Hide Article Text (OCR)
EDMONTON BULLETIN, (Sumi-Wesk!¥.) Printed Monday and hureday evenings. Subscription §24 year, in advance. Transient advertisements: Five lines and under, three insertions and under §1, or 10 cents a line 1st asertion and 5 cents a fine each week or part of week stor, . Standing advertisement—50 decline for 3 months, FRANK OLIVER, — PROPRIETOR, OMONTON BULLETIN, DECEMBER 4tp, 1896 THE SCHOOL SETTLEMENT. The terms of settlement of the Mani toba school question have been an nounced at last, and the expected has happened; that is to say the same parties who hoped at last elections to retain the hold of themselves and friends in political power by fanning the flames of Protestant and Roman Catholic bigotry, respectively, have started again at the same game. On the front page of a recent issue of the Winnipes Nor-Western--the joint organ of Archbishop Langevin and the Tupper remnant of the conservative party—there appeared at the top of the left hand column under flaring head lines on account of the burning of Laurier and Sifton in effigy at some point in Manitoba by Protestant object ors to the settlement, and at the top of the right hand column under equally flaring headlines the objections and threats of the Archbishop were present el. It might be possible that an at tempted settlement would be equally objectionable to both Protestants and Catholics—as the so-called remedial bill was for good and sufficient reasons. But in that case the attempt was made to give each of two diametrically opposing interests all that they demand ed, with the only possible result—that is no result at all. The present case is different. No attempt is made to pander to either party, or to give either all that they choose to demand. ‘The effort has been to find common ground upon which both could meet and by reasonable mutual concessions arrive at a working and workable basis, so that if anyone wants to keep up the fight longer on either side, at least the educational interests of the children affected will not be neglected in the meantime. ‘That the elements of justice and fairness are contained in the terms of the settlement which appeared in last issue, aside from pre judice or bigotry, must be evident to every one. But it is not on these grounds that people are chiefly asked to accept them. It is because they offer a means,whereby the children who have been’ debarred from the benefits of a common school education during the past six years by the claims of conscience on the one hand and financial inability on the other, shall be placed in, a position to receive an education on the usual basis of state aid without any possible violation to conscience. To gain this point is sure ly worth some concessions on the part even of the most extreme religious politicians. When the new world famous Mani toba school law was first proposed there were no provisions for religious instruction contained. The Protestant clergy of the province raised the strong est objection to this lack, with such effect that provisions for religious in struction satisfactory to them were in serted. It might be possible theoreti cally to provide some system of re ligious instruction that would be equal ly satisfactory to the Protestant and Roman Catholic clergy, but practically that has hitherto been found to be im possible. It was not strange then that the very triumph of the Protestant clergy that should be the chief cause of offence to the Catholic clergy—and no reasonable man can say, without full justification. This was the specially unjust feature of the school act which cannot be defended on reasonable grounds. If Protestant children should have Protestant teaching—and on the authority of the Protestant clergy, they should—no true Protestant believing in civil and religious liberty and equal ity, which is the foundation principle of Protestantism, could deny the right of Roman Catholic children to Roman Catholic teaching. While the Roman Catholic clergy had many objections, more or less well grounded, to the new act, this objection was the one upon which the strength of their appeal rested. Whatever injustice was done in this particular under the act has been removed by the settlement, and the right of the children of Roman Catholics to the teaching of their own faith, as distinct from Protestantism, is fully recognized ; while the right of imparting Protestant religious teaching to Protestant children is more firmly established than before. There are people who consider that religious teaching of any kind is out of place under the circumstances surrounding the public school, but they are not the parties who have been making the Manitoba school question a political issue for the past six years and their views have not been considered in the settlement. Another feature of the school act objectionable to that part of the Roman Catholic minority of French origin, was that no language, but English was allowed in the schools. In practice it has been found to be in the interests of education in the German settlements of Manitoba to allow a portion of the teaching to be carried on in the language with which the pupils are familiar. This concession is now extended by the terms of the settlement to the school; in French districts—a concession that was not provided for either in the re medial bill or in the terms proposed by the commissioners sent by the late government to negotiate a settlement. There are people, no doubt, who will object to this provision as pandering to “French domination.” But it is strange indeed if a concession freely accorded as an educational necessity to foreigners settled amongst us may not be accorded as freely to a smaller number of our own countrymen. That an attack is to be made upon the school settlement all along the line is amply evident. The attempt is to be made to wreck the Manitoba and Dominion governments for having com mitted the atrocious crime of removing, or at least attempting to remove, from the arena of active politics by reason able and conciliatory means a question which but lately threatened the rupture of confederation. Apparently the chief attack will come from Archbishop Langevin and other dignitaries of the Roman Catholic church in Manitoba and Quebec, who will make the attempt to detach from the Hon. Mr. Laurier his French-Canadian support, on the ground that inasmuch as he has not restored the condition of affairs existing before the school act of 1890 was passed, and therefore has not given full effect to that decision of the Imperial privy council, he has not done justice to his and their compatriots in Manitoba and is therefore a traitor to his race and faith. Regarding the above it may be as well to state that the decision of the Imperial privy council did not express ly or by implication, directly or in directly, require the restoration of the school system of Manitoba as it was before the Act of 1890 was passed. On the contrary the decision expressly states that such restoration is not re quired. But let that pass. Admit for the sake of argument that the privy council has declared that the school system of Manitoba should be placed where it was previous to 1890, as the Archbishop now demands. He has not always made this demand. During the last session of parliament when the abortive remedial bill was introduced, although its effectiveness fell far short of the provisions of the law previous to 1890, inasmuch as it did not provide for state aid to Roman Catholic schools, he specifically declared himself satisfied with its terms—with terms which were not in accordance with the decision of the privy council , which placed Roman Catholic schools in a position of per manent inferiorly to Protestant schools as regards means of maintenance. And yet he declares that he will not accept a proposition which most distinctly places distinctively Roman Catholic schools on a perfect equality with Pro testant schools as to means of main tenance and otherwise. Can it be that His Grace considers the side of politics from which the proposition comes as more important than the proposition itself; or is it that he does not con sider it important that Roman Catholic schools should have equal means of support and give an equal education with Protestant schools ? But when it became apparent that the remedial bill would not pass, an other proposition of settlement was made, the full text of which appears elsewhere jin this issue. It emanated from the late government, and although the Archbishop did not publicly declare his satisfaction with its terms he cer tainly did not dissent from them, and remained in close touch with his political friends during the negotiations. These terms if accepted were to be final as far as the remedial bill and the judgment of the privy council were concerned. They provided that in towns and villages having 25 Roman Catholic children of school age a Roman Catholic teacher could be demanded. In cities the number was 50. No provision was made outside cities, towns and villages for Roman Catholic teachers. The terms of the settlement provide that “in villages and rural districts an average attendance of twenty five Rom an Catholic children may demand a Roman Catholic teacher and in towns and cities an average of forty. The Archbishop would have accepted a requirement of 50, but rejects a re quirement of only 40. He accepted terms which applied only to cities, towns and villages and rejects terms which cover rural districts as well. The terms offered by the late govern ment made no provision for religious teaching ; the terms of the new gov ernment make full provision. He would accept the former, but rejects the latter. The old terms did not recognize the (ungual) necessities of French dis tricts, the new terms do. Again he would accept the old, but spurns the new. The old terms provided for a less efficient system of Roman Catholic than of Protestant schools by demand ing the employment of unqualified teachers. The new terms require equal qualifications from all teachers. This again is objectionable it appears. The old terms asked for Catholic re presentation on the governing bodies ; and the Manitoba government replied that not only had such representation not been refused, but reasonable efforts had been made to secure such repre sentation. Looked at from a strictly Roman Catholic standpoint there can be no question that the terms of the recent settlement are more favorable to Roman Catholic interests than either the remedial bill or the proposition made by the late government ; and the same time conform more closely to the re quirements of the existing system which the majority in Manitoba united ly support. They are an attempt to heal an open and angry sore on the body politic. There is every prospect that unless most active opposing measures are taken the effort will be successful. Those who deliberately set themselves to prevent the healing are in danger of being looked upon as enemies of the state.
Newspaper Details
Edmonton Bulletin
Edmonton, Alberta, CA
Thu, Dec 03, 1896
Page 2
Full Page
Clipped by
Cherish M.
USA 27 Jun 2026
Other Publications Near Edmonton, Alberta
Edmonton Daily Bulletin
Edmonton Bulletin
