I.—l Mb.

72

[J. CAUGHLEY.

42. Are you aware thai all of those ecclesiastical assemblies are constituted of at least an equal number of laymen to the ministers of religion, and in many cases double the number of laymen I— 1 also know thai in the majority of eases the laymen are outvoted by the clergy and many propositions are turned down in that way. t-i. Are you aware that nil those Church courts are constituted of an equal number of the laity with the ministers, and in some instances a greater number of laity would say the laity are represented, hut I would not say they are of equal number. I have known cases where ihey are not. In the Presbyterian A-ssembh which met here last November there was not an equal number of laymen. 44. That is not my point I —Yon said " the ecclesiastical court." 45. As the court is constituted it is the fault of those laymen if they are not present? Is it not a lad that the courts are constituted of an equal number of laity?—l do not know even if that is so. I would not agree that that is even so. 46. In your statement you use the phrase " Victoria and New South Wales furnish an admirable basis for comparison, since, in almost every respect, their conditions are remarkably alike." Would you regard as one of the respects in which they are remarkably alike the fact that rhe territory of Xt'w South Wales is nearly four times greater than Victoria?— Yes, I will explain my point with regard to that. The eastern division of New South Wales extends up to. I think, the 149 th meridian, ami the statistics of New South Wales show that in the western division there are only eighteen thousand people living, with the exception of the four large towns of Bourke. Cobar, Deniliquin, and Broken Hill. I know also that between 78 and 80 per cent, of the people live in populations of live hundred and over. The point I wish to show is that for all practical purposes the population of New South Wales is confined almost entirely to the one division, where the population is very dense. 47. You also made this statement : " New South Wales has over .">() pel' cent, more illegitimate births to each 1.(1(1(1 unmarried women." Do you take the figures of illegitimacy as a proof of morality or otherwise?— The editor of the Methodist Times rained that as a proof of morality of New South Wales, and I refuted it. 48. You do not take the figures, then, of the number of actual illegitimate births as a proof of morality or immorality?—l certainly think they are one of the evidences. They are quite unmistakable, and quite good evidence of the morality of any country. 49. If that is so. how do you. in using your figures, bring in the use of preventatives and other things which would reduce the illegitimate birth-rate? — l take it for granted that, where the birth rate as shown by the statistics is so great as it is in New South Wales, they know just as much about preventatives with that class of people in the country as in a country where the birth-rate is low. 50. Is it not possible that a high rate of illegitimacy may actually be a proof of a higher morality than a low rate of illegitimacy? — No. I would not admit that. 51. Well, supposing then that in a country there was such a knowledge of preventatives that the illegitimate rate was kept down in consequence, would you say that proved that there was a higher state of morality?—lf you prove that the Victorian people show such a great knowledge of preventatives that they reduce the illegitimate birth-rate, then T will admit the force of \ our contention. 52. You make a good ileal of use of criminal statistics. Why is it, when you quote Victoria and New South Wales, you leave out altogether any reference to Tasmania. Because the Government Statisticians of New South Wales, and also Victoria, lay it down as a principle of statistics that in comparing you must take countries with equal conditions. Now. the conditions in Tasmania are so vastly different froni_ those of Victoria and New South Wales that a comparison would no' hold. Tasmania is a scattered small district—the whole population could almost be put into Sydney —and if you look in the Year-book, the condition which Canon Garland himself quoted in another respect supports me in this respect — i.e., that you must not-make a comparison where the conditions are not similar. The conditions of life in Tasmania are such that a comparison with Victoria and Australia would not hold. 53. You have shown practically that figures cannot be taken purely by themselves?— No. T did not say that. What T say is that figures can lie taken by themselves if they are based on proper conditions, and 1 base them on proper conditions for New South Wales and Victoria; but they could not be based on proper conditions for Tasmania. They do not hold with Tasmania, but they hold with Victoria ami New South Wales. 54. You are expressing an opinion, not facts?—lt is quite open to you to controvert it. 55. Tn regard to convictions for drunkenness, the Commonwealth Year-book for 1911 gives the percentage in New South Wales as 167 per 10.000. Victoria 56 per 10.000, and Tasmania at 38?— That ie quite possible. 56. You accept that?— Yes. 57. Tn your statement you refer to a pamphlet and you say. " Then follows a sentence which the Bible in Schools League omits from its pamphlet when quoting the Inspector." Would you show me in tin- pamphlet where we are quoting the Inspector?— The pamphlet says, "The following extracts from the report of one of our most experienced Inspectors may be taken as representing the true value of the lessons." 58. If you look at the heading of that statement yon will see it says " From the Undersecretary " I— Yes. 59. And it is signed by him? —Yes. 60. You do not question our honesty in producing that as we received it? —You mean every word of it is given as produced to you by the statistician. Is there no error? 61. There may be printers' errors?— Would you call the omission of two important words printers' errors? I have a copy of the original that Mr. Board issued, and the word "general."