New-York tribune., 1906-08-20
OPENED PANDORA'S ROY
With Legislation and Politics r..
ducsd to Comic Opera.
LonAo7 arz,.

LonGoa. Aug,s,u
Pan1ora's box Is opened IN the courts q.
where IN well regulated country IKE E,oz,s-, 80
IL was so when the Cockerson, Sharpe 80
Tan Vale decisions were rendered and also 80 s
the properties OF the United Frss Chur.s -
handed over 70 remnant OF scattered HE'S
congregations; and confusion is even vors. - ~a~
founded BY the judgment Of the Cour. !. a. -
peal on the Education act os 1902. r., a. a.
four government IN framing that act u1-1,.,N~
ably intended 20 put denomlnational sasoe1' $3.50
the rates. dogmatic religious instru.fl,, =
eluded, and both political parties ana ~. g
tenders and opponents OF this highly co,ssr.,-'
BIT OF legislation supposed that Il had baa, -.
The Passive Resisters. headed BIZ Dr.. Cr,-a-'
organized a campaign against the az. -
throughout England and Wales there ws-.
eeedings fOr distraint or Imprisonment a,,,.s
thousands who refused % pay taxes - :
Mgious instruction; ana when the IIoeraa =.
ernment came tn &C accepted as It's frss o,-,
obligation os redressing NOnconforrnFst -
ances and providing that Ge1omtnasIorag s.,.s
ing should not be paid ror out os publyo 49,.
When the new Education BIN has been Er,o.,--
until October IN the House os Lords IN. c..
OF Appeal has discovered that the Tr,sor-.
government Gid not carry OUT its O5y.5u, sr..-
tlons fn ths act OF 1902 that the Noneo,.,--~
lists Gld not have any real grievances; ina. A.
distraint processes against Passive Ps,s,.,-'
were Illegal; that Mr.. BirreIl's Education -
was unnecessary, and that everybody Ia. 80
wrong on essential issues OF raG. ex,su, 81.
County Council or the West Riding o, Yo-x
shire That clear headed body OF local -or.,
clans held that 80 was not under Oblfga.,o7 !,
pay for Genominational instruction n r.oa.oro.
vrled schools; and while the Divisional. cau-,
decided in the first Instance that g was w>,,
and that all the other educational autno--,s,
were right. the Master Of the Rolls ans Los
Justice Farwell. two eminent 1urists. have f.r
sustained IT'S action Lord Justice Moulion d..
sentins. While the Judgment OF the Cou-: :.
Appeal IS not final and may b reversed b. u.
Law Lords. IL leaves everybody. from th. A-cs.
bishop OF Canterbury. the Prime Minister a-s
the leader OF the Opposition. down 20 NJ. BIZ.
ren and Dr. Clifford. In a thick haze O. unc.r.
talnty and bewilderment-
What seems at the first glance a complex rat.
ter is IN reality simple detail OF construction
The Court Of Appeal does not concern Itself Win
the intentions OF the UniOnist government wh.c5
enacted the Education bill OF 1902 Il takes Ia
text of the measure and. comparing Il with ira
law as It stood. decides that local education az.
thOrities cannot be compelled under the act 70
pay for religious teaching IN uon-prov.ss.
schools. although they may havs per1llsslss
right 20 do SO. The pivot on which ths decision
turns Is the phrasing IN Section Z: "Ths l0ca.
education authority shall maintain and kss,
efficient ell public elementary schools viia1z
their area which are necessary" Ths On.
learned justices agree with tho YoEkshire Cogn-
eli that these words do not Involve bligat.on 70
provide religious instruction but rasss.y raesz
that the schools taken over shall BE- kss: up d
such a standard as viii entitle them % ca.n
the Parliamentary grant That "a % say what
ever Mr.. Balfour may have mean. 60 DO when
ne brought ln the Education biu, uelthsr hs nT
his legal advisers knew how % Go e, ard con
seQuently Il was not done; and whatever s.
Henry Campbell-Bannerman and Gir. B.E-a
may have thought was the situation. & was n.
so. and there was no necessity for tsvotins
legislative year 70 reforms which were eatirsl
superfiuOus The Court OF Appeal being Or
witness, there has been much ado about NOTHING
during the last four years all around and tE1
parllansnts have been wasting their tirzs az.
energy, one IN prohibiting payment Sor rsl.gios
teaching from the rates. when &t was seeking q
authorize e and TO make it compulsory s1d u
other In redressins imaginary grievances a-'a 9
reforming a system that has not required amend
nent Two ministries and all political factions
educational authorities and religious gEo-os \
convicted OF fOOlishness and the only Tiss m'l
sn the kingdom are the shrswd YorkshiEs coll
eIllors. who have known more about ths law "a
the Crown lawyers.
This unexpected decision creates seE.es Z
amusing anomalies. The local authorities =
placed IN the sorry plight OF making Illegal ga
ments for religious instruction. and tns aet'''
OF the local government can hold them =
cOuntable Tor such charges. The many l'
sands OF victims OF distraint and impTtsolE1s'
who have been punished fOr refusing 70 p
'catechism taxes are supplied BY the eo-
OF Appeal with adequate grounds OK ssI1an Z
damages S0r every seizure OF property ane sFa
personal indiguity. Tho liberal goveEna's'
which has been striving laDOTiOusly 70 thSz'
Mr.. Balfour's supposed Intentions tn one Egg
latlv- measure by reversing them In another az
can now fall back upon this decision y II
Lords defy the Commons. for ft establishes Il
principle that religious teaching cannot % p
yor without absolute public control 1hs .
Prime Minister who used 90 be considered
most too subtle in his methods and dial4ea.1
for ordinary minds. IS now 1udicially cEoNae1
with honor as the tnvincibis champion o.
progressive principle OF local control over g
chisms and dOgmas. The present Prime Mn
ter, who has insisted upon having as little ta'a
ference as possible from the upper hOuss u ]
forming the old law. viii now be pieaS1o
the Law Lords interpret Mr.. BalfouEs act u :.
cOrdanCe with obvious intentions and reverse i
decision OF the Court Of Appeal II Is Al.
funny as rag OF many cOlOrs-
There IS tOpsy-turvydOm all around.
neither educational authorities nor experieAS
politicians nor religious zeaIots know vhs-
they stand or what viii come next. Apparen'
the decision, which makes ducks and cEea
Of both political parties and Unsettles the V1
course OF local administration under che eN
ing Education act. viii have to 50 before
Law Lords for review: but IN the mean q ]
what Is 20 be done with the new act, which \