[To TER EDITOR OP rue "SPECTATOR. " ] Sin,—As one who reads
the Spectator almost from beginning to end every week, and greatly admires its ability and fairness, may I venture to put before you the case of at least one section of the Nonconformists to whom Mr. Birrell made special reference in the House of Commons P No doubt something of the same is true in relation to other Churches, but I prefer to limit my references to my own Church, with which naturally
I have more intimate acquaintance.
The Primitive Methodists, as Mr. Birrell pointed out, have chapels in four thousand villages, and out of these there are three thousand one hundred and fifty villages in which the only schoo) available is a Church of England school. In many of these villages Primitive Methodist children form a large proportion, and in some cases the vast majority, of the scholars attending the school. In many instances, of which we have accurate informa- tion, these children have been subjected to persecution, and informed that their fathers' Church is no Church and to enter it is sin. I have myself known cases where young people had to choose between forswearing the faith of their parents or having the teaching profession closed to them. In such cases as I refer to above the Conscience Clause is no protection; it means ostracism of the kind children find it hard to bear. And yet you say last week (p. 568) that you " were never able to see that the consciences of Nonconformists were really injured by the Act, or that it was essentially unjust." Is it no hurt to a man's conscience to be compelled to pay for having his child taught that his Church is no Church and his
• minister no minister? it is this state of things that would make it impossible for Nonconformists to acquiesce in the arrangement you suggest by which teachers in trans- ferred non-provided schools should be allowed to give de- nominational religious instruction. We know too well what it would mean. Moreover, the nation has pronounced decisively against sectarian teaching in all schools supported by public money. This question has been settled at the ballot-box. Long before Mr. Chamberlain launched his Fiscal policy the Liberals were winning by-election after by-election by large majorities, and this began immediately after the passing of the Education Act. That you, like Mr. Balfour, should fail to see the injustice of that Act fills me with astonishment. There have been more Primitive Methodists imprisoned over this Education Act than any other section of Nonconformists, and the explanation is largely furnished by the facts I have cited. 'I heartily sympathise with your strenuous effort to retain simple and unsectarian religious teaching in the schools, and believe your fear that if that position is not accepted we shall have to come to the logical position, the giving by the State of secular instruction only, is well founded. That is not the wish of the nation, nor is it the desire of the Nonconformist Churches, but if it should prove to be the only guarantee of Protestantism and religious freedom we shall be driven to accept it. I am temporarily resident in Scotland, but most of my ministry has been spent south of the Border, so that I am familiar with the facts. Nonconformists ask for no privileges for themselves apart from the claims of simple justice, and they voted at the late Election with the determination of securing that justice once for all.
—I am, Sir, &c., JOSEPH RITSON.
Motherwell, N.B.
Previous page
