The Press. — London, England, 1856-04-12 00:00:00

EDUCATION. tons having, on Thursday, littee upon education, )bserving that Mr. Cobden was affliction from attendance in it is expedient to extend, minutes of the Committee i.ucation." an amendment, that the leave the chair. Dealing iheme proposed by Lord John iticised at much length the ived, and the machinery by were to be worked out. The auld, be con division of the ,e parochial the existing would im iuestion already to the levy found much the mode in and secular ions before compulsion loyers to pay . >ir employ id result in of juvenile ldren from neither at contended, of private the estab , aided by anticipated could be oh conclusion, J. Russell iucation, he question— passing the first al rate, as promoting a le he could be imprac- extension means of carry desired. He 'he scheme charities, proposal would extension and . entertain pleasure the them Mr. the others proceeded to speech. After this ques preceding tperinducing 'iad come to ived for the attitude and The volun. educate the ,lisconcerted timidity of the applying a The volun -1 was doing iorant and moment. What ntary system same time, in the same no conceiv- The object benefits of the co-opera not strong t contained either the noble Lpporter of a atruggle system. They were supplement the deficiencies of that quicker in its operation and more it could be standing unaided us first see what VMS the action of the existing system, - perfection, correct, it. Allu 'arren recommended Lord the proposal on the sub charities ; and, in conclu appealed to the house that THE PRESS. something should be done; that the State should remember it had duties which were based upon reli gion, and when it saw that no education existed, or would exist, unless it interfered, it was not only its right, but its bounden duty to interfere. Mr. EWART gave his most hearty and sincere sup• port to the resolutions. Lord R. CECIL replied to Mr. Adderley's argument in favour a local rating, which he insisted would extinguish voluntary aid. It was unjust, he said, to charge upon one part of the community, as tl.e reso lutions proposed, a burden which ought to fall upon the whole. A compulsory local rate, in connection with the provisions for religious teaching, was not only unjust, but would be unmanageable. Mr. MONCKTON MILNEs examined the objections urged against the scheme, and observed that the fair and moderate character of the resolutions was ob scured in the criticisms passed upon them. They prescribed a tentative mode of proceeding, merely permitting ratepayers, under certain circumstances, to tax themselves for maintaining a school. The large proportion of the population unable to read or write was a great and palpable danger as well as grievance, there being no greater enemy than organised ignorance. Sir J. GRAHAM expressed his satisfaction that this could not possibly be regarded as a party question, and observed, in reply to Mr. Warren and Mr. Milnes, that it -..wits not moral suasion which these resolutions contemplated, but direct legal compel• sion, and that, so far from being tentative, the step was a most headlong one. In the first place, he objected to the form of the proceeding, which was exactly the reverse of a bill. It began with details and ended with the principle, some of the details involving the principle ; whereas in a bill the prin ciple was first affirmed and the details were adapted to it. Then, some of the resolutions were super fluous, not requiring legislation. Passing in review the resolutions, previous to considering them as a whole, the right hon. baronet commented upon each. He maintained that the scheme was unnecessary. Quoting the statistics contained in the pamphlets of Mr. Baines and Mr. Unwin, he asserted that no country had made so great progress in educational appliances within the last forty years as England had. He objected to the scheme as most expen sive; according to Mr. Unwin the annual expense would be 6,300,0001.—a sum equal to the poor rate and the county rate together. The plan, moreover, was inc )mplete, vexatious to the poor, and oppres sive to industry. It was constitutionally dangerous, inasmuch as the vast patronage invested in the Government might be turned to political pur poses : It is proposed (observed the right bon. baronet) that we should at once hand over to an inspector, aided by a sub inspector, the appointment of some 3.1,000 or 35,000 schoolmasters, and all the influence which such a patron age cannot fail to give. The patronage is enormous; but there is also another objection, there is a French word surveillance which I can hardly translate into English, but which implies an inspection of, a watching of, a pry ing into private affairs by Government servants—( Hear, hear)—and something very like that system will be created if the present resolutions are carried out, for it would be necessary to go into every farmhouse and make inquiries with respect to every boy under the age of fifteen. This is the admirable machinery proposed by the noble lord. (Hear, hear.) My right hon. friend the Secretary to the Treasury slumbers quietly below me—( loud laughter, which disturbed the slumbers of the right hon. gentle man )—but, if such a thing as a general election should take place, this machinery of the noble lord, this appoint. ment of inspectors, of sub inspectors, and of school- masters, all holding their places under the direct control of a governmental department, will give him more to do than flesh and blood can stand. ( Loud laughter.) If we allow the use, or it may be the abuse, of such machinery, he will not slumber then. (Renewed laughter.) That which is now proposed for the best of purposes may he prostituted to the worst, and we may, if we agree to these resolutions, in the endeavour to attain an end perfectly legitimate and proper, narrow or suspend the boasted liberty of the people of this country. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion, quoting an opinion of the late Sir Robert Peel, upon the report of the Massachusetts Board of Education, and the opinions of M. Guizot, M. Cousin, and M. Bunsen, that voluntary associa tion in education was the only safe and true principle, Sir James Graham observed that the resolutions were really neither religious nor secular, and hence lay the extreme danger of the proposition : Having established a rate, the majority of ratepayers would year by year be fluctuating. The majority of one year might be the members of the established Church ; the majority of the next year might be Wesleyans, and of the third, Roman Catholics ; and with each variation of the majority the schoolmaster would be changed and the religious teaching would be changed also. What would be the effect of this? If the education were secular only, the discord to which i am about to advert would not arise. The chance majority would fix the religious teaching, and the children of the minority must go to the school where a master is chosen precisely of a creed to which they are opposed. There will then be not only the chance of con fusion in the secular education from the peculiar opinions of the master, and the minority will not only have to con tribute their money for the sahn of that master and for 341 his secular teaching, but also for his religions teaching in a creed to which they most object. Surely this will give rise, on the ;art of the minority—a minority, it may be, turned only by one—to the most angry and bitter feelings, arising front a sense of injustice in respect to a most sensitive point—religious creed, and that sense of injustice will create a state of anger and discord—l hope not of tumult--which I scarcely venture to describe. Sir J. PAKINOTON said he joined issue with Sir J. Graham in the appeal to proofs, and proceeded to reply to his objections to the resolutions. To main tain the parochial boundaries was, Sir John said, simply impossible. He met the objection of Sir James, that the scheme was unnecessary, by assert ing that the right hon. baronet was positively wrong in his statistics; and to his opinion that the scheme would be oppressive to the poor he opposed his own opinion, that it would be directly the reverse. The epithet " unconstitutional," applied by Sir James to the scheme, was, be said, a common term of reproach employed to express a vague dislike. The sugges tion that a school rate would encounter the same opposition as a church rate wag a mere opinion, and incapable of proof; the two rates were essentially distinct. Sir James Graham bad asserted that th• voluntary system was sufficient; that England was educated; he (Sir John) affirmed the contrary:— On that subject the right hon. gentleman quoted st atis tics, showing that in 18.51 the rate of education was higher than in any former period ; but the right hon. gentleman did not state that the progress from 1833 to 1851 was less in proportion to the population than from 1818 to 1833; neither did be advert to the centesimal proportion of the attendance at the schools, which would have shown that the attendance was not so great now as formerly. The right hon. gentleman then made a comparative statement between the state of education in this country and the Continent. I beg to tell him that on that subject he was positively wrong in all he stated. His statement was tho roughly ernmeous. I understood him to say that, as compared with foreign countries, England was only ex ceeded in the centesimal proportion of attendance by oue. This is contrary to my knowledge, and the right hon. gen tleman is altogether misinformed. In Sweden the cen• tesimal proportion of attendance at schools is 1 in 4 ; in Russia lin 7; in France 1 in 6. In Saxony the propor tion is 1 in 5 ; in Denmark, 1 in 7. What it is in Holland I don't know. There is only one country which exceeds England in this respect. The right hon. gentle man must allow me to refer to the United States of America, and to the State of Massachusetts. On this question I think the superiority of the United States in several of the States, especially in Now England, is unde niable, the proportion being generally 1 in 5 and 1 in U. Instead, therefore, of England having only one country better than itself in this important respect, there are not above three or four countries in Europe which are in a worse position than that in which England stands at this moment. The right hon. baronet, denying that he desired to displace the voluntary system or underrate its exer- tions, adduced a mass of documentary evidence and statistical returns, showing that from thirty-six to ninety-eight per cent. of prisoners in gaol could neither read nor write perfectly; that the means of education were meagre and inefficient, thus proving that the voluntary system was icsufficient, that it does not educate the people, and that some auxiliary system must be adopted. He asked how it was pos sible, in the face of these facts, gravely to assert that the education of the people of this country was in a satisfactory state. Instead of being progressive, there were parts of England in which education was retrograding. He denied that the resolutions were open to the charge of being opposed to the spirit of liberty ; they proposed a system of local taxation under local management and control. The rate he advocated because no other practical mode had been suggested whereby the deficiency of funds could be supplied. If any other satisfactory expedient could be devised he would cease to advocate a rate. Mr. BROTHERTON moved the adjournment of the house. Mr. DISRAELI did not feel authorised in opposing the motion, but the hour was not so late (a quarter past twelve), nor was the house in such an excited state as to prevent an expression of opinion from her Majesty's Government—(laughter)—and before as senting to the adjournment of the debate they were therefore entitled to hear what were the views enter tained by the Ministry as to the policy that ought to be pursued on a subject of such vast importance as this, which now engaged so much public attention. Lord JOHN RUSSEII, hoped, after the statement of Sir James Graham, made evidently under a total misapprehension of the facts, that the debate might be continued on the ensuing night. After a brief discussion, in which Mr. DISRAELI protested against the thoughtless manner of the Government first fixing Friday night for supply, and then in a highly inconvenient manner putting off the Committee of Supply till Monday, The motion for adjourning the debate was agreed to . OATH OF ABJURATION BILL. Mr. M. GIBSON, cn Wednesday, moved the second reading of the bill for abolishing the oath of abjura tion and the assurance which accompanied it. The measure, he said, was practically the same as that introduced in a previous session by Lord Lyndhurst APRIL 12, 1856. • Trouthings zn arlianttnt NATIONAL EDUCATION. The House of Commons having, on Thu resolved itself into a committee upon education Lord J. RUSSELI, observing that Mr. Cobde prevented by domestic affliction from attenda: the house, moved—" That it is expedient to e: revise, and consolidate the minutes of the Copts of Privy Council on Education." Mr. HENLEY moved, as an amendment, thi chairman should at once leave the chair. D with the educational scheme proposed by Lord Russell as a whole, he criticised at much leng principles which it involved, and the machint which its several objects were to be worked out pr • oposed Government inspection would, be sidered, excite much hostility; the division • country into districts would break up the pat system, and the proposal to deal with the e] charitable trusts for educational purposes wou port additional complication into a question a beset with difficulties. He objected also to tt of a compulsory rate for education, and found that was dangerous and censurable in the m which the controversy respecting religious and: instruction was dealt with in the resolutions the house. He objected also to the comf which it was proposed to lay upon employers for the education of juvenile persons in their el ment, a measure which he believed would re the employment of adults in the room of jt labour, tend mainly to keep young childrer school, and augment the numbur of those nei: school nor at work. The scheme, he cont would also interfere with the exercise of benevolence and individual exertions for the lishment of schools,. from which sources, aic the Privy Council in special cases, he antic much more satisfactory results than could I tained by any general measure. In colic' thinking, he said, that the scheme of Lord J. I had a strong tendency to secularise educati moved—equivalent to moving the previous ques that the chairman leave the chair. Mr. ADDERLEY was in favour of passing th resolution. He approved of an educational ri the best and most effective plan of promc national scheme; but at the present time he not advocate that plan, believing it to be it ticable. He believed that a revision and exti of the existing plan afforded the best means of ing out the object which all so much desired would oppose Mr. Henley's amendment. Mr. ELLICE objected to that part of the at which related to the appropriation of the cite and spoke of the hardship which the proposal inflict upon the people of Coventry. Mr. LIDDELL was in favour of an extensioi improvement of the existing system, and ente Mg that opinion, he anticipated with pleasui appointment of a Minister of Education. Several members here rose, and among thet WARREN. On the cry of " New Member" the resumed their seats, and Mr. Warren proceet address the house in an able first speech. noticing the many difficulties which beset this tion, he observed that the speeches of prec speakers had the fault of prematurely superind details. Upon the main question he had co the conclusion that the time had arrived fc Legislature to assume a more resolute attitud a more authoritative tone than hitherto. The tary system had not and could not educat nation : Men of all shades of opinion began to be discon and discouraged when they considered the timidity Legislature, its imbecility and cowardice in appl remedy to the crying exigencies of the case. The Lary system had done well and admirably, and was at now. He should show himself most ignoran ungrateful if he questioned that fact for a moment. he said was this—let the friends of the voluntary e continue their di s i n t ereste d e ff orts, b ut, at t h e same let (l the m meet the efforts of a Christian State in the ection in a friendly spirit. There could be no cc able motive in extinguishing those efforts. The wi.s rather to strengthen them, and to carry the bent education into those quarters where, without the co- tton o f t h e State, the voluntary sys tem , was not enough to convey it. In that he thought was con the pith of the noble lord's resolutions. Neither the lord nor the rig ht hon. barronet, nor any suppo their plans, intended fora moment l to enter into a at with the friends of thev unt system.. .They rather intended to supplement the . deficiencies and system—to make it quicker in its operation . an effectual hilts results than it could be standing in and al one . We wanted education ; let us first see what we extent and mode of action of the existing sy datiindewherewediscover imperfection, corre c t, it. to details, Mr. Warren recommend e d John Russell to reconsider the proposal on the ject of the alienation of charities ; and, in CI hi ", the hon. member appealed to the house A