We cannot say that we find any satisfaction in looking
back on the controversy concerning the religious education given in London Board-schools. The combatants on both sides have been violent and unfair, though the Progressives seem to us to have shown the worse temper of the two. The nicknames of " Diggleisra " and " Diggleites," which have been given to the policy and spokesmen of the majority, are very unmeaning and vulgar, and depend for any poor effective- ness they may have, on the accident of a not altogether dignified name, while the attacks on Mr. Riley's personal theology have been grossly unfair, seeing that Mr. Riley has never attempted or even hinted a wish to import his own private religious views into the religious education of the London schools. Worse still, the poor and repulsive religious caricatures which have appeared from day to day have been as utterly without humour as they have been malicious. On the other hand, there has been a great deal too much heat in the defence of the Circular, and a question which was really one for the parents of the school children, has been made one for angry personal recriminations. If everybody had spoken and written in Dr. Martineau's tone, how different the controversy would have been I There was no reason why it should not have been so. The question is a purely practical one as to what amount and kind of religious teaching would best meet the wishes of average parents and the wants of average children. That is a question which it did not need all this poor wit and poor invective to determine. It seems to us one which might well have been submitted frankly to the School Board constituencies with a declaration of hearty willingness on both sides to abide by their arbitra- ment.
