics osite is the the false- unscrupu- VQ what Mr. the Roman ght will be :<)ne before. (Support the I the hatred if the exist- II English 9 from the hold the ion assem- it did not appose the > ? Is it to iiossible to lupport of 58 any on V' Relieve that their declaration in favor of a constitutional ||mendment is intended for any other purpose_^than a mere iilind ? Let it be remembered that the -Free Press has ippeatedly within the last three years declared in favor of 'p,oman Catholic separate schools as right in principle and lis a just concession to the conscientious scruples of the linority. No course has proved too dishonorable for the present recognized leaders of the Opposition, and by resort- ing to the political gutter for some recent alliances they J%ave made themselves even more to be watched and ihunned. But besides traitors at home, there are other angers which have yet to be encountered. Quebec has btill to be reckoned with, and when Quebec speaks, Ottawa lis not without ears. The TSritish North America Act, Bection 93, sub-section (3), provides that : — , " When in any Province a system of separate or dis- ^Bcntient schools exists by law at the union, or is thereafter )stab)ishcd by the Legislature of the Province, an appeal shall lie to the Governor-General in Council from any act ^or decision of any provincial authority affecting any right or privilege of the Protestant or Ronum Catholic minority jof the Queen's subjects in relation to education." The ';8ame i)rovi8ion is reproduced with modifications, as sub- ■ Bection (2) of soction 22 of the Manitoba Act as follows : ;'*'An appeal shall lie to the Governor-General in Council 'from an Act or decision of the Legislature of the Province, , or of any Prcnincial authority affecting any right or privi- lege of the Protestant or Roman C'atholic minority of the Queen's subjects in relation to education." A third sub- section, like sub-section (4) of the 93r(l section of the British North Aniericji Act, provides for the enactment by the Parliament of Canada, so far as may be necessary, of laws requisite to the carrying out of the decision on such appeal. Even if the Judicial Committee should decide that the Public School Act does not affect any right or privilege with respect to separate schools possessed by the Roman Catliolic^s ])rior to the union, what is to prevent the Dominion Qovernnieiit holding on an appeal that they have a right to their denominational schools as established since the union ? What is to prevent Parliament from attempting 86 to pass laws to force such a system on this Province under its powers to pass remedial legislation ? It is apparent to anyone who gives close attention to these appeal clauses that if the Privy Council holds that no rights have heen aifected by the school act, then the Dominion Government has neither the moral right nor the legal power to interfere. But are the men who are the present opposition candidates likely to resist the encroachments of the Dominion Govern- ment upon this part of the domain of provincial rights ? The pr sent local Government can, of course, be relied upon to do so, and this is one of the reasons why they should be sent back to office with an overwhelming vote. To return the Provincial Government by a decreased majority would be to invite this very interference which we have every reason to avoid. But if it comes it must be strenuously resisted by every means known to the constitution, fouebec is on the alert and will spare neither eftbrt nor expense to destroy opposition to the favorite project of her priesthood. When Quebec is vigilant and determined, Manitoba must not be weak. The fight which has been entered upon must be fought with a united front and unfaltering resolution to the end. The school (question is still t\e supreme issue before the electors of the Province, and upon it the Government is entitled to the support of every lover of freedom, every opponent of priestly interfer- ence in the management of Provincial affairs. Is Manitoba to be controlled from *he Vatican, or by her own people ? Every vote cast agains-, the present Government is on the side of Po]jicry and the reactionary scheming of a foreign priesthood. J 37 # APPENDIX A. Sample Separate School Education. •*' To demonstrate the utter useloBsneBS of the teaching given in the Roman Catholic separate schools in this Prov- ince under the old system, the following translation of an examination paper set for first-class Roman Catholic teachers in 1885 is appended : — Catholic Section of the Board of Education -Exaaii na- tion OF Teachers. First-Class Certijicate. ' Examiners f Rev. J. Mossier, Priest. ( M. J. I'rendergast, Barrister. Catechism — 1. What is the Church ? Where is tlie trne Church ? Oujrht one to helieve what the Catholic Church teaches UB ? And why ? 2. What is the Eucharist? What is it necessary to do to receive with hcnefit this u;reat Haoranicnt ? 3. What is sanctifying grace ? How is it lost ? 4. Name and define the theological virtues. Comportment — 1. How is a letter addressed, when written, to a prelate, to a priest, to a profcHsional num ? How are such letters concluded ? 2. In conversation, what titles do you em[)loy in speaking to these same persons? History — 1. Doscriho the defeat of the Anuu-ican armies near Chateauguay ? 38 2. Who was Saint Thomas Bockot? What difficulty had he with Henry II ? How did he die ? What was the fate of Marie Stuart ? Write a short note on tlio treaty of Paris. Who was tlieii Governor of (Canada? GEOaRAPIIY — What is the capital of England ? Name its principal cities. Where is Kgypt situated ? What is the ohject of geology? What is terrain d' alhivion, terrain de sedi- ment ? Pedagogy — Demonstrate tljc importance of develo[)ing judgment :;.^iong children. How can that faculty be excrriscd ? Tlie original of the above paper a d of several otliers ovcn more absurd will be found in the •■' Memoire " prc- j>:trod by the Caholic ection of the lioai'd of Education aiul sent to the Colonial Exhibition at London, in 1880. 39 API'ENDTX li. The Religious Exercisks in the I'miLic Scuoolh. To refute the statement Hoiiietimes made, that the national 8(!ljools of thin Provinoe are " godlesn," it ia onl}' neeessary to call attention to the regulations of the Advisory Board regardinrms of pniyer. SCIIFPTIRK RKAniN(JS. r.\RT 1. -HlSTOKICAI,. 1. The Cmition (ieii. i, 2. Tlu> Creation— contiinu'll (leii. i, S. The Kail of Man (leu. iii. 4. The DeluKe (len. viii, 5. The Covenant with Noah T.en. ix, «. The Trial of Ahrahani (ien. xxii, 7. Isaac HhMseH Jncol) (ien. xxvii, H. Ivsati's nieftsitiK (len. xxvii, 1». Jaeob's Vision Gen. xxviii. 10. Jacob's Hetnrn to Hethel Gen. xxxv, 11. Joseph and his lliethreii Gtm. xxxvii, 12. Joseph Sold into l':gypt Gen. xxxvii, 1- 10 •20- -:il I- 22 1- 17 1 -IH 1- 2<) ;u)- •V) 10- 22 1 15 1- 22 28- -30 40 13. Pharaoh's Dreams Geu. xli, 1 14. Joseph's Interpretatious Gen. xli, 25 15. Jacob's vSons' Visit Gen xlii, 1 IT). Jacob's Sons' Return from Rgypt Gen. xlii, 21 17. The vSecond Visit to ICgypt Gen. xliii, 1 18. Jo.seph and his Brethren Gen. xliii, 15 19. Joseph and his Brethren — continued Gen. xliv, 1 20. Jo.seph and his Brethren — continued Gen. xliv, 14 21. Joseph Discovers Himself to his Brethren Gen. xlv, 22. Jacob and his Household j^o into Hgypt Gen. xlvi, 1 — (>, 28 23. Jacob's interview with Pharaoh Gen. xlvii, 1 24. Death of Jacob (ien. xlviii, 1 25. Burial of Jacob (ien. 1, 1 26. Moses at the Burning Bush Kxod. iii, 1 27. Grievous Oppression of the Hebrews Rxod. v, 28. The Passover Ivxod. xii, 1 2{». The Israelites l^scape Through the Red Sea Kxod. xiv, 10 .'{0. The .Song of Deliverance Kxod. xv, I ii\. Giving of Manna Kxod. xvi, 2- 32. The Water from the Rock I<:xod. xvii, 33. The Ten Connnandments Kxod. xx, 1 34. The Covenant with Israel Ivxod. xxiv, ;«. The Tabernacle Kxod. xl, 17- 30. .Spies sent into Canaan Num. xiii, 17- 37. The Peojile Rebel at the Report of the .Spies Num. xiv, 38. The Song of Moses Dent, xxxii, 30. The 1 )eath of Moses Dent, xxxiv, 40. Joshua Succeeds Moses Josh, i, 41. The Covenant will Joshua Josh, xxiv, 42. The Call of Samuel 1 vSaml. iii, 43. The Israelites Desire a Kitig Saml. viii, 44. .Samuel Anoints .Saul Saml. ix, 21—27, xi, 45. Samuel .Anoints Davitl Saml. xvi, 10. I )a vid and ( '.oliath Saml. xvii, 47. David Overcomes Goliath ' Saml. xvii, 28 48. David and Jonathan Saml. xviii, 40, David Instnuted as to the building of the Temple. . I Chrt>n. xvii, -24 -43 -20 -38 -14 -34 -13 -34 -34 -12 -21 -20 -20 -20 -31 -22 -;i5 -17 -30 -33 -30 14 17 -28 -20 -11 -27 -54 1(1 17 41 28- 34 1- -12 1- -21 1- -20 1- -20 1- -20 10- -31 1- -22 *> ** -35 1 17 17- 30 17- -33 1 — -30 14 17 28 1 ^ 20 11 27 28 54 -Itl 1 50. 1 51. 1 52. 1 53. 1 54. 55. I m. , 57. 58. 50. 00. ' (>1. ($2. , (43. (i4. ,■ (15. ' ()0. \ 67. 1 (W. 1 «». 1 70. m 71. David's Advice to Solomon I Chron. xxviii, 1 — 20 David's Preparation for Building the Temple. .1 Chrou. xxix, 1 — 10 Solomon's Wise Choice I Kings iii, 1 — 15 Preparations for Ruilding the Temple I Kings v, Solomon's Prayer at the Dedication of the Temple. . II Chron. v: Solomon's Prayer — continued II Chron. vi, PHijah I Kings xvii, I^lijah and the Prophets of Haal I Kings xviii, Discomfiture of the Prophets of Haul I Kings xviii, PHijah in the Wilderness 1 King xix, Klijah and Elisha II Kings ii, Naaman the I 1- -13 1 15 1- -li) ()- -24 20- -36 1 10 20- 36 5-21 1 -IK 10-30 1 17 1. Christ the Word . John I, 2. The Hirth o( Christ .Announced Kuke ii, 3. The Visit. of the Magi Matth. ii, 4. The Song of Simeon I.uke ii, 5. Jesus in the Temple " I,uke ii, 6. The Ha])tism of Jesus Christ Mnlth. iii, 7. The Tenjptation of ( )ur I,ord I.uko i", 8. Testimony of John the IJaptist John i, 0. The l-'irst Disciples John i, 10. JesuH at Na/.areth Kuke iv, 11. At CuiJtinaum INlatlh. iv, 1-18 8-20 1-12 2.'i-4() 41—52 1 17 1 -15 10-34 35-51 m-32 13-25 42 12. vSermou on the Mount Matth. v, 1—12 13. Sermon on the Mount — continued Matth. v, 13 — 20, 33 — 37 14. Sermon on the Mount — continued Matth. v, 38—48 15. Sermon on the Mount — continued Matth. vi, 1 — 18 ll). Sermon on the Mouiit — continued Matth. vi, 19 — 34 17. Sermon on the Mount — continued Matth. vii, 1 — 14 18. Sermon on the Mount — continued Matth. vii, 15 — 21) 19. The Miraculous Draught of Irishes Luke v, 1 — 15 20. The Healing of the Paralytic Luke v, KJ— 2(5 21. The Twelve Apostles .«jnt forth ' .tth. ix, 3(i— 38, x, 1—11 22. The Centurion's .Servant — The Widow's : i Luke vii, 1 — 17 2;^. The Declaration Concerning John Matth. xi, 2 — 19 24. The Feast in .Simeon's House Luke vii, 3(1 — 50 25. Privileges and Responsibility Matth. ix, 20—31 2H. The Sabbath Luke vi, 1—11 27. Parable of the Sower Mark iv, 1 —20 28. Parable of the Tares, etc Matth. xiii, 24—35 29. Parable of the Tares Ivxplained, with other Parables. . Matth. xiii, 30—62 30. Children brought to Tcsus — Conditions of Discipleshij). . Mark x, l.'{— 30 31. Tribute to Ciesar -The Widow's Offering Matth. xxii, 15-22, Mark xii, 41-44 32. Christ Confessed Matth. xvi, 13—28 33. Christ I'eeding l-ive Thousand Mark vi, 30—41 34. Christ Walking on the Sea Matth. xiv, 22— ;W 35. The Transfiguration Matth. xvii, 1 — 18 30. The (ireat Supper Luke xiv, 7-24 37. The Lost Sheep and Lost Piece of Silver Luke xv, 1—10 38. The Two .Sons Luke xv, 1 1-32 39. The Pharisee and the Publican Luke xviii, l>— 17 40. Hliiul Hartimeu.s-Zaccheus the Publican Luke xviii, 35 — 43 xix, I 10 41. The (iood Sauiaritan Luke x, 25-37 42. The (iood .Shepherd John x, 1-18 43. Christ One with the I'ather John x, 22 42 44. Ihimility John xiii, L -17 46. The Death of La/urus John xi, 30 -48 46. Th 47. Pai 48. Par 49. The 60. Cht 61. The 52. Chr 53. Last 64. The 55. The 56. The 57. The 58. Chri! 59. Chri! 60. The ' 61. The( 62. 'i'hc 1 63. The J 64. Jesus <»5. Jesus 66. The I Most for Thy fa greas whic Thee to it received, \ eternal we amiss in o still guide relaxation, ni<»rrow wi we besee our humble and hearty thanks for Thy fatherly care and preservation of us this day, and for the pro- gress which Thou hast enabled us to nuike in useful learning ; we pray Thee to imprint upon our minds whatever gootl instructions we have received, and to bless them to the advancement of our temporal and eternal welfare; and panlon, we imjjlore Thee, all that Thou 'last seen amiss in ouv thoughts, words, and actions. Mav Thy good I'u'vidence 8till guide and keep us