The Sun. — London, England, 1856-04-11 00:00:00

=PMw! Turret): a Sane FRIDAY EVENINd s APRIL ll,_ 1686. t tan§ of the noble lord, and 'stash he balrevel had not put too far. He confessed that the atatiatios of *the noble lord, which trenched the accuracy of those quoted by the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Pakington) last session; startled him, and compelled him mentally to exclaim, " Something must at length bo done ;" for those statistics disclosed the frightful extent of the moral degradation of the people of this country. They showed that the land was totally uncultivated—not that the soil itself was sterile, but that it needed good moral husbandry, from which, if timely applied, they might gather a rich, plenteous, and virtuous harvest. (Cheers.) Was this state of things truly characteristic of the age ? Let them fix their eyes steadily upon these facts, and ask how it had come to pass that they should have existed so long, .and what were the circumstances which were controlling and pressing upon them ? Let them look upon the children whom these re solutions regarded, and consider them in the benevolent spirit in which they had been framed. Let them look upon every individual child, who was an object of these resolu tions, as being one of those immortal spirits of which the State was but an aggregate, and whom the State had been so guilty in neglecting; and thedlet it sink deep in the national conscience, so as to compel the Legislature, fro m a sense of personal as well as national responsibility, to feel itself bound to establish an act by which it should it self become the guardians of those children. But when the nation seemed at length to be awakened to something like a sense of its duties in this respect, it was to be told, it seemed, that it could not rtir a step in the direction of reclaiming this moral waste, because if it did it would be ruining and beating down the safeguards of civil and reli gions liberty. He asked the house to look at this grand argument, the stratum of so much unreal opposition—of much unsubstantial though showy opposition—to these resolutions. Let the house consider into what a strange paradox it resolved itself. Our strength was the source of oar weakness. We were so powerful that we were power less. But was it to go forth to the nations of the world that England, so great, could not educate its own childrer, and that where power was the greatest the least could be done? If this were so, it ought not to be so. Let them not in the 19th century —in these critical and remarkable times —stultify themselves by converting that noble thing li berty into licence, by submitting to an ignominious tyranny that arrogated to itself the name of freedom. There could be no language more bitter, no rebuke more severe and grave, addressed to the Legislature than the very reasons which had been assigned for its abdi cating its authority in this matter, since that authority was to be seen in constant action, limit ing and directing the exercise of the rights of the subject in whatever course it pleased. The most con spicuous feature of modern legislation was its bold interference session after session, and Parliament after Par liament, with those rights which were conceived to be pe culiarly transcendent—such as the right of personal liberty, the right of private property, on which were imposed from time to time restrictions so severe that they would not be tolerated in a low state of civilisation. What, he would ask, was the characteristic of the Encumbered Estates Act ? (Hear.) Since then there had been a dozen or twenty sta tutes which interfered with the liberty of the subject, and yet when a resolution was aimed at the extirpation of this moral evil, this cancerous disease, they were roughly told he might say—with reference to a statement which he sup posed had been put into the hands of other members as well as into his own—they were acrimoniously told that the noble lord was interfering with the liberty of the sub ject. Now, the speech in which the noble lord brought forward his resolutions required that he should be encoun tered with the utmost respect. (Cheers.) The noble lord did not appear to him, after all the consideration he could give the matter, to contemplate any violation of the true liberty of the subject. (Hear.) He would not presume upon the indulgence which the house usually awarded to a new member, to say many things that he intended to ex press —(cheers)!--but if the house would bear with him, he wished to say a word or two upon a point upon which scant justice had been done teethe noble lord. They must look at the resolutions of the noble lord as a whole, and as complementary to that which had been done by the friends of voluntary education. The object of the resolutions was expressed in the first resolution, that, seeing the want of education, it behoved the house to extend, revise, and con solidate the minutes of the Privy Council on Education. The noble lord had dealt with the question in a compre hensive spirit, and it would be for the home to consider what should be the extent and mode of action of the ma chinery. Where it was deficient let them add to it— where its action was imperfect let them correct it, but let not the noble lord be found fault with when he said that, although he gave every credit to the voluntary system, there were great patches of ground which that sys tem could not reach, and when he called upon the Govern ment to exercise its authority in reclaiming and elLtivating this moral waste. There was nothing more cheering to the great body of the public which had constituted them its representatives and the focus of its will and action . han to see manifested in the discussion of this great question that holy reverence for religion, without which education was a bsockery, a delusion, and a snare. It was necessary to re spect that liberty w hich the subject ought not to cease to enjoy, but let the house do something, let the State remem ber its duties, and that those duties included the education of the people on religious principles. The greatest man who bad sat in that house for centuries, Edmund Burke, had shown that the Church and the State in a Christian com munity were one and the same thing. being only contiguous parts of one and the same .whole. Religion was thus seen to be within the province of the civil magistrate. The State bad duties which its subjects had a right to expect the per formance of, and where the State saw that no education existed, and that none would exist, it was not only its right but its bounden duty to interfere. With reference to the machinery for carrying the bill into effect, he regarded it with deep anxiety. He did not wish to add to the ob stacles by which the noble lord was surrounded and embar rassed, but he asked him to reconsider that portion of his resolutions which referred to the alienation of the pro pel ty of charities. (Cheers.) So deeply did be respect the spirit in which the noble lord had brought forward his reso lutions—so much did he appreciate the comprehensive cau tion with which the noble lord had dealt with the subject, that he would not suggest a difficulty unnecessarily. But he asked the noble lord to reconsider that portion of his resolutions, and see if he could not dexise some remedy which was less calculated to mouse feelings of the intensity of which the house had a sample the other night. He was very grateful to the house for having listened to him thus far. (Cheers.) After the powerful and argumentative speech of the sight hon. gentleman the member for Oxford shire (ffr. Henley), he rasa with great hesitation from the honcho behind that right hon. gentleman. But ho thought he should ill discharge his duty as an independent mem ber if he did not act upon his honest and conscientious conviction. (Hear.) He trusted that a question so im portant would not be determined by an array of ugly words. (Hear.) Let the noble lord go steadily on, and he hoped he would realise that picturesque and feeling elo quence on which threnoble lord had adverted to the diffi culties that surrounded this question. He trusted the noble lord would not steer his bark against any of those snaked rocks which had wrecked so many noble vessels, but that he would calmly stand by the helm, that be would set his sails and catch the favour.able wind and cur rent of public opinion. (Cheers.) Whatever hon. mem bers might think of the voluntary system, he trusted that they would not be deterred by the word compulsory, but would recognise in the noble lord's resolutions a principle, not of supercession of the voluntary principle, but a sup plement to its deficiencies. They might then use the lan guage of Lord Coke—the master of lawyers, as he was called—and say—" Blessed is he that lays the first stone of this building ' • more blessed is he that carries it on towards completion ; but most blessed is he that finishes it to the honour of God and the glory of His kingdom." (Loud cheers.) Mr. EWART sand that the resolutions of the noble lord did not propose to deal with charitable endowments, but with educational institutions left by our ancestors for the benefit of posterity. The noble lord did not wish to divert these endowments from their legitimate object, but to restore them to their original purposes. Great good had been effected by the Commissioners of Charitable Endow ments. Parliament had last session passed an act to en large their powers, and that act had been attended by the happiest results, since the commissioners had investigated 3.000 cases, in which applications for investigation had been made by the trustees. It had been said that our engineers and labourers in the manufacturing districts received a kind of passive education in the discharge of their daily duties, which rendered to a great extent any other kind of education unnecessary. But one of the worst symptoms of modern society was the tendency of the division of labour and the use of machinery to render man himself a machine, unless this tendency were counteracted by education. He thought the system of paying for edu cation out of the resources of the State had arrived at a point when they must soon take a very decided course with regard to it. He had always been a warm advocate for establishing an educational rate, and he firmly believed to that consummation they must come at last. The sys tem of paying for education out of the Exchequer was so complicated that its own officers could not understand it. It reminded him of the lines of Milton— " With centric and eccentric scribbled o'er I Ilene* mixture of Independencies /mil obedience to authority which made the greatness end independence of the Ame rican and British names. If the education of the Ameri can people had become more and more secular, it had be ' come so only because the American people had gradually separated the two elements of religious and secular edu cetion. Ile did not think it possible for auy man who ap predated the character of the A 0387ican people to point out I any people amongst whom religious convictions were more profound, or who acted more upon religious principle. I (Hoar.) But. yet he did not mean to say that be thought the American system was applicable to this country of ours. What was education but the bringing up, under a thousand influences, of the in ividual child? It was impoe sible for them to say that by any system they could pro duce a fixed and definite result ; they could only approxi mate to what they expected, and there would always be many counteracting causes. It was, therefore, that he thought there was a profound philosophical truth in: he resolutions of his noble friend the member for London, and he believed his noble friend was perfectly right in en deavouring to develop, in the fair and liberal - manner ex pressed in his resolutions, the education of the country. He could not see that these resolutions made it imperative to impose any given rate at all upon the country. It was only proposed that, under certain circumstances, if the in habitants of any particular district were themselves so im pressed that it was notoriously deficient in moral and reli gious knowle lge, that they should be permitted to impose a rate upon themselves. It was surprising the monstrons deductions that had been made that evening from that simple fact. He should even think that the scheme pro pounded by the inhabitants of Manchester and Salford ought to have been accepted. (Hear, hear.) He believed it would have been an experiment coming out of the very heart of a noble people, and he thought that, in practice, many difficulties would have disappeared. The noble lord (Lord R. Cecil) had mentioned a school in which there were a number of children of different religious denominations, and they were allowed to be taken away Ilnring the time of religious instruction ; ho (Mr. Milnes) would ask the - noble lord if he was aware that where that experiment had been tried on a very large scale, the effect bad been that, where the religious services were short and reasonable as in the prayers of the service of the Church of England, the number of children withdrawn were infinitesimally small. He would instance one case, that of the large school at Birmingham, on going over which the Bishop lof Man chester said to him, "Oh ! I wish those gentlemen who talk so much about religious differences could see how these difficulties disappear in practice." He (Mr. blilnes), therefore, wished they would be a little more modest in their assumptions, and , a little more doubtful as to their statistics. if the power of imposing rates should be at any time abused, there was a power in public opinion to cheek that abuse ; Parliament might at auy time interfere. He should vote for the resolutions of his noble friend, as he believed them to be honest, just, and moderate. (Hear.) Sir J. GRAHAM said he believed he was sitting at the feet of Gamaliel, and he was willing to take lessons of humility, whether enforced by precept or example. (A laugh.) He would be moderate in his conclusions from any statistics he might use, and he had inquired carefully into their accuracy; and, before he sat down, it would be his duty to comment on the experience of the hon. member (Mr. Milnes) as to the benefits resulting from short reli gious instructions, and to show that it was neither consis tent with the voluntary teaching of religions sects, nor permanently conducive to the religious or political interests of the country. In the first place he must premise that this could not possibly be regarded as a party question. (Hear.) Now that peace was happily restored to the people of this country this was the question in which they took a deeper interest than any other, and one on which a mistake on the part of that house would be most fatal to the interests of the people ; and, ho thought they should best meet the wishes of their constituents in dis cussing it without any party considerations and with moderation and calmness. (sear.) He was glad her Ma jesty's Government had not committed itself to any definite line as to those resolutions. He hoped they would ponder well and deliberate seriously before they gave to those reso lutions their official support. He could not agree with the hon. member for Midhurat (Mr. Warren) in everything which he had said, especially to the voluntary efforts of the Dissenters, and he was surprised at the conclusion at which that hon. gentleman had arrived, that iu supporting those resolutions he should not be interfering with those voluntary efforts. (Hear, hear.) He also used an expres sion to show the extent to which he was prepared to go iu support of the resolution of the noble lord for compelling the children to come in and be educated, and he said, also, that it was a moral compulsion. Now, the great objection which he (Sir J. Graham) took to the 'violation was, that it proposed, not a compulsion of moral suasion, but a legal one—(hear)—both on the employers of labour and on the employed. Again, he said, quoting, perhapsnot correctly, the words of the hon. gentleman, how disgraceful it was that England, with her free institutions, could not educate her people. Now he (Sir J. Graham) was prepared to - show that England, in consequence of having free institutions, was educating her people progressively; and his great objec tion to these resolut one was that they were contrary to the principles of liberty, and would most materiallyimpede the course of those free institutions under which our people were • being so educated. The hon. and learned gentleman justified the exceptive legislation contemplated in the resolutions on the precedent which Parliament had set in passing the act for the sale of encumbered estates in Ireland, but he alto gether denied the application of that precedent, and he denied that the people of England wet a arrived at that state of things in reference to education which, prevailing in Ireland in regard to landed property, justified the passing of the act referred to. The hon. and learned gentleman, however, said that he (Sir J. Graham) Leg, eeci with him that these resolutions were to be taken as a whole. Now, speaking of them as ,a whole, it was his opinion that, in stead of these resolutions producing that gradual develop merit of pro g ressive education, so much desired by the hon. member for Pontefract, he looked upon them as a most headlong step in advance. He spoke with respect—with un• feigned respect—of his noble friend the member for Lon don. Ho could not forget—history would remember what had teen his successful labours to improve legislation, and to promote civil and religious liberty. He remembered that it was to the noble lord they owed the repeal of the Test ale.l Corporation Act. He remembered all he had done for the emancipation of the Roman Catholics. He also re membered the labours of his noble friend in the introduc tion of the poor law into England and afterwards into Ire land. He remembered also tho constant support he had. given to the introduction of national education into Ire land—a benefit not less than the greatest which the Legis lature had conferred on that country. But, above all, he had a satisfaction in seeing his noble friend yesterday, al though stripped of all official power, do battle in defence of the great principle that no difference of creed should operate as an exclusion from the fullest and fairest enjoy ment of those rights which were the property of every citi zen while liberty remained in this happy laud. These were some of the services which his noble friend had rendered to the cause of liberty, and for them he felt deeply grate ful to hie, ' and he could never forget them, but yet he must say that he eiffered from some of the opinions of his noble friend on this subject. and he Si'euld preface what he had to say on this question with ofie 'Observation. They were called on to discuss eduCation in' England, and that the question of education in England was to lie kept quite distinct from education in Scotland or in Ireland, because, unhappily, in England they were divided into sects almost innumerable, while in Scotland nine-tenths of the popula tion were united iu one creed, and that one circumstance gave facilities for higislating on education which they were altogether in want of in England. Then, with respect to p o r o f a t o le h e o pd Irela nd,rtoo- T The io n a t a h n e c c i a r t c h u o m l i s o t s a nces constituted sv e re also a the l t g o r g e e a t t h , e r t n e different. over whelming pro vinces, pr population ovinn e i t n h e t y h r a e p e while majority in th e ofth the northern an equality in numbers with the Presb y terians. But throughout the four provinces the members of the Esta blished Church seemed to be in a minority. It would be wrong for him to carry this point fa rther ; but he begged it to be understood that in arguing this question they were arguing the question of education in England alone. In the absence of all party condderatiou on this question he trusted he would be allowed to give his opinion with all the freedom he would use if sitting upon a committee up stairs, or if he were at the council table elsewhere. He, in the first place, objected to the form of the pres ent proceed ing as unusual in Parliament, and inexpedient tobe brought into use. The course which they were invited to take was exactly the reverse of that in the case of a bill. It was a proceeding which began with details and ended with the assertion of principles, and the jumble of both was such ; as to produce the greatest confusion, and involved great dan ger. Now, in the case of a bill, they began with principles, and when the 'house sanctioned those principles by the second reading, they then went ist i e the details in commit tee. He farther objected that some of those resolutions were superfluous, and being superfluous, they were calcu lated to excite suspicion, so that he could not see why they should be asked to conform in a manner by which they would use all the advantage of past usage. Now, he wished to say that he was far from negativing thenecessity for legislation bearing on education. He was of opinion with the hon. member for Staffordshire (Mr. Adcierley) that the question of education, as baring on prison discipline, and on the juvenile criminal population, was one which came most properly within the scope of legis lation, and he thought the time was come when in the case of children who were under proper parental con trol the greatest power should be given for reformatory purposes ; neither was he prepared to say that the Chari table Commissioners might not produce a bill with a just and equitable regard to property, and which might vary the application of charitable trusts in cases where, from change of habits, or other causes, tl • e trusts had be come inapplicable ; but all that must be done with the greatest caution. As his noble friend was a memberof that commission, he should gladly receive any measure for that purpose which might be recommended as the deliberate opinion of that commission. He himself had had the honour in former times of recommending legislative interference with the education of paupers, by which the children were removed from the' ordinary workhouses and provided, in a central school, with the moans of obtaining a better educa tion than they could get in them. With the permission of the house he would now briefly review the resolutions, and do so as summarily as he could. The first was that, in the opinion of this house, it was expedient to extend, revise, and consolidate the minutes of the Privy Council on Edu cation. He could not deny that it was expedient to revise and consolidate these minutes, seeing they now occupied 20 volumes ,- but the important word in the resolution was the word "extend " We had now a Minister of Edu cation, who was a confidential servant of the Crown, and if that Minister was of opinion that any extension was neces sary, it would be his d u t y to l ay b e f ore t h e h ouse th e mea sure and constitutional to take the s sense of o h f ic t h he house mann er, when they would have to suggest such alterations and amendments as they thought proper; but by this reso lution power would be given to what might be called a Se cond Minister of Education to extend any system be thought proper, without the exercise of the controlling power of the Legislature. On the next resolution he woulte not add a word to what had fallen from theright hon.gentleman the member for Oxfordshire, but he had not yet heard any reason assigned for the appointment of 80 inspectors. If, however, it were necessary to increase the number of inspectors, the Council of Education had the power to propose it, and to call on the house inthe ordinary way to supply means for doing so. The same observations applied to the third resolution with respect to the sub-inspectors of the schools of Wesleyans, and of other sects. With respect to the fourth recoluton, which gave power to the Committee of Council to form school districts, it was a complete abolition of the paro chial systs m, and introduced a new boundary, distinct from either that of the parish or of the union. The fifth reso lution was unnecessary, as it was at present the duty of the sub-inspectors to make such reports. The sixth he L should pass by, as it was that which had given rise to a considerable part of this debate, an - bow it found its way • into the resolutions was to him a wond,r. The seventh • stated that it was expedient that in any school district i whore the means of education from various sources should ; be found deficient, and declared to be so by the Committee Cycle and epicycle, orb in orb." Re was in favour of uniting to the plan of an educational rate the present system of centralisation, so as to combine perfect freedom of adsion with perfect responsibility to Par liament by means of a Minister of Education. He con curred with the noble lord in many of his resolutions. He believed that every discussion advanced the object they had in view, and he would conclude by impressing on the house the words of Milton—" The nation that neglects the education of the people deserves to be eternally benighted." Lard R. CECIL thought that a local rate on behalf of edudation would be neither just nor practicable. If local rating were ibstituted it would inevitably dry up all the' voluntary principle of the country. It might be thought, unreasonable that this should be so, but assuredly they must make up their minds for that result. It had been said that education was a national duty, but if that were so, it was a duty which ought to be discharged by the whole of the nation. But who were those upon whom the rate would fall? Why, only upon about one-half of the popula tion of the country. The funded property of persons would escape from the tax. Mining property would be excused from contributing its fair share, as would also shipping, which principally supported many seaport towns. The enormous wealth of London would also be excused from ,contributing to an educational rate. More than one-half of the property of the country would, as proposed by the resolutions, be excused from paying a rate. He considered that, if the whole country would be benefited by national education, the wholo'of the nation ought to pay the rate. With regard to the proposition of the right hon. baronet the member for Droitwich, that he would have a distinctive form of religion, but excuse those children whose parents might object to it, he had a great objection. To allow each set of ratepayers to select that form of religion which each Treferred would, he believed, result in absolute infidelity. he people would naturally suppose that the Legislature did not believe more in one form than another, and that would lead to infidelity. In a report recently presented to the house, it was stated that in a school in Wales the inspector toned 5 members of the Church of England, 24 Baptists, 37 Independents, 4 Methodists, 1 Reformer, 3 Unitarians, 13 Mormonites, and 13 children of no denomi nation at all. (Laughter.) The house would observe that in this school there were children the religion of whose parents were diametrically opposed to each other. He be believed it was an unjust way, that of rating, of raising funds, and it would lead to a compulsory education of the people, and, above all, that it led to a tampering with their religious belief, and ended with rendering the children in capable of any religious feeling at all. (Hear, hear.) Mr. M. MILNES hoped they might be able to approach this question in a spirit of a little more humility and a little less confidence as to the character of the people amongst whom they lived. He did not think that, in looking into futurity, they could say what would be the effect of this or that application of the noble lord's measure, or of any other measure. He owned his experience brought him to the conclusion that induced him to believe they must go on experimentally and without reference to foreign c •untries. Foreign countries differed from us not only in their domestic manners, but also in their political remain • brances and their political history. They must look, there fore, to their great sister State, America ; for there only eziated the soiree foundation of national character—that THE N, LONDO N, of Comte), the ratepayers should have the power of taxing beard acrd billiard tables, (near, and a laugh.) For the themselves fur the oroetiou and maintenance of schools. purpose of adeomplishing some speenlativeimpeovements of Now he begged the house to mask that the taxing power in that kind, they were called upon to double the poor rate that resolution was vested in the ratepayers, and that it and the county rate, and they, were b expect that the far re-enacted all the evils for a school rate of which they corn- niers of England would continue to employ plough boys, p 1 tined in a Church rate. The eighth resolution gave power, who were to be educated at this enormous cost. His third after the Ist of January, 1858, to the Quarter Sessions to objection to the measure was that, it, would defeat itself. impose a school rate for the county, city, or borough in Next, he believed that it would be fatal to industry, but which the moans of education for the poor might be de- after what he had said he need not expand that point. But Glared to be deficient. He had read that resolution ,20 double eompuleion would be necessary. They mightcompel times without being able to understand whether the Quar- , the employer to educate; but they would have a far more ter_ Sessions were to exercise a- Ministerial or a discre- ' difficult task to perform—th e y wo uld have to compel the tionary power; tat no matter which was intended, he wan.; employed to be ediscated. They would make the whole quite sure that there was no body less suited to exercise system odious to the people of this country. Now many such power ; and he understood that the hon-baronet, the children were attracted to Sunday schools by We honest member f.e- Droitwich, who was himself a Chairman of zeal of their employers. It had been well said by the right Quarter Sessions, felt this so strongly that he intended to hon. gentleman (Hr. Henley) that the people of this coun move an amendment to the proposition. The ninth reso- try were not to be driven. Pains and penalties would never lution laid it down, that the school committee was to ap- educate the people. It would, indeed, be au evil hour whets point the schoolmaster and schoolmistress, and form rules I Parliament should venture to make so perilous an attempt. for the government of the school. Now all who had at ail He said that the measure was foanded upon no sound prin attended to education, knew that it had passed into an I ciple. It was based upon a principle of Government mono axiom that the schoolmaster or schoolmistress was, in fact,. poly, and would destroy the free competition of labour. the school, so that it was by no means desirable that they jHe would illustrate the danger of this course. He would should be interfered with in the conduct of their schools. It illustrate it, both by the experience derived from foreign was also evident that if they gave the committee such power I countries, and by the effect of the operation of the opposite they would elect teachers of their own creed, and make the principle in our own, through the medium of voluntary school regulations in conformity with their own opinions ; associations. He must replied the house that he claimed and he thought that, if they agreed to the resolution, the no merit whatever for the use of the main part of the argu short experience they would have of its working before the mesas and facts which ho h a d s t a t e d. He had mentioned 18th January, 1858, when the taxing power was to cow- j the sources from which he had drawn them. He believed merle°, would teach the house that they had come to a- rash Vidal to be pure an -I undeni a ble, and until they were die decision. The 10th resolution provided that the Holy Scrip- placed, he should suffer his con c lusions to rest upon them. tures should be read in the schools, and that was doubtless They had been told of th e e ff ec t o f Government inter the short and reasonable religious education to which the ference in foreign countries, lie would on this subject hon. member from Pontefract had alluded. (Laughter.) read a passage from Mr. Laing's work on Norway and the Now, the resolution was so ambiguously worded that ho Duchies. He said, "It was true that in education the sup could not ascertain whether the reading of the Holy Scrip- ply followed the demand, as in other markets of labour, tures was to be part of the school lesson or part of the and that the people would always educate themseWes or school teaching. (Hear.) If it was to be part of the school I find education for themselves up les the demand and ne. lesson, it amounted, as the noble lord the member for cessity for knowledge and educated labour amonast them, Stamford (Lord R. Cecil) had remarked, to genera religi- and that the forced supply of l ea rning or educated labour ous instruction ; and if it was not to be a part of the school- beyond that which the social st a t e of the country required lesson, then they were at once arrived at secular instruc- aod could fuly and completely use and employ, was alto- Lion. The hon. gentleman the member for Manchester bad gather as opposed to the prin ci ples of social economy as a laid down an axiom in which he (Sir J. Graham) fully con- forced supply of other labour by Government inter curred, that with a compulsory rate no other scheme of ference in the labour market. The result in Germany, of education but a secular one was possible; and he thought giving a monopoly of education to Governmental boards that they had better go the length of adopting such a sys- and allowing none but licensed teachers to instruct the tern than establish one in which they would have many of _people, was to create a power in the State not exceeded by its evils without any of its advantages. The 11th resolu- that exercised by the Roman Catholic clergy in the middle tion was, that the employers of young children should be ages.. In 1818 this class of teachers shook every continen reqaired to furnish certificates, half-yearly, of the attend- tal throne by the effects of their social power and inter :Luce at school of children in their employment. He had ference, and by the false education which they had been heard legal questions raised as to the effect, of the word forced to impart." (Hear.) , That course_ stood out in " may ;" he had heard an opinion expressed respecting the i broad contrast to that pursued by the Governments • word might ;" but never had he seen the word "should'' whether of Austria or Prussia. He told the house he so frequently used - as in these resolutions • and whether it would illustrate this by analogies of a contrary kind in was imperative or permissive he could noepositively make our own country.- Be took the following facts from Mr. up his mind. (Hear and laughter.) If it were imperative, Baines's pamphlet. In the census which was taken in then, indeed, was Sir Robert Walpole's scheme of intro- 1801 the number of sittings in churches and chapels was clueing excise into every family carried out to the fullest 5,171,000. In the year tan the number of sittings was extent ; for, to ascertain whether every plough-boy h a d 10,212,000. Only 188,000 of these sittings were provided been to school, they would have to visit every employer, with any help from Parliament; 4,852,000 had been pro• and call him to account; and the interference would he videa by voluntary system. The rate of those provided constant, and irritative in the la , t degree. (Hear, hear.) by the voluntary system to the others was as 96 per cent. And if they sought to make education odious—(bear, hear) to 4 per cent. The State granted 1,033,0001 e and the vol -throughout the land, that was the plan for doing so. untary 1 rinciple contributed only 22,4001. These were the (near, hear.) Then, with regard to the encouragement to facts. The hon. and learned member for Midhurst begged be given by prizes, by libraries, and certificatek and every them not to overlook the statistics of this question. These other proper means, without the least notice what was statistics had now been produced they had been thrown meant, he had not the slightest objection to any definite before that assembly in ord er that they might have the proposal for encouraging the children. It was the duty proper effect ;if they had not, he entreated the house to of the Couucil of Education now, under the votes already allow them to have that effect which they ought to pro made by that house, to favour the extension of the educe- auce. —His (Sir J. Graham's) last objection was that the measure was unsound in piincipla. 11e now said that it was dangerous in operation—constitutionally dangerous in principle. There was great difficulty in adopting the mea sure of the noble lord the member for London, and he thought hie last views is support of education were op posed to some of those constitutional principles which he (Sir J. Graham) had learnt to espouse iu that house. It was proposed to have 80 inspectors, 80 au-inspectors, some 34,000 or 35,009 schoolmasters, and all the ramifications of the influence which such a scheme could not fail to possess. The patronage was enormous ; that in itself was a very great objection. There was—to use a French word, which he was not able to translate—a surveillance —an inspection —a watching—a prying—of these Government setvants— (bear)—which would be intolerable. There was a power of inquiry like that of Sir ' Robert Walpole's scheme to be carried into every part of the house. Every boy under 18 years of ago was to be ezetniued. This was most admir able; (Hear.) His hon. friend the Secretary for the Treasury slumbered. (Load cheers, and Mr. Wilson rose and bowed.) If this machinery of inspectors, sub-inspectors, and schoolmasters were to come into full operation, flesh and blood would not be able to stand it. (Cheers.) The use and abuse of a machinery such as this would be monstrous. His hen. friend would not slumber then, (Cheers and laughter.) A scheme such as was now proposed with the best motives would ee prostituted to the worst of possible objects. (Hear.) The liberties of England—the boasted liberties of England—which they were now asked to 81113. pend for a legitimate purpose, might be degraded into the most impure and fatal channels, destructive to the freedom of our country. (Hear.) He had already said that he re garded this as a new Church rate. A bare majority might impose a tax upon a large minority. Dr. Candlish, who was a Dissenter, and a man of genius, said that the whole success of a school depended upon the schoolmaster. Some bare majority that. had imposed a rate might choose a school master for the put peso of religious teaching. All the 84 sects of the parish would immediately be iu arms against him. (Hear.) If a Dissenter were chosen the Churchman would be seriously aggrieved. (Hear.) So far from bring ing peace, this measure would be a sword in every parish --(cheers)—and whilst they had with dif f iculty extin guished a ft ime by the abolition of Church rates, they were about to kindle a flame that would be felt iu every house hold. (Cheers.) The rate to be proposed was to comprise purely secular education. The right hon. baronet the mem ber for Droitwitch said he wished he could find some middle ground-eke said he wished there was some middle ground upon which Dissenters and churchmen might meet. He said that, remembering only the points upon which they agreed, and forgetting those upon which they difeeted—(cheers)—and, as far as his (Sir J. Graham's) experience went, the more minute the difference, the snare intense the feeling. (Hoar, hear.) They might regret it, but such was the fact. This plan of the right hon. baronet was happily termed by Mr. Baines the neutralisation of the Black Sea of religious teaching. (Hear, hear.) That was a very happy expres sion, and he (Sir J. Graham) would most gladly adopt it. (Hear, hear.) Then let them embark upon that sea ; they were not without a compass ; they were not without expo- . rieuce in this matter. He would deal first with the pro visions of that house—he had a very strong feeling on the matter—and they should learn what was the effect of this model course in foreign countries. He would read what M. Guizot said about the theory of these:grants. He said that the attempt to secure to the followers of different creeds the reality of religious instruction sufficient for the subject, and such as wood apply to all religions, had neither answered the expectations of families nor complied with the conditions of Use law. The attempt to establish religious instruction in the school which would setisfy all persons was only vague and illusory. On the highest authority, he said that children valued instruction only in proportion to the time and attention that was bestowed upon it. He (Sir J. Graham) would cite a report which had been quoted by Sir R. Peal. He would not only read the passage, but also his comments upon it, which might be received with the highest I 'spout. It was the second report issued 'by the Massachussats Board of Education, and was dated at Boston. It stated that, in the report of last year, the writer expressed- the alarming deficiency of moral and religious instruction in their schools. That deficiency in religious instruction was only to be explained by supposing that the committee to whom the task had been assigned had not found any books at once expository of doctrine and free from discussion which fitted them to be means of religious instruction. Hence ho was bound to ex. elude such books, though it was but fair to add he would have been vary glad to introduce them. Upon this report Sir R. Peel said—this was a system which did not exclude the Scriptures (exactly what the noble lord proposed to do). Although the scriptures were to be read, they were not to be taught upon the principles of any Church, pro vided they were used for the purposes of education, leav ing it to the teachers of religion to inculcate the doctrines — Lord J. RUSSELL—No, no; quite the reverse. Sir J. GRAHAM said he was sorry to trouble the house at such length, bat this was a matter of authority and evi dence. Chevalier Bunsen, who had the advantage of a knowledge of the systems of Prussia combined with that of England, in a work which he had lately published, stated that his experience had convinced him that the system of centralisation was incorrectly applied in the education of the people ; that the necessary operation of that system was to keep the people iu a perpetual state of tutelage, and that it was opposed Co that independent life which natu rally belonged to every Christian congregation ; that, upon his return to his own country, after 14 years' absence in England, he compared his then impressiond with those with which he had left Germany, and the conclusion he had come to was that the principle of voluntary association had been, up to a late time, very active in England, and that the root of every greaemovement, and its successful working, were to be sought in that great principle. (Hear.) He (M. Bunsen) illustrated that by referring to the origin and growth of our Indian Empire ; to the operations of the pilgrim fathers, and by the growth and union of Upper and Lower Canada. He (M. Bunsen) further stated that during the last century more churches and chapels had sprung up under this system than all the Governments that had been able to erect. Such was the !deliberate opinion of M. Bunsen, his conclusion, drawn from 14 years' experience, being that the voluntary system was the only true and safe principle. (Hear.) Now, with regard to education, they were asked to-night to set that system on one side. He (Sir J. Grahat) had another objection to these resolutions. They were neither hot nor cold—they were neither religious nor secular. Religion, after all, was the mainspring and sup- I port of the voluntary system. (Cheers.) It was the religious zeal of the different sects which urged them to give their la hour and money for educational purposes in the schools of their denominations. Religion was the life-blood of their association. (Cheers.) Their differences might be great, and their resentment to the Established Church often more powerful than might be wished, but the great body of Dis seeters in England formed, undoubtedly, amongat them selves Christian bodies, and their religious zeal manifested itself day by day in making provision for the education of their children. (Hear, hear.) But these resolutions sought to introduce into the schools' the religious principle-in a covert manner. He would illustrate what he thought the extreme danger of this measure. The majority of Fate payers would constantly vary. One year the majority might be in favour of the Established Church, the next year it might be with the Dissenters, and the third year with the Roman Catholics. According to the majority so would the election of schoolmasters be. The schoolmaster would thus be constantly changing, and the re li g i ous teach ing would of. necessity change with him, and be affected thereby. If the system were wholly secular, the discord he was about to allude to would not arise. But, because it was not se—and a majority even of one would decide the election of schoolmaster, and thus affect the tendency of both the religious and secular teaching in the school — for one could hardly be affected without the other—much angry and bitter feeling must almost of necessity arise, urged on by the knowledge of injustice - which, in the people of England, might lead to results which he (Sir J. Graham) was afraid to contemplate—results of a disastrous character, if not of actual tumults. Having already so long trespassed on the attention of the house, he would net enter into the general topics connected with this question, which had been so often discussed in that house, and by none better than by the noble lord the member for the City of London —that secular education got based upon religious doctrine and instruction was not conducive to Bound morality, or the real interests of the State. Remember the Divine an thority that said that the love of God was the first of the great commandments, and that the love of our neighbours was like unto it, for that upon those two commandments hang all the law and the prophets —our happiness here, our hopes hereafter— (eheees)—and thi s comm itt ee h e (Si r , J. Graham) felt persuaded would pause before, by any hasty decision, they violated that great precept, and de prived the peopleof England of the inestimable advantages tion of the people by such means. Any legislation, there fore, for such last resolution was superfluous. Although the hon. and learned member for Midhurst (Mr. Warren) begged that they would not go into statistics, but deal with principles; and though his hon. friend the member for Pontefract had recommended him to be modest in his references to matters of that kind, still truth was invalu able—(hear, hear)—truth could only be ascertained by re ference to those statistics—(" Hear, hear," by Sir J. Pak ington)—aud if the right hon. 'baronet the member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington) cheered, he would have the opportunity of following and combating those statistics. To the best of his knowledge he would be accurate, and quote authority for the statistics that he gave. The statis tics and many.of the arguments which it would be his duty to advance were not his own. Something disparaging had been said with regard to pamphlets. He should not have investigatedthis subject satisfactorily to his own mind, and ho should not have arrived at the conclusion to which he had come, but for two pamphlets which had been published within the last week. He well remembered the father—the honoured father of one of those pamphleteers. He sat in that house; he had risen by his' honest industry to the place Which he occupied us the representative of the most important, portion of the constituency where ho was born and bred—he alluded to Mr. Baines. (Cheers.) His son was on the Treasury bench at the present time; he had been tried and not found wanting P • and his brother, the pam phleteer, was not inf er i or t o him in abilities, or less worthy of their approbation. (Cheers.) The other was Mr. Unwin; and none were more worthy of their attention and eonsiderae tion those two pamphleteers; and their pamphlets con tained arguments and facts which, to his mind, were irre sistible, and had led him to the conclusion at which he had arrived. He did not pretend to try novelty in argu ment, much less to novelty, in facts ; those facts had al ready been brought before the house; they remained un controverted, and he believed them to be incontrovertible. His objection to the scheme was that it, was unnecessary. tie contended, in the strongest manner, that there was no country in Europe, within the last 25 year?, in which the progress in education had been so rapid and satisfactory as in England. His hon. friend the member for Pontefract had made allusion to the year 1818. Austria stood high in regard to education, Prussia stood high in regard to edu cation • -but what were the scenes at Vienna? what were the scenes in Berlin in 1318? What was the proud con trast iu England, prosecuted on the voluntary system, as he hoped it would continue ? He had said that the num ber of schools was rapidly and progressively increasing. He would call attention to facts which he contended could not be answered, and which were drawn from sources, as' he believed, fair and undoubted, and which it would be for the right hon. gentleman the member for Droit wick (Sir J. Pakington), if he did him the honour to fol low him, to deal with. As regarded the day schools—in England, in 1818, there were 674,000 day scholars, or one in 17 of the population ; in 1853 they had risen to 1,276,000, or one in 11; and in 1851 they had risen to 2,144,000, or 1 in 8 of the population. And what was the state of the Sunday schools ? In 1818 the scholars at tending the Sunday schools were 477,000, or 1 in 24 of the population ; in 1833, 1,548,000, or 1 in 9; in 1851, 2,407,000, or 1 iu 7 of the whole population. He would now shortly read to the house the state of education under the continental system, with the most rigid Governmental in terference. In Prussia, where the Governmental inter ference was most rigid and stringent, the proportion was 1 in 6 of the population; in Holland, 1 in 7; in Bavaria, 1 in 8 ; in Austria, 1 in 10; in France, 1 in 10; in Belgium, 1 in 10'; in Sweden, 1 in 11; so that despised and ma ligned England was espial to all of these countries, with the exception of Prussia, in the proportion of the popula tion receiving education. And now with respect to the number of teachers. In the English clay schools, 'at the census of 1851, the number was 94,878; in the Sunday schools, 318,000 ; so that the number of teachers in Eng land amounted to 413,000, or 1 in 43 of the whole popula tidn, or 1. in 10 of the number'of children; and yet in the face of all this the right hon. member for Droitwich (Sir J. Pakington) stated last year that we could not go on as we were—that the voluntary system had broken down— that it was harassing and vexatious, as Mr. Kennedy, the school inspector said, and that the only legitimate mode in which they could provide for the education of the people was by calling on the people to provide a rate. That was the first germ of the compulsory principle. He entirely concurred with what had been stated by the hon. member for Northumberland - (Mr. Liddell), that the inducements offered in this country for the improvement Of education were strong beyond measure. He was sorry that the house was not full when the hon. member spoke, and he '(Sir J.' Graham) would only repeat the arguments which he (Mr. Liddell) had urged. All the railroad companies—all the scientific bodies —were daily more and more anxious to ob tain skilled labour. The premium upon education was higher and higher. The wisest policy had been pursued by opening the public offices to public competition, and the success of the system was stated by the President of the Board of Trade to have been all thst could be desired. The most valuable appointments in our Indian empire had been opened to the competition of the middle classes, and the greatest inducements which the State could offer, without State interference, had been offered to stimulate the people to exertion in the path of education. It was also worthy of consideration, now that admission to all the humbler publio offices had been made subject to examination— now that 16,000 or 17,000 of those offices had been thrown open to public competition—wh e th er w ith ou t any educational rate or any compulsory system, the State should not provide, the best means of education to fit men for those offices? (Hear.) His next objection was that 'this was a most expensive and prodigal plan. Its effect would be that all .voluntary contributions would cease. (H ea r.) Everything must be done by the Government, an d everything must be paid by the Government, except just what the rate would yield. The school pence would ceas e. The right hon. baronet the member for Droitwich (Sir John Pakington) said that theschooling should be free, whilst the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) said that the school pence should be retained, though much lessened in amount. They might rely upon it that the school pence would cease —that there would be no contributions on the part of the parents, for they would not be both taxed and contribute voluntarily. He did not believe that the noble lord could correctly estimate the cost of his plan at less than 6,000,0001. per annum. Mr. Unwin had given an estimate. He stated, taking the number of children to be taught at 2,600,000 at 18s. a-head, the expense would be 3,240,0001., the noble is-rd's estimate . ; but here Mr. Unwin convicted the noble laid of a great omission. He pointed out that the noble lord had omitted the 10s. per head now contributed by the Government out of the educational grant. That sum would raise the expense to 28s. per head, and adding charges for repairs of schoolhouses, the expenses of inspection, and of training institutions, the total would be not less than 6,3/.1,000). (Hear.) The estimate of Mr. Baines was, that the noble lord's plan would cost n,580,0001. per annum. Thus, according to either estimate, the cost would be equal wa to the poor rate and the with yrt oratfeoc, broughtfeEegland rd the catakenfor to gether. (Hear.) Some time ago the right hon. member for r Buckinghamshire, o ki Vth ha e n lo s ca hirle wh ea burdens affecting land, in the. hope that on principles of equity those burdens might be re duced ; and now, by a resolution in a single night's debate, the house was asked, so far from diminishing the burdens upon land, by a stroke of the pen, by one breath of voice, to double ,the' amount ‘ o f the poor rate and of the county rate affeeting land. It would be for the right hon. gentleman to consider that proposition, and to endeavour to reconcile it with the interests of 'the landed interest , . (Hear.) He (Sir J. Graham's) next ob jection to this measure was that it was incomplete. He said that, without further compulsion, it would diminish education. In the first place, children under 15 years of age would no longer be employed. No farmer, if he could obtain women to hoe his turnips instead of boys, would ever think of employing boys, with ail the odious chances of the school inspector coming round to look overhis books to see whether the boy had been re gu l ar l y sent to school. The farmer would natura ll y sa y — " Aw ay with such in yle Imabeor, me." (near.) no r bo Ho But would become of the wages of these boys? b f e e e malem p]. o r e d i b a thought that their wages w o u ld be foun d to amount to one supne c d e t i r * o l n s — y l e a w r 1 5 1 l s h haveaall fourth of the wages earned by their fathers, and yet the latter were to be called upon not only to pay this rate, but to sacrifice one•fottrth of the earnings of their families. Such a system would spread confusion and dissatisfaction throughout the whole of the rural population of thisnoun try. It was well affected now, though at times it has been ' sorely trie I, and they had had recently the advantage of their fidelity and loyalty. He had shown that the _people were not indifferently educated, and that there was no pre ' text for saying that a more extended education was luxes nary —such a system as that which the right hon. member (ilr. Henley) had alluded to, comprising backgammon Berkshire, where dootrinal teaching is carried on, an ti where the conscience of Dissenters is respected. This I be hewe to be the true solution of the difficulty —a solution which may be safely adopted by this country, and which will enable us to impose a rate without being open to the objection to which the right hon. baronet •has referred. Again, there are France and Switzerland, in both of which the religious difficulty is overcome. In the sextons of Switzerland this plan is adopted :--In the Roman Catholic cantons the Protestant children are admitted into tie schools withent forcing their consciences in matters of religion; and vice versa, in the" Protestant cantons the Roman Catolic children are admitted in like manner, without having their consciences forced ; and this I believe to be a conclusive and satisfactory answer to the objection of the right hen.• baronet. I must say, too, that I equally dissent from the objection which has been rel.:Ad by my right hon. friend near me (&tr. Henley), and by the right hon. baronet, and which I have no doubt we shall again hear in these debates —namely, that if you impose a school rate, you will be reviving and aggravating all the evils of Church rates. This, again, is a mere matter of opinion, and there is hardly an opinion which can be advanced less capable of being supported by argument. It appears to me that the two rates alluded to—the church rata and,the school rate--are essentially distinct and different. What is the objection of the Dissenters to Church rates? I say not whether it be well or ill founded; but I take his objection to be that he is called on to pay a rate for the support of a Church from which lie derives no benefit. What would be the case with the school rate ? Why, that the Dissenter would be called upon to pay a rate in return for which his children would have the benefit of the education given in the schools. The cases appear to me, then, to be exactly opposite. (Hear.) I have now gone though the criticisms of the right hon. baronet upon thd noble lord's resolution, and I must say that I think his criticism and those of my right hon. Mend (Mr. Henley) were criticisms rather too much in detail. They treated the resolutions more as if they were clauses of a bill than as merely intending to lay down broad prin ciples for future action. I tbiuk, therefore, that the right hon. baronet hardly met the resolutions of the noble lord in the spirit to which the noble lord's exertions on this subject are entitled. (Hear.) With the permission of the house I will now proceed to deal with the most important statement advanced by the right baronet, and in reference to which I beg respectfully, but confidently, to express 'my opinion that his views are not supported by facts. I allude to the expression he used, that England is educated. Sir, I say that England is not educated—(hear, hear) that the state of England in this respect is not satisfactory —(hear, hear)—that our advance, such as it is, does not bear any proportion to the necessities of the case, and that if Parliament does its duty by the country it cannot leave the matter to rest where it is." Now the future action of Parliament on this subject must turn upon the truth. It must turn upon the question whether the right hon. baro net is right when he says that England is educated, or whether I am right when I say that England is not edu cated. I say, that upon this broad question fairly raised be tween us must turn the question wnetheror notthis matter can rest where it is, or whether, whatever the decision of this or next year may be, it will not be theparamount duty of Parliament to provide some conciliatory system. 1 - 10 not wish to displace the voluntary system, or underrate or undervalue the exertions hitherto made, but I say that that' system is insufficient, and by itself it cannot educate the people, and that some auxiliary system must be adopted. The first proof I will give on this subject is one to which I would entreat the particular attention of those gentlemen who are the advocates of the voluntary system. I hold in my hand one of the most curious illustrations I have ever met with of the advocacy of the voluntary system, and the complete simultaneous proof of its failure. I hold in my hand a report of the Diocesan Society of the diocese of Bath anti Welts—a society which consists, as most of these socie ties do, of some of the most eminent of the clergy and laity of that county. In October last this society published their annual report, and at the end of it extolled the voluntary 'system in the strongest words that can well be used. The report concludes with speaking of •` well-meant though comperatekly impracticable endeavours," such as they had seen made in the last session of Parliament—alluding to my bill and that of the noble lord—to anbititute for the present " noble voluntary exertions of the people, and es pecially of the Church of England," a state system of sup port, having tendencies which are alien to the feelings and principles of the great majority of the Christian population of this country. Here, then, is the broadest possible asser tion of the merits of this noble voluntary system, and of the insufficiency and objectionable nature of the other sub stitutes proposed. But it so happens that in a preceding sentence in this report attention is drawn to the fact that a new diocesan inspector had lately been appointed—the Rev. Mr. Vaughan. It appears that this inspector had been round the diocese to examine the educational state of the county—this county in which the effects of the volun tary system are so landed by the society. Will the house pirmit me to draw its attention to one or two passages in the report of that rev, gentleman as to the state of the dio cese ? and particularly I would beg the attention of the risht, hon. baronet to them, because he says that England is educated. Well, Mr. Vaughan said that there must be evidently thousands growing up in the diocese without the knowledge of the simplest elements of the Christian reli gion, whilst the very irregular attendance of a large num ber of the children who did go to school prevented their a ;quiring any knowledge that was worth possessing; that in many parishes there were no schools ; and that the first remedy was the provision of funds for the building of schools and the payment of masters and mistresses. And at the end of the report he said he could not conclude with out expressing his decided opinion that the state of educa tion in the diocese was below what it ought to be; that in many parishes there were excellent schools, which were doing a great work, but that there were many also in which there were no schools connected with the Church, and many more in which the schools were sadly inefficient —mere schools of idleness and every bad habit. In the diocese of Bath and Wells, then, the right hon. gentleman can hardly say that the people are educated. I will now say a word . or two that may be interesting to the right hon. gentleman the member for Wiltshire (Mr. S. Her- ' bed). I wish to show, from certain .evidence in my pos. s ission how far the right hon. hart. would be justified in saying that the people are educated in that county. I hold in my hand a communication which I have received from a resident clergyman in a parish in Wiltshire, with whom I have no personal acquaintance, whose name I have no authority to mention in this house, but which I shall be happy to tell the right honourable gentleman in private. He declared that, looking over the length and breadth of that great county, he did not know a single rural parish were the education of the la bourers was satisfactory, or the means of education any thing approaching to efficiency ; that there might be such, but ho did not know them; that he knew many where there was no day school of any description ; and that in 5 parishes the schools were only kept in existence in their present wretched and almost usele.s condition by the libe rality of a single individual. Will the right hon. baronet say, if this las a true statement, that it is possible for any man to hold that England is educated so far as Wiltshire is concerned ? Again, the Rev. Mr. Clay, the chaplain of Preston gaol, in one of his reports, alludes largely to the state of education in the county of Lancaster. Ha states that of the immense number of prisoners who had been in that gaol during the last two years not less than 36 per cent, were unable to repeat the Lord's Prayer, and that upwards of 70 per cent. came into the gaol in such a state of moral debasement that it was in vain to give them instruction or endeavour to teach them their duty, because their state of ignorance was such that they did not understand the meaning of the words used for the purpose. We are also informed by Mr. Clay in this report that of the working population in the county of Lancaster not less than 1 in 14 comes every year within the grasp of the law; and he argues, and argues fairly, that the condition in which the unfortunate people as e brought into the Lancashire prisons is a proof of the state of degrading ignorance in which they stand. Yet it is in the face of such facts as these that the right hon. ba ronet endeavours to get rid of the noble lord's proposition by declaring that England is educated. I contravene the assertion. He gives me an opinion, and it is that England is educated. I meet him with facts ; and I say that these facts demonstrate that England is not educated, and that a large proportion of the population are in the most alarming state of ignorance. Further, the head constable of Preston says that of 16,500 peisons taken into custody in the years 1853 and 1851, not less than 9,641, or more than 58 per cent. of the whole, could neither road nor write. The head constable of Manchester says that of 8,291 males taken into custody in 1853 and 1454, 2,676, or more than 32 per cent., could neither read nor write, and that 5,300, or nearly 61 per cent., could read only, or read and write very imperfectly. Andetpt. Greg, the head constable of Liverpool, says that of 2°,111 pri soners, only 2 per cent. of the whole could read and write well ; that 11,000, or about 43 per cent., could ..read and write imperfectly ; that 1,806 only could read well ; whilst 11,600, sr about 48 per cent. of the whole, could neither read nor write. He asked the house, then, and would ask the country, how, in the face of such facts as these, it was possible for the right hon. baronet, or any other man, gravely to assert as his opinion that the people of England were in a satisfactory state with respect to educa tion ? (Hear, hear.) The house had lately had the report of the inspectors of schools laid upon the table; and what are the representations they contain ? Mr. Mitchell, an inspector of the eastern counties,' says that he had in spected not less than 40 schools, and his colleague many others, and that the details show that education is by uo means universal in extent or good in kind ; that in some instances the education is not only insufficient, but has positively retrograded ; and that instead of progressing, there are places where the action is altogether in the con trary direction. Mr. Mitchell also says that the pressure of the times is such, especially upon clergymen of limited in come, who have heretofore supported schools by their con tributions as well as their influence, and they are now un able to continue the schools in rainy instances, unless they, are supplied with some aid beyond that which the voluntary system affords. Mr. Kennedy's report goes to the same point, namely, the want of funds. Well, what does the right hon. baronet say in answer to this, to prove that England is s ec t lu : cated, or that the state of education in the country is 8 6 factory? The right hon. baronet says y ou must t t rely moupon nts I the voluntary system. Do you believe the a a e have furnished the house? Are they, tru e, they or are exaggerations ? Mr. Kennedy says the daily want IS the want of funds, and he finishes his re pert by saying h e is convinced that this want can only be supplied by a rate for education, that the first and great want is an educational rate. This view is not confined to Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Ken nedy, and Mr. Cooke; but: all the inspectors tell you th at there. is throughout the country a grievous want of better education, and that the main cause of that deficiency is a want of mone y, withent which education cannot be carried on, The right hon. baronet advanced one of the most startling opinions when he told us that these resolutions are opposed to the spirit of liberty. The right bon. bisoriet brought forward no argument in support of that opinion. Is i t opposed to the spirit of liberty to take measures to promote one of the greatest objects of an enlightened peo plc, Is it opposed to the spirit of liberty that we should adopt it for England, at this period of the nineteenth cen tury, precisely those principles which the Scottish nation of themselves adopted 200 years ago? (Hear.) Those prin ciples I asked you to adopt last year, as the noble lord now asks you to adopt them, and to carry them out by kcal taxation under local management. The right hon. baronet opposite was not quite fair in the quotations which he has made from Mr. Baines's pamphlet, where he talks of the bad effects of centralisation. This will not be a centralising system, but a system of local management and of local control, under central guidance and central assistance. I believe the right hon. baronet was a member of the Administration which adopted the present system of the poor-law management. (" Hear, hear," from Sir J. Graham.) Was that a system opposed to the spirit of liberty or of freedom ? Was it not rather a system which every intelligent man rejoiced to see established, as one of the most efficient reforms of late years in the social con dition of the country. (Hear, hear.) What I proposed, and what the noble lord proposes, is local management with central guidance. The rate is to be raised by the votes of the ratepayers. It is to be managed by committees locally elected. I grant you, that for the sake of uniformity of practice, those committees must be under central guidance like the poor-law. But I defy the right hon. baronet to prove that in proposing this scheme we are adopting any plan open to the grave objection of being opposed to the of the privileges they now enjoyed of secular teaching in t maixecl, even upon the voluntary system, with religions knowledge and instruction. (The right hon. baronet re sumed his seat amidst loud cheering.) Sir J. PAKINGTON—Sir, after the able and powerful speech we have just heard from the right hon. baronet, I feel most unaffectedly the difficulty be has imposed on ma of following him ; but, entertaining as I do, a clear con viction of this important subject, and, differing, as I am compelled to do, from the conclusions at which the right hon.gentleman leis arrived, I must throw myself on the indulgence of the house while I undertake the arduous and difficult task which, under a sense of public duty, I have imposed on myself. I hope I shall not appeal to the house in vain for that attention, without which I feel it is impossible to meet and reply to tho statements the right hon. gentleman has just delivered. The right hon• gentleman appealed in his emphatic speech to truth. I join issue with him boldly and fearlessly on that ap peal. I agree with the right hon. gentleman that this is a great and important subject, affecting the dearest interests of the people, and that it must be discussed by the house with a strict regard to the merits of the case. On the merits of the case, then, sir, I venture to join issue with the right lion: bart. I a -cept his -Chal lenge, and, though . l own myself unequal to the right hon. bait. in the p rwer of debate, yet I do not fear the issue if 1 atu.indulg.el with that atteution which is indispensable for me to meet the stet nauutsuf time light lien. gentleman. In one respect I am happy to say I cordially concur with the right hon. gentleman. I agree with him that we ought not to approach this subject in any party spirit, but that we ought to approach it with the greatest gravity and anxiety, and in that spirit I shall endeavour to deal with and to approach this important subject. And, sir, I feel it is all the more incumbent upon us to approach this sub ject with that gravity the right hon. gentleman so much desires, when we bear in mind the enormous centesi mal proportion of the people of this country who are affected by the great question of national education. I shall not overstate the fact when I state that not less than 15,500,000 out of the 18,000,003 of the popula tion of England and Wales are directly an I personally in terested in the question. 'ln this opinion I have the well known authority of Mr. Carr, the income tax commissioner, who, in his report relative to the income of the various classes in this kingdom, draws a broad line of distinction between thoie who have an income of 751. per annum and those who have not. Juelging, then, by this 'division of the population—those who have and those who have not 74. a year—l am light in the statement I make, and I think the house will agree with me when I state that every family who has less than 751. a year is mainly dependent for the education ofits chit iren on the national fund, what ever that may be. I am endeavouring to show the house the enormous numerical proportion of the people affected by this measure. ' It affects directly 15,503,000 out of the 18,000,003 of people. I say, then, we are bound to ap proach this question with the greatest anxiety, and because the whole nation has a deep sense of the magnitude of the question. With respect to the resolutions of noble lord I will come at once to the objections made to them. The first objection of the right hon. gentleman was made on the ground of the form the resolutions have taken. I beg to say, that while I give my support to the general spirit of the resolutions, I do not coacur in all the details, as I think will be sufficiently proved by my having moved amend ments to some portions of them. I do not thick the first resolution is essential to the plan of the noble lord ; so, therefore, I agree with the right hon. baronet that it re fers to matters which might be arranged by the commis sioners of national education (we understood). I object also to the plan of throwing on quarter sessions the duties which the noble lord proposes to throw on them, which I think they cannot adequately perform. I do not under stand how magistrates in quarter, sessions in towns, and especially in counties—how they can be informed as to the educational requirements of distant parishes, or how they can attempt to decide as to the proper amount of rate. Then, with regard to the sixth resolution, which has formed the subject of a great deal of discussion, I agree with the right hon. gentleman in his objection, and I cannot quite understand why the noble lord introduced it haze. It touches a delicate and difficult subject, whice is likely to create a great clamour, and to raise a principle about which a great difference of opinion must exist ; and, there fore, considering the scope and object of the noble lord's resolution, I hope an opportunity will be found of with drawing that resolution, or at least of not pressing it upon the house. To the general spirit of' the noble lord's resolu tions I give my adherence, and I am here as the advocate of some such plan as that brought forward by the noble lord. But, looking to the importance of the resolutions, and looking at the state of public opinion on the question of education—a question on which there must be great difference of opinion, still I must confess I was not pre pared for the course taken to-night by my right hon. friend the member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) who throughout his speech has been silent on one point. He has not told . the house whether he is prepared to enter upon the dis cussion of the resolutions, and by the right hon. baronet, who has expressed a hope that the house will tuke upon itself to repudiate the whole of the subject, and to refuse to entertain the question of the education of the people; that is the proposition of the right hon. baro net. He refuses to go into the resolution at a 1 • he refuses to enter upon the subj ec t o f th e reso l ut i on ; and while he asks the house to take this course, he must know if it is ac ceded to the house will evince a disregard towards the feelings of the people, show itself indifferent to the public interest, and without fail shako public confidence in it. I hope, therefore, the house will n o t su pp or t the motion of my right hon. iriend. I hope the house will enter upon the discussion of the resolution of the noble lord. Let me now approach the criticisms of the right hon. baronet. His first objection was as to proceeding by resolution at all. I admit there is one serious objection to that course. I re minded the noble lord on a former occasion that the plan of resolutions would not do; that Lord Brougham had placed resolutions on record without proper effect. But the noble lord defended his course by arguments of which I, for one, admit the propriety. His experience, he said, showed him that uo independent member of that house had a chance of carrying through a bill on such a complicated question if her Majesty's Government refused to entertain it. The noble lord has felt prudently and wisely. I think, that looking to legislation on the question by an indepen dent member, it would be the inure prudent course for independent members who had strong feelings on thesubject not to attempt the hopeless task of legislation. but in a series of resolutions to lay down broad and intelligible principles for the adoption or rejection of the Legislature. That I think is a sufficient answer to the first objection of the right hon. gentleman. The right hon. gentleman then, with con siderable force, as I thiok, took the same objection as that taken by the right hou. gentleman the member for Oxford shire; and I am the more disposed to advert to this objec tion because my right hon. friend in his able speech last session appeared to attach weight to this objection. The right hon. gentleman. (Sir J. Graham) objected to the parochial boundary system, on the ground that it would break up the parochial system, and sever the clergyman (rein the school. I shall attempt to show that the parochial system is simply an impossibility, and if I am right it will be a good answer to this objection. Let me illustrate my position by two instances, one on my own estate, in a palish in my own neighbourhood, where a considerable portion belongs to me. This parish has 36 re-iel ant inha bitants and five children of the school age. Will either of my right hon. friends tell me how the parochial system of education can apply to that parish, or avoid that Sever ance of the clergyman from the school which they so much deprecate ? I will mention just one other instance in the county of Monmouth, referred to by Archdeacon Williams, where there were only 17 inhabitants. I need go no ;further in order to dispose of the objection as to the importance of maintaining the connection between clergymen and schools. It is, as I have said, simply an impossibility. The next point is, that the plan of the noble lord is unnecessary. If the right honourable baronet is right, certainly nothing can justify the intro= duction of the plan. But the .whole question turns on the assertion that the plan is unnecessary : and here I join issue with the right honourable gentle man, and undertake to prove that the plan is imperatively necessary, if we wish the people to be e 'fleeted. The right hon. baronet spoke of the state of oducation of the people of England, and referred to statistics, with which we are all familiar, referring • to the periods of 1818, 1533, and 1851. I never have denied that these returns show that the number of children - at school during the latter period was more than at either of the former periods ; but the right honourable gentleman did not state that the progress evinced in the latter period was less than in the former periods, nor did the right honourable gentleman refer to the centesimal proportion of the scholars. These statis tics must ba wholly useless unless it can be shown that the schools in the country aro tit for the duty required of them, and that they are better than they were. Tha right honourable baronet entered into comparative statistics of education in this country and on the continent. I tell the right honourable gentleman, without any discourtesy, that he is positively wrong. Either he is or I am thoroughly deceived on this point, and the house shall judge be tween us. I challenge him to the issue broadly and distinctly. I understand him to say that in comparing England with foreign countries, as far as education was concerned, England was only - exceeded in the centesimal proportion by one country. By the highest authority on such a subject I am able to assure him he is misinformed. We are exceeded by Switzerland—for in some cantons the population is 1 to 4, in others 1 to 5. We are exceeded by Russia; the centesimal proportion there is 1 to 7. We are exceeded by a considerable portion of France, for there it is 1 to 6; and by Saxohy, where the population is 1 to 5 ; by Denmark, where it is 1 to 7. I do not recollect as to Holland, but I have mentioned four or five countries in stead of one, which certainly do exceed England in this respect. The right honourable baronet must allow me to refer to the United States, where in parts of New Eng land the proportion is 1 t o 5 and 1 to C. Instead, there fore, of there being only one country better off than Eng land, 'there are not more than three or four countries worse off than England stands at this moment. What . is the next argument of the light honourable baronet? He says theplan is oppressive to the poor. Here the right hon. baronet again is dealing, not with facts, but opinions. I joie issue with him by distinctly expf - esiing a different opinion, and say that nothing would bo more oppressive to the poor and nothing more' injurious than to make it an impossibility for thleracisgive their children that education they ought to receive. Instead of being oppressive to the poor, there is no portion of the people that would be more grateful to the house for carrying a measure that would give education to those classes, and enable their children to derive the benefit of a better system than that which now exists. The next charge, which I heard with sur prise, made against the noble lord's plan was, that it was unconstitutional. Ic would be quite wrong in me to at tempt to defend any plan of the noble lord on the ground of its constitutional character. No one is more competent to= defend questions respecting the constitu tional interests of the country than the noble lord. thel have long observed that when it is wished to attack t plan of some public: m mn the cry is raised that it is not constitutional. The word constitutional is one _ the most abused of words—it is used on all subjects. The t of right hon. gentleman then told us that his plan would ndiist connect education with the religious system , ma similar to that which obtains in Massachnsets. But the noble lord, I am satisfied, will deny the imputation, and will refuse to fwll party i to the American system'. The noble lord and h Ly h e y el hold that any system of us tional education will be imperfect, unsatisfactory, and aun acceptable to the country that is not based on religion, and which does not distinctly recognise the necessity of, basing education on religion. The right hon, baronet referred to what I said last year on the subject of religious education, and endeavoured to show that the plan I' ventured to re commend would not meet the case—would not, in fact, at tain the principle of education in combination with 'reli gion. I deal with his opinion as not being the fact. T dissent from it, and say I am enabled to refer to experience to prove that there is abundant experience, both in England and on the Continent, to show that the religious difficulty can be solved, and that you may have religious teaching in a mixture of religions sects without the slightest sacrifice of the interests of religion. I might refer to the remarkable instance of the grammar school of spirit of liberty. I repudiate that clittrii, suit 4.6 him to prove it. If I feel warmly on this subject, it is not from any feeling of disrespect to the right hon. baronet, but from the great issue before us. I am only discharging the day which every member ought to discharge in stating boldly the convictions I entertain. At this late hour I will not enter into the question as to how the funds are to be supplied for meeting the educational wants of the country. When we get into committee fitting opportunities will arise for considering the rules on this point. I will only state on this occasion that I advocate the rate simply for the reason that no other practical mode has been suggested by which the deficiency can be supplied. My noble friend— sit now in. his place—the member for Stamford, feeling the pressure of this part of the case as to finding funds said that we ought to ask Parliament to grant the money; but my noble friend did not tell us what must be the next step. If Parliament granted the millions, who,is to have the ad• ministration of them ? I believe the question of rating will turn out to be simply a question of business. Money is wanted. We cannot educate without money. Where is it to come from? At a voluntary meeting the other day I see it was stated that education in this country was a matter of parental duty. Now, with all respect for those who attended that meeting, I think this further question, whether the industrious classes are in a position to educate themselves without help, might well have been raised. At this moment, under the voluntary system, are the working classes called upon to educate their own children ? Nu. They pay 21, while the child costs 6d. a week. And the question of rates was really a question as to where the difference was to come from. Show me a more satis faetory mode, and I shall no longer advocate a rate. I believe you cannot point out a more satisfactory mode. To supply the great defects I have pointed out' you will find practically no other mode than that to which I referred. It may not be this year, but my belief is that the day is not far distant when this plan will ba adopted by Parliament. (Hear.) I do not deny that the subject is surrounded with difficulties, but I hope Parliament will meet them. boldly, in an enlarged spirit, and that they will approach the consideration of the noble lord's resolutions in a calm, temperate, and for- bearing spirit. I believe that in a few years this house and the country will look back with - utter astonishment at the bugbear with which we have so long been contending, and with a feeling that this house and the country ought not so long to have postponed the settlement of this great question, so deeply affecting the interests and welfare of the _people s (Cheers.) _ BARNES moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr. DISR &ELI expressed his astonishment st a proposal to adjourn this debate without the hawse or the country having any idea of what were the views of the Giiiernment on the question. He thought, before the house consented to adjourn the debate, it would be highly satisfactory to receive from the Government some expression of theiropi nion on a matter of such vast importance. (Hear.) - Lord J. RUSSELL hoped, after the statement made by the right hon. baronet, the member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham), and which statement was made, he (Lord J. Bingen) thought, in total misapprehension .of his views, that the noble lord at the head of the Government would so far alter his determination as to allow the debate to be continued this day (Friday), so that the house might be in possession of what was really the scheme he proposed before they heard the course which the Government in. tended to pursue. (Hear.) Lord PALMER,STON said he had stated, in the early part of the evening, that it was the intention of Govern ment to go on to-morrow (this day) with supply; but cer tainly the circumstances to which his noble friend alluded, and the natural desire which his noble friend must have to reply to the statements of the right hen. baronet the member for Carlisle, furnished sufficient reason why that course should be altered, and why they should go on with the debate. (Hear, hear.) He proposed, th ere f ore , t o go into supply ott Mon day Mr. DISRAELI said the noble lord seemed to forget that, at, the request of gentlemen sitting on that side of the house, he had inquired what were the intentions of Govern ment with respect to business on Friday, in consequence of this important debate coming -on that evening. It was then obvious it would be a long debate; and it was quite obvious that the noble lord the member for London would feel it necessary to the high interest of the question, and to .his own high character, to enter into an elaborate considers. tion of his resolutions, but the noble lord at the head of the Government said he had made up his mind to go intocont mittee of supply. The house - must feel that it was of the utmost consequence that when those inquiries were made the reply should be distinct, and adhered to. Lord PALMERSTON said the right hon. gentleman was very hard to please. (A laugh.) The reply ho had made was not made in thoughtlessness, but for the convenience Government, and the interest of the public service. But he had yet to learn that it was the duty of Government to disregard those courtesies which were due to members bringing forward an important question, and who, like his noble friend tha.member for London, might be desirous to take the earliest opportunity of replying to statements made against those measures. The Motion for adjourning the debate was then agreed to, End the house resumed. RAILWAY AND CANAL TRAFFIC BILL. The second reading of this bill was postponed until the Bth •f May. JOINT-STOCK 'BANKS BILL. This bill was read a second time. WAYS AND MEANS. Mr. FITZROY brought up the report ou ways and means, which was agreed to. - BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. WALPOLE wished to know, as the ordinary course of proceeding with the business of the house was n e xt we ek to bo altered, when the Police: Bill would Come ou for dis cussion. Sir G. GREY said he would flan for Friday, but could not say when it would be proceeded with. Mr. DISRAELI again complained of the adjournment of the debate until to morrow (this day), as it wo u ld pf ec l u d e his right hon. friend from making his motion en going into supply. Viscount PALIVIERSTON said that it was an act of corn. mon courtesy to his noble friend. Mr. DISRAELI wished to see courtesy extended to his friend. • Viscount PA.LMERSTON—My, friend is my friend. Laughter.) SPIRIT TRADE IN IRELAND. On the motion of Mr. BRADY, the house went into com mittee to give him an opportunity of bringing iu a bill on this subject ; but as the proceeding was considered out of rule, the house resumed. SHIPPING DUES COMMITTEE. Mr. WILSON moved that the committee should consist of 17 instead of 15 members, which was agreed to. The name of Mr. Vance was then added to the committee. On the motion that Mr. Kirk's name be also added, Mr. VANCE opposed the motion as Mr. Kirk was em ployed on another committee, and because it was desirable to have on the committee some boil. member to represent the southern ports of Ireland, and as Dublin and Cork were the only two ports which would be affected by the bill be coming law, he would propose the name of Mr. Beamish as au amendment. Another objection to Mr. Kirk was, that he was likely to be a partisan, as he had already spoken in. fa vour of the abolition of shipping dues. Mr. LOWE hoped the house would not agree to the amend ment, as it was desirable that the mercantile interests of Ire land should also be represented on the committee. After a few words from Mr. GROGAN, Mr. RICHARDSON, and Mr. BRANUM, the house divided. For Mr. Kirk Against 73 94 Majority The announcement was received with loud cheering. The name of Mr. Beamish was thou put, and added to the committee. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. Sir G. GREY moved the substitution of the Name of Mr. Monckton Milnes for that of Mr. Scott. After a few words from Mr. WALPOLE, Mr. SCOTT, and Mr. Y. MILNES, the motion was agreed to. POOR-LAW (IRELAND). Mr. NAPIER obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws relating to the election of poor-law guardians in Ire land. The bill was brought in and read a first time. , MORTARS AND GUNS. Colonel BOLDERO moved for-1. The names of the dif ferent contractors of certain ordnatoe. 2. Their calibte. 3. The proof charge of each description of gun, howitzer, and mortar, and 4. The number of rounds tired from each. The motion was agreed to. The house then adjourned at a quarter-past one. The opening of the conference of prelates at Vienna took place on the 6th. H.R.H. the Prince of Wales and the Prince Alfred, attended by Mr. Gibbs and Dr. Becker, visited the Crimean Exhibition, 121, Pall-mall, yesterday. Yesterday morning the marriage of the Hon. C. Stewart Hardinge, 11LP., eldest son of Field-Marshal Viscount Hardinge, with the lovely and accomplished Lady Lavinia Bingham, daughter of the Earl of Lucan, . was solemnised at St. George's, Hanover-square, the presence of a numerous circle of the nobility and friends of both noble families. After the ceremony a dejenner was given at the Earl of Lucan's, Hanover-square. The happy couple left town for South-park, near Penhurst, Kent, Lord Hardinge's seat, to pass the hon e y moon . The Minister of War at Turin has given o r d ers f or t h e formation of a camp o f observation at La Spezzia, where the troops returning from the. Crimea are to b e concen trate:l before return in g to their respective regiments. ]- [A nv sarsamixr.--It in ever a pleasing duty of a jour nalist to introduce to his readers some new discovery cal culated to benefit that vast portion of our fellow-creatures which has the strongest claims up on our s ymp a thi es . It is with this feeling that we ca ll th e a tt en ti on o f i nva lid s t o the following extract fr om D u B arry ' s i n t eres ti ng R epor t o f Cures without medicine of Indigestion (Dyspepsia), Flatulency, Constipati on, N ervous, Bilious, and Liver complaints, Cough, Asthma, Consumption, and Debility, by Du Barry's Rave leuta Arabica Food. Cure No. 180.—Twenty-five years' ner- VOUSIICBS, constipation, indigestion, and debility, from which I had suffered great misery, and which no medicine could remove or relieve, have been effectually cured by Du Barry's food in a very short time.---W. R. Reeves, Pool Anthony, Tiverton. Cure No. 1,784.—N0t expected to live six days linger, I was cured by Du Barry's admirable Health-restoring Arabica Food.—Magdalena Purvis, Moffat, Scotland. Cure No. s,46l.—Sixty years' partial paralysis, affecting one-half of my frame, and which had resisted all other remedies, has yielded to Du Barry's Health-restoring Food, and I now con sider myself a stranger to all complaints excepting a hearty old age.—Wm. Hunt, barrister-at-law, King's College, Cambridge. In canisters, 51bs. Ils.; 121b5., 225. The 121bs. carriage free, on receipt of post-office order. Barry du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, London ; Fortnum, Mason, and Co., Purveyors to her Majesty, Piccadilly ; also at 60. Grace. church-street; 330 and 451, Strand; 4, Cheapslde ; 68, Ccrnhill ; 49, Bishopsgate-street ; 55, Charing-cross ; 54, Upper Baker-street ; 63 andlso, Oxford-street. (Anyzarissmssr.l—Only to be known to be valued.—Dr. Roberts's celebrated ointment, called the " Poor Man's Friend," is confidently recommended to the public as an un failing remedy for woun d s of every description, a certain cure of ulcerated sore legs, if of twenty years' standing, cuts, burns, ssalds, bruises, chilblains, scorbutic eruptions, and pimples in the face, sore and inflamed eyes, sore heads, can cerous humours, &c., and is a specific for those afflicting eruptions that sometimes follow vaccination. Sold in pots, at Is. M. and 2s. 9d. each.—Also his " phulse," - confirmed by more than forty years experience to be, without exception, one of the b es t a lt era ti ve me di c i nes ever compounded f or purifying the blood and assisting nature in all her operations ; hence they are useful in scrofula, scorbutic complaints, glandular swellings, particularly those of the neck, esc. They form a mild and superior family. aperient that may be taken at all times without confinement or change of diet. Sold in boxes, at ls. lid., 2s. 9ds, 45. 6d., lls., and 225. each.—Sold wholesale Irs the proprietors, Beach and Barnicott, at their dispensary, Bridport; by the London houses ; retail by all respectable medicine vendors in the United Kingdom. Observe,—No medicine sold. under the above names can possibly be genuine, unless "Beach and Barnicott, late Dr. Roberts, Bridport," is envaved and printed on the stamp affixed to each box. Moir