The Sun. — London, England, 1839-07-06 00:00:00

EVENING EDITION But what it was proposed, and what it was most important to effect, was, that the inspection should be applied to the 1 introduction of those improvements which even in secular 1 education might be effected, and those admirable arrange ments which their Lordship's might witness (we believe the Noble Marquis said) at the school in Norwood, established by the Poor Law Guardians, arrangements not bearing i upon the question of religion, but bearing upon that which I was of equal importance—the training the children in habits of order, cleanliness, dispeipline. and industry, which might form a part of a cre.netalbsystem of ed ucat i on w i t h out I interfering with those 'high truths which it was t h e d uty I and the privilege of the Church to inculcate. He had I now touched upon the points respecting the plan which was before Parliament. The Most Reverend Prelate had thought it necessary to advert to a former minute of the i Council, which had been withdrawn, not so much on ac count of the opposition made to it out of doors, as on ac count of the difficulty which existed in coming to a distinct understanding between conflicting opi n i ons, as to t h e way I in which a normal school could be established. Now he I (the Marquis of Lansdowne) did not depart from the prin ciple that the normal school would, under the sanction of Government, he most important and beneficial. But there was no intention on the part of the Govern ment to take such a course without bringing it under the review of Parliament, and publicly stating the grounds upon which it was proposed. The amount of the vote itself indeed was sufficient proof that no such intention existed. The Most Reverend Prelate had spoken a great deal of the dstitiction between general and particular re ligion,—which he thought implied in that first minute,— and having assumed tlyst by " general" religion, " na tural" religion was to be understood—he had argued upon that supposition; —an erroneous supposition, for the words " natural religion" did not occur in the minute : and as to the distinction between general and particular religion,-- it had first been published in a speech of Sir R. Peel, who in speaking upon education in Iceland, had drawn this dis tinction very naturally between general and particular religion, stating that the one could be taught in a certain manner and the other in a different manner. Fur him self, he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) disclaimed any other distinction on the subject than that which naturally arose between truths which were common to several religions, and those which were peculiar to each. The Government l intended not to propose anything hut what they considered Would conduce to the grand object of promoting secular improvement, reserving to the Church, free from all pos sibility of interference from inspection, or any other cause, the right of religious teaching—a right which he (the Marquis of Landsdowne) did moat solemnly declare lie i most sincerely desired that the Church should retain, and 1 which he believed it was the duty of th e Ch urc h to ex ercise. But because he wished the Church to preserve ; that right he was not prepared to exclude from the benefit lof improved education any class of her M a j es t y ' s su bj ects. and as a Member of Parliament he was bou n d t o see t h at S, a grant voted by the representatives of all, at th e expense of all, should be distributed for the benefit of all.--( Loud cries of " hear, hear.") That was the sole claim which the Government put in upon this occasion ; and in the manner he had described did he solemnly declare that it was the intention of her Majesty's Government, or the Committee of the Privy Council, to administer the system they had proposed; nor would be abandon the hope that this plan, divested of those contingent objections to which the too curious apprehensions of some persons conceived 1 it to be subject, would become the means of leading the Icountry to the adoption of some practical system with respect to education, equally condusive to the interests of the Established Church and to the general welfare of the ! country.—( Cheers.) With these feelings he should now I move :he previous question to the motion of the Most Rev. Prelate, trusting that it would not be carried, but if it were he should not regret that the attempt had beer. made on the part of the Government to carry into effect that which he believed was the only mode of promoting that i improvement in the general condition of society which at the present time, more than at any former, was impera tively called for._( Loud cheers.) The Bishop of EXETER said he would first address ? himself to those questions which the Noble Marquis bad F ; put to that bench to which he had the h o n our to b e l ong ; ; though he wished it to be cleanly understood, that he did I not presume to speak the sentiments of that bench, still less of the Church, upon this subject ; but only replied to I questions which had been addressed to each individual of i that body of which he was a Member. The first of these questions was, whether the Church had a right to the edu .: cation el the public at large, including that portion of the i people—millions in numbers—who do not belong to the J Church. He was sure the Noble Marquis meant to pro , pose a question which should be clear and intelligible, but the terms in which it was couched, raised in his (the Bishop of Exeter's) mind considerable doubt, and he must make some qualification. He would answer that the ' Church by no means claimed a right to enforce any system of' education on the people ae large, least of all on those who did not belong to the Church; hut he did say this, that the Church had a right to de -1 mand of the State—and if both Church and State w er e I prepared to', do their duty the demand would be acceded to 1 —that the Church should receive from the State the means Of offering an efficient education to all the people of this country, whether they belonged to the Church or not.— S . Cheers.) God forbid that the Church should claim a I right, or ask the State, to compel persons to take educe ' tihn from her;, but she had a right to cl a i m th a t th e chtech, recognild by the State as the supporter o f th e true i h ilgion....4 sfear, hear)— should have the means, at least, of e s etructing in that religion those belonging to her cos/m i m e ses ...s e e the Noble Marquis seemed to think it no part of her duty to reclaim those who had wandered into error-end if tlie State were prepared to do its duty on this subject—(Cheers) —he would answer for his Right Reverend Brethren on 'the Bench, and for the clergy of their respective dioceses—that they would not neglect their , duty—a duty he rejoiced to bear on this occasion admitted, hesitatingly indeed, hypothetically it was true, ' hut still in some measure admitted, by the Noble Marquis . the President of her Majesty's Council.--( Cheers.) The second question which the Noble Marquis had proposed : was, whether the claim of the Church extended not only to the religious, but also to the secular education of the pets- I plc. To which he (the Bishop of' Exeter) answered, that ; the Church did not presume to claim the direction of the • secular education of the people, but she had a right to de mand that she should receive from the State the means of sanctifying the secular instruction, particularly of those poorer classes who were chiefly to be considered, and with regard to whom he must say that he knew of little secular education that ought not to be combined with religious. ; lie Wes far from denying, God forbid that he should, that I a poor cum had not a right to make all those acquire ments in knowledge which it might please God to enable him t o o hn i ne..—( Hear..) But looking to the condition I of those who were constantly engaged in laboiious occupa tient, he did say that it was impossible that they ", should be able to attain :iny y great intellectual cultivation, 1 and that it would be much cetter for such classes to con- centrate their views on the one ~ -rand subject of religion ; that they should make their learning subservient to the illustration of the Bible, instead of beiPS engrossed in mere scientific inquiries.--( Hear, hear.) The` next ques tion of the Noble Marquis involved some difficult' in au swerir,g it ; because there was some obscurity as to the meaning of the Noble Marquis. Did the Noble Marquis mean, whether it was lawful for the State to give its aid generally to persons not belonging to the Church, or whether it was lawful for the State to give its aid to the teaching of erroneous doctrines in religion to such parties ? As he (the Bishop of Exeter) could not answer a question which he did not understand, he would feel obliged to the Noble Marquis if he would nxplain his meaning. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE explained that he meant this—Whetlit,r it was the duty of the State to pro vide in the most etf Ttual manner for the improved educa tion of persons differing from the Church.—( _!ar, hear.) The Bishop of EXETER—If the Noble Marquis in tended the general education of persons not belonging to the Church, he answered most readily to the question, Yes, it was right to give that assistance ; but if it were meant that the State should assist in teaching those doctrines which the state believed to be false iu religion, then the State departed from its first duty. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE further explained that he wislod the State to provide for the secular—not the religious—•he spiritual instruction of the p e opl e . Th e Bi s h op of EXETER said that confirmed him in heartily assenting to the principle of the Noble Marquis, though he could not help remarking that if the principle Mere good in England, it was equally so in Ireland, where, howevir,. a different plan ,vas pursued.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Marquis had asked whether the state of ciuca tion,ia this country was satisfactory? , God knows (said the Right Rev. Prelate), I think it is in a inOit urfiatitifactory state—(-Hear, hear)--that there are myriads of our fell 14w subjects—of our fellow Christians—fellow heirs with us of immortality—in the very abyss of ignorance—( Hear, hear)-80,000 children, for instance, in the neighbourhood of Manchester, who, if suffered to remain in their igno rance, where they grew up, the State might punish them for their crimes, but would be chargeable with their guilt. —(Hear, hear.) But he must ask whose fault was it that these. children had been allowed to continue in this . _ Inhaopy situation ? Was it the fault of the Church ? Was the Church to be charged with that tremendous extent of misery which had accompanied the extension of menu factures, in which the State had been most anxious to breed up and to encoura the production of these neg lected children, tion, must -lid which, when left to its natural inevitablyopera lead to ignorance and vice.—( Hear, bear.) The Reformation, illustrious as was the era, had many grievous stales, and among the greatest was the niggardliness with whi c h since that period the State of England had doled out religious education to the people. —_( Hear, bear.) There had been but one ir glorious p excep tion, of that most Christian statesman, l bad, in the midst of financial difficulty, proposed. ..v,,arla,nwth ofo 100,000 L for the spiritual instru c ti on of thaett it eves only b poorer-classes. That vote was continued for many years, n discontinued because Parliament, a f ter h av i se . been blessing of God, enabled to go through the erbeyattehset Iproteverits be t threatens .. t re be a t n e e n f e a d c t a o n r y country , lt w ls t thoughth d i to dangers throw w a h s i i e d h e i per of the Parliament, not of the Clergy. There weregsrotmeee present who were not guiltless of that offence, but they ought to bins God that they were still able to make repa ration—that only reparation which was now within their power. Let thorn give additional means of Ch urc h ex tension in the manufacturing districts. Without that he would not say that it was dishonesty—he would not say that it was hypocrisy ; but be would say that it was the grossest inconsistency in any Noble Lord to get up and complain of the destitute state in which the manufacturing districts were with respect to crime. He did not complain of the present Government so much as those wlO had gone before. But the Noble Marquis had alluded to the unfor ' tunate case of Sir William Courtenay, which had lately I happened in Kent. Now he (the Bishop of Exeter) would suppose that the Noble Marcos had got one of his model A phooli established in Kent. Those unhappy, and nahappily ignorant people believed that Sir Wiliam Cour ten sy was inspired and a prophet. Now, suppose also, were were e nough of bel i evers i n hi m to h ave l according to the doctr i ne l a id d own i n I/1 flute of the Com m i ttee, that C omm i ttee wou ld , t s".-eore c d to pay a master of the op i n i ons o f .41(o ~,,t'Or Ailli 'am Courtenay—( La ug h ter.) Th ey h a d al -7.4:040c three plans sin ce the Ist of January, )6 n+r/"'~i how many more they would have before the Ist of January, 1840, it was impossible to say. One had already been superseded—another had not been super seded, but another plan had been put side by side with it—the second to be acted upon the first opportunity that could be found. Model schoels were the most cherished idea of the plan—it was the first and the last, and was only laid aside for a time. Difficulties arose, and it was hid aside in a certain mass of words, which left it open to the Committee to resume the plan at the earliest opportunity that offered. The Noble Marquis in his letter to Lord John Russell, held that model schools were indispensible; and her Majesty. through her Secre tary of State, had given the scheme her most cordial ap probation. It now, then, became the duty of the Noble Marquis to take means for carrying it out; and he (the Bishop of Exeter) had not the least doubt but that he would be most happy to perform his duty. The Commit tee spoke of general and special religious instruction, but why si.ould the general religious instruction be confined to Christians—why should it exclude the Heathen, the .Icw, or the Mabometan ? Again, what were the truths which all Christians professed in common to believe ? If they were only to be those in which all would agree, the Commission, which was the shOrtest document upon the table, would be longer than the Book of Truth, in which all were to agree. But there was a fallacy about it which appeared to have been entirely lost sight of. It was giving the power to those who believed least of the Christian religion to impose upon the mass their own prin ciples.—(Hear, hear.) Would - the Noble Marquis con sent that his child should be taught his duty to his Maker —would he consent that he should be taught big moral duties as a man, without his being taught what he was as a ►nan—without being taught that he was a sinful, worthless being, who was unable to perform any duty unless he was assisted by the Divine Grace—that being so, he should say that general religious instruction was not the way in which to sanctify the dawning reason in youth. He would not trespass farther on their time than merely to thank them r the attention they had paid him. The Bishop of DURHAM having on a former occasion presented a petition signed by 24,000 people in favour of general education, he had taken that opportunity of stating that it would be desirable that normal schools should be established—that a larger grant should be made to the British and Foreign School, to the Na tional Schools, and to the Education Schools in Glasgow. An imputation had been thrown upon the Government, that it had jumped from the course it had proposed to pur sue in 1838. He did not know what might have induced them to take their present course, but he did know that there were many circumstances which should have made them do so. Last year a great number of petitions had been presented to both Houses, praying for an extended scheme of national education. In fact, that matter had been agitated in the public mind more than any other thing. Again, the inquiries that had been made, and the statistical accounts that had been returned, showed that there was an imm..nse number of persons totally without education. and that crime was caused thereby—the greater number of prisoners having been left totally without any means of instruction—also from the very general wish that had been expressed for a large scheme of national education, and from the accounts of what was doing for education on the Continent, and from the unhappy cir cumstances which had lately taken place in Kent, no doubt the Government was induced to take the matter se riously into their consideration, and to make a larger grant to the two Societies than formerly. [We regret that the Rev. Prelate was nearly inaudible in the gallery from the circumstance of his speaking from the Bishop's bench, which is at the far end of the House, and also from his speaking very low, but more particularly from. the buzz of conversation that arose from the Tory benches.] Earl FITZ WILLIAM said that every one of their Lordships must have heard with pleasure the speeches which had fallen from the Most Rev. Prelate, and from the Rev. Prelate who had spoken from the table (Exeter). Any man must have listened with pleasure to the speeches dictated by that talent, which had no doubt given them the opportunity of addressing their Lordships ; but there was a very considerable discrepancy between the two speeches. Thee Most Rev. Prelate, in the conclusion of his speech, said that if the Church ceased to teach morals, or a right course of Christianity, then it would be right for the State to cast off the Church. He trusted there was no individual in that House who thought the Church could be cast off by the State on any account.—( Hear, hear. ) But it did not appear to him that was a grant on which they could be led to the conclusion to which the Right Reverend Prelate had arrived. The Right Reverend Prelates would forgive him if, greatly adwirring the elo quence of the latter and the lucid and distinct statements of the former, he took the liberty of complaining that they bad not grappled with the true question before their Lord ships.--( Hear, bear.) Since 1834, for five successive Sessions, a vote of money had been made by the House of Commons for purposes analogous to those contemplated by the present vote, and any person imbued with the rea ,:oning faculty would have expected the Right Reverend Prelates would have pointed out some glaring inconsis tency between the plan now proposed and those carried out by previous votes. From that they had shrunk.— ( Hear, hear.)— Differences he knew might be shown, ( Hear, hear, from the Opposition)—but real and sub. stantial differences he contended there were none. There was no substantial difference between the hands through which the money was to pass. He admitted that in granting public funds to any locality they ought first to call on the wealthy in the neighbourhood to contribute ; but they ought not to refuse funds because no voluntary contributions were made, because by such a course they might deprive those localities of assistance which from their poverty stood in the greatest need of it. The Right Rev. Prelate had said there was only one pe riod for the last three centuries in which the State bad done its duty on the snbject of education, and that was in granting 100,0001. But was that 100,0001. granted for the purpose of instructing the people ? No ; the only object of that grant was to increase the value of small livings.-- ( Hear, hear.) He did not disapprove of that grant; but it was money given to the ministers of the Church, and did not at all insure the increased instruction of the people.—(A Noble Lord—" It encouraged residence.") No; the building of glebe-houses would have encouraged residence, but the 100,0001. did not—it might have im proved the condition of the pastors, bd.'. it did not benefit their flocks. He was painfully surprised to hear the Right Rev. Prelate say there was not a dogma in Chris tianity that was not denied—he was surprised to hear that from a Christian minister—but would the Right Rev. Prelate get up and say there were not many dogmas in Christianity that were acceded to by every sect in the empire ? He did not know what impression such an opi nion would create out of doors. It appeared to him that the Right Rev. Prelate's opinion was that the education and instruction of the people was not only not calculated to make the people more Christian, but had a directly opposite tendency. If that were so—that the more know ledge a man had—the more he was accomplished, and the more he bad the means of tasting intellectual pleasures, so in proportion was he the less fited to receive the doctrines of Christianity—if that was so no man would be more averse than himself to affording intellectual en joyment; but, on the contrary, he believed it was the best preparation for enabling him to receive the truths of Christianity according to their true spirit. It appeared to him ( Earl Fitzwilliam) that such an opinion was the most remote from the truth, and which, if true, would lead to the most alarming and disheartening conclusions. As to the plan proposed by the Government he had little doubt but that the formation of the Committee, as it was now formed, had led to a great deal of bona fide mis understanding, and a good deal of misrepresenta lian out of doors; and, therefore, though his Noble Friend (the Marquis of Lansdowne) had defended it with a considerable degree of success, he did not think, viewing it as a matter of expediency, that his Noble Friends had been well advised in the course they had taken—he meant for their own interest. He was very far from being of opinion that there was anything to complain of in the constitution of the Committee. There was little difference between a Committee of four responsible Minis ters and four Lords of the Treasury—indeed he should say the present Committee was, in some respects, a better body than the last, because it was composed of men in higher strtion and mere responsible to Parliament. He did not believe that anything would be done by that Com mittee that had not been done by the Treasury itself. If he thought they would administer the money as the Right Rev. Prelate supposed, so as to encourage those who had the smallest portion of Christianity about them to the exclu sion of those who had a large portion of Christianity, then he, would not approve of it; but be did not think any well founded apprehensions could be entertained on that subject. On these grounds he should give his vote in favour of the previous question. One word on a branch of the subject which his Noble Friends had been obliged, as he thought, unfortunately to recede from—he meant the establishment of normal schools. There were very few of their Lord. ships, he trusted, who had not, at one period of their lives, been engaged in establishing schools, and he would ask them whether the greatest of all difficulties in the establishment of a good school, was not the difficulty of firstling a good school-master. That difficulty met these at the very outset.—(Cheers.) He (Earl F.) augured well from the attempt that had been made by the present Go vernment on the subject of education, and if successful in their bands, he believed it would drag many others up by the collar.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) If the Go vernment yielded to the address, they would betray the best interests of the country. Ii under the dictation of lay Lords, or even of clerical Lords, they would violate their duty, and would incur a large share of responsibility to the people of this empire, to whom it was proposed to lend a sum of 30,0001 (Laughter)—they would de prive the people of England of all the benefits which the other House of Parliament—aye, and which that House had during five successive years recognised to have been the results of the previous grants. Their Lordships could not`get, out of that. They had acquiesced in those votes, they had acquiesced in them—it was andbecause they t h k e n y e w why felt they were beneficial to the peopl e o f England, and they knew their duty too well to mak e any few objection to the distribution of those grants . there Whateverere hate f v . e . r vote they might comehe believed to, believed there her Majesty, contained in the address—he who th ou ght his Noble Friend would give that advice t o were few w h o wou ld give different advice to what ho hoped theystrin stringent as ldg t i o ve p . re If en their m Lordships' proceedings were so giving that advice to her Ma jesty, which t h ey ought to gi ve, the responsibility so in curred wo u ld recoil on their Lordships' heads.—( H. Hear. The Bish op of NORWICH felt some difficultydifficultyad dressing thei r Lordships, feelin that his opinions might not be in accordance with many g of their Lordships, and he felt still more difficulty' because he was aware might not by any means be in accor dance his opinions w ith the opi nions of some of hi s Right Rae Brethren, yet he consoled himself by thinking , though might not be treading in the pat h ye t the end and the aim of thei r o bj ect was the. same.P He had been much gratified with the eloquent and able speech of the Right Rev. Prelate at the table (the Bishop of EXC. ter). He bad been much gratified at the cordiality with which the Right Rev. Prelate (the Archbishop of Can terbury) spoke of the Noble Marquis's syste m of educa tion. All he hoped was that there would be a new era, and that the most Rev. Prelate would have the rest of his Right Rev. Brethren aiding and assisting her Ma jesty's Government—endeavouring, as they were, by every means in their power, to do that which was to pro mote the welfare of the people. He was also much gra tified with what fell from the Right Rev. Prelate a few evenings ago, when he disclaimed the idea that the clergy were anxious to have the education of all the people— The Bishop of LONDON—I disclaimed nothing of the sort. —( Hear, hear.) I claimed the right to educate my own flock. The Bishop of NORWICH—The Right Rev. Prelate, and another Right Rev. Prelate claimed, and rightly claimed, a right to educate every one of their flocks com mitted to their charges, He rejoiced to hear this, because it was a sufficient answer And refutation to the calumny that had been heaped upon them, that the Clergy of Eng land had been dormant at their post, in apathy and le thargy. From this time forward the people of England would never hear that the clergy of England were apathetic or slumbering at their post. No, they would be ever ready to attend the people, and he hoped and trusted their energies and zeal would be always displayed in the great and important work of educating, not only their own flock, but the mass of the population. —( Hear, hear.) When he observed the changes that had taken place within a short period in the Church—when be called to mind the time when it required some moral courage to speak of education—when they were used to have the most insignificant portion of it dated out to them, might he not anticipate that great changes were likely to occur ? (Hear, bear, hear.) He remembered the time when infant schools were looked upon as dangerous to the Church.— ( Hear, hear.) He remembered the time when he was taunted, and by a clergyman, because, forsooth, he consi dered these infant schools as engines of Socinianism, and calculated to undermine the Church. It was Socinianism in the cradle—it was danger to the Church from infants in the nursery. He looked forward to the time when he hoped to see the Established Church as tolerant in its prac tice as it was in theory. He admitted there were serious dif ferences in the way of a general system'of instruction. If there was any subject which should be discussed without pas sion or without anger,. it was that of education.—( Hear, hear.) But he appealed to their Lordships arid the world whether the subject had been calmly and dispas sionately discussed?—( Hear, hear.) How had it been met ? By exaggeration, by falsehood, and by every de gree of obloquy which could be heaped upon man. Such had been the reception et the system of education pro posed by her Majesty's Government. Surely that was not the way to receive it. The fact was, each party had his own scheme hammered out of his own anvil to which he regularly attached himself. Instead of adopting the Christian principle of believing no evil in the plan, they considered it as all evil. He (the Bishop of Norwich) did not mean to say the scheme was perfect. But there had been no explanation ; the country had condemned it at once without examination. The clergy might be anxious for education, but they could not do it, they were not suffi ciently numerous. There' were immense masses of the people to whom they never. could obtain access. The Right Rev. Prelate who presided over the thirty-two parishes of :the metropolis had stated that there was not one clergyman to every 15,000 persons. How then could they do their duty, and carry education amongst these masses of people ? It had been said that there was great difficulty in devising any plan by which the Dissenter and the Churchman could be educated together. It was a point of great nicety, but.jie believed it was practicable. —( Cheers.) He was not a novice in education, for he had spent many years of his life among the humbler classes, he knew their feelings, their habits, and their thoughts, and it was his deliberate conviction that the people could be educated together although of different religious opi nions. He now came to the most delicate point, the system of general and special religious instruction. The Goverment had been taunted with that proposition, but it was not a dis covery of their own—they were plagiarists, and of a man of whom they had no need tar be ashamed. That individual was neither more nor less than ' a Right Rev. Prelate, who com manded the esteem and respect of all who knew him—he meant the evangelical Prelate, Daniel Wilson, th e Bi s h op o f C a l cutta. There was an establishment at Calcutta called Martiniere, which had been founded by a general officer, who had gone out to Madras as a private soldier, amassed a large fortune, which he left for the education of the people, without reference to creed. The Lord Bishop of Calcutta was at the head of the Committee, and the document in his hand was signed " Daniel Calcutta, Robert Leger, and James Chare;." Now he wished to reverse the order, and to put James Charles at the top, as promoting a system of general education.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The plan first adopted was that of education in the doctrines of the Church of England ; but that was discovered to be contrary to the will of the founder, and a system was then established in which Protestant and Catholic, Dissenter, Creek, and Arminian might receive moral and reli gious instruction. The religious instruction was divided into two pans, general and special, and these were the very words which were used in the Order in Council. In the general re ligious instruction were contained those doctrines in which the Catholic, Quaker, Arminian, and every grade of Dissenter and Churchman were agreed, and the special instruction was given on particular days by the Ministers of each religious persua sion to the children. Truly when they found such a system working well at Martiniere, it was unfair to condemn the pre sent proposition. Again, with respect to the different versions of the Scriptures, a great objection was urged against the Douay edition of the Bible being permitted in these schools. What was the Douay version ? It was a translation from a book published in 1669 by the University of Oxford, as being the very best version of the Bible. At the time of the Revolution in France, when England was deluged with emigrants, what did the University of Oxford? They pub lished a large edition of the same work, which they dissemi nated among the emigrants—they were received with gratitude and considered a boon worthy of the University.—(Hear . , hear.) He was awa re th a t t h e prospect was g l oomy enough before them, and through that gloom it was scarcely possible to see anything like a bow of promise, but among the angry feel ings and animosities that existed he predicted that the time would come when these prejudices and angry passions would sink like sediment, and at the top would float those buoyant principles which all philanthropists should cherish—then, instead of contending together as controversialists, they would go hand in hand to overcome their powerful enemy, both ignorance and vice, and Profligacy ; and although her Majesty's Ministers might not live to see the fruit; tlaey had sown the seed which no power could crush, which would never be crushed, and he hoped they might all look forward with confidence to the time when the people of England would be educated. The Bishop of LONDON at that late hour, and in an atmo sphere very much resembling that of the diocese to which his Right Rev. Brother would send him—(Laughter)—would not trespass long upon their Lordships ; but he felt it would be inconsistent with his duty if he did not offer a few observations before the discussion was brought to a close. He gave the Right Rev. Prelate full credit for sincerity of intention—he had spoken of the tolerance of the Church, and he (the Bishop of London) hoped with him that it would be as tolerant in practice as theory. He would not dwell upon the subject, but lie would just remark that if any Church de served the character of toleration in practice it was the Es tablished Church of that realm.—( Loud cheers.) Indeed, lie was not sure if it had not carried it further than the Con stitution of the country warranted.—( Hear, hear.) Not that he blamed her for that—not that he wished her to retrace her steps, but he could not sit quietly by, and hear those statements made to their Lordship.. It was with unfeigned reluctance that he presented himself as the supporter of resolutions which were, view them as they might, condemnatory of the plan proposed by the Government. That plan had been persevered in with much determination— with an insignificant majority in another place—and the oppo sition of the great bulk of the people. With the opposition of 3,000 petitions against it, and 100 in its favour. lie felt great pain in doing so, because it had taken the shape of receiving the sanction and approval of their Sovereign, who was recognised as the temporal head of the Church.— ( Hear, hear.) But in applying the language of censure to the measure, he hoped he might not be supposed to ascribe unworthy motives to any individual. They were erroneous motives lerding to injurious results, but he did not suppose there was any deliberate intention or forethought to set in ope ration machinery which, if allowed to go on, would undoubtedly undermine and weaken, if it did not overthrow, the Protestant Church in that country. Above all, the Noble Lord the Pre sident of the Council was the last person to whom he would impute sneh motives. The Noble Lord had stated his conviction of the intimate connection between the Esta blished Church and the State too frequently to sup pose that he had any such intention, but giving the Ministers full credit for the sincerity of their motives it required some degree of charity to believe that they were influenced by anything but a desire to promote the interest of the Established Church. lie thought they were in the hands of party in that country who were using, or attempting to use; them as instruments in carrying that measure—( Cheers) —a party making up in activity and subtlety what they wanted in strength and respectability.—( Cheers )—who were endea vouring to undermine the foundations of the Church and the Throne, and who most skillfully assailed the one through the other, and if the Church fell ib would involve in its fall that of the Throne.—( Hear, hear.) He spoke athisedly when he said there was an active party labouring for these objects ; it was now two years since he took occasion to warn their Lordships and the country against the projects and schemes set forth, and recommended for adoption by a Society comprising in its list names highly respectable, whether he looked to the rank of the parties,or the uprightness and integrity of their motives, but who had lent their names, not being aware of the tendency of the Society —he meant the Central Society of Education. That Society was at work to overthrow National Education in con nection with the Church, and to establish a strictly secular education. It had been ascertained that the exclusion of the Bible was made a sine qua non by that Society. The first project put fort by their Committee was almost identical with that proposed by the Goverment, but there was another body which had been recently formed, called the Society for tho Promotion of Religious Equality. The Right Rev. Prelate then read an extract from the rules of the Society, and ob served that that was not more than might be expected from determined Dissenters, anxious for the suppression of the Estab lished Church as a Church. But the following passage was much more important :—" On every side the Church and State question meets us—it is the Tithe question in Ireland— it is the Church Extention in Scotland, and it is the Church rate, and Education, and University question in England. " ( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Now, it followed, that if they were to have primary schools upon the Government system, the same principle must be applied to the Universities. They had increased to the amount of 71,814, only one twenty sixth part of which were Dissenters. In this number were not included the scholars at the Dissenting schools. There were 1,000,000 of children at schools in connection with the Church ; compare that large aggregate with the number of scholars when the impulse commenced which instituted the National Society and the British and Foreign School Society. Were not the clergy the most active and liberal promoters of those schools formed under the superintendence of those Societies ? Many of the schools were commenced almost at their expense, and they spent a great portion of their time in the management of them.—(Hear, hear.) A vet y just and eloquent tribute was pronounced by a Noble and Lamed Lord (Lord Brougham), who had distinguished himself as an advocate of education, upon the parochial clergy in the other House of Parliament about 21years ago. As the Noble and Learned Lord then said that he respectable of that n u m educationbehritlhdofirses attention estimateh was i n w , which obutse spoke after full and mos t mature d e 'ib erat i on, he trussed that that well considered e u l ogy wou ld not now b e withdrawn. The Noble Marquis had ad m itt e d th a t a very considerable extent of education had been s uppli e d t o t h e people in connection with the exertions of the Ch urc h ; b ut he cemplained that the quality the Noblee religious Marquis t h e education ll of inferior. the a education i d n The e h to e was a hi very s la3uetg schools. llse g said hede f tOO 0 0 n f d theth greata children did not himself call this bad, b u t t h at was t h e language of that party in whose hands, he feared, th e Government were--those badness i arosevtel c r s wf roorte,s . who were classed against the Church, and looked for the success of their designs to the operation of the measure now brought forward by the Government. The alleged badness was, that the clerical system of education devoted too much time to the s tudy . and exposition of the Scriptures, and too little to the ac quisition of that useful knowledge .requisite for the pursuits of artizans in after life. The clergy were content to bear this im putation.—( Hear.) Without reserve they admitted that they felt . the great object of education was to train up immortal beings, ! 'f ~. 5 Z,} .-" rii SUN. LONDON. SATURDAY, JULY C. Is3g. who by baptism were placed in a relation with their Maker—to teach them how to maintain and fulfil those relations—to teach them the knowledge of God and of themselves—to form their habits by impressing the truths of holiness and charity. They looked upon this kind of education as unspeakably of more im portance (though they did not purpose that it should form the whole amount of instruction) than the impressing deeply upon their minds that kind of knowledge which they would be sure to acquire for themselves in after life, if they should find that it would be serviceable for their rdvancement in the world and for the security of worldly advantages. His opinion was that mere intellectual, mere wordly knowledge, unless sanctified and re strained by Christian instruction, would turn out rather a curse than a blessing. He said this advisedly—:( Hear, hear, bear)—for he would beg their Lordships to remember that man was not only a reasonable being, but a moral and an accountable agent. That knowledge which was only calculated to sharpen the wit of man to exercise his faculties and to fill the stores of memory, was proved, by experi ence , not to be neces sarily connected with the social happiness and moral improve ' ment of the possessor. The contrary specious theory was con ' troverted by his (the Bishop of London's) own experience. What was the present state of popular education in Frasiee ? They found there nothing to support the theory of those who would hold out such vast advantages from the introduction of the proposed scheme into this country. He would refer their Lordships to the interesting and educational statistics of M. Guerin. That industrious gentleman stated that crimes against the person were most frequent in the province of South East Alsace, where the people were well instructed —that they were much less in Britanny where the people were most ignorant, and that in the best informed de partments the crimes against property were most numerous, so that if instruction did not increase crime there was no reason to show that it diminished it. If this statement were true, he (the Right Rev. Prelate) thought the whole question was settled. It surely would be better to leave the people in ignorance than to increase their crimes by educating them. While M. Guerin seemed at a loss to find out the reason of this state of things in France, he (the Right Rev. Prelate) thought it existed in the fact that there education, which was pushed forward vigorously by the Government, was confined to secular objects—( Hear, hear)—and he believed that the Government of France, seeing this grievous result, were now about to con nect the system of incorporating religion with a secular educa tion. A report, addressed to M. Guizot, while Minister of Public Instruction, by one of his agents, stated that there was no moral and religious educationwhatev er among the people. The labours of Mr. Beaumont and M. de Tocqueville in Ame rica, which was often reverted to as an example for us, and where the Government required the people to have their chil dren educated, the moral improvement of the people, caused by the secular system of education, was at least problematical. This was further shown by the admissions of the Americans themselves. Witness the annual Reports of the Massachussets Board of Education. The public library there was composed of books calculated for adult and juvenile readers. The books excluded particular religious dogmas. They proposed to have in the books of their Board religious instruction which should not favour a sect of Christians. He (the Right Rev. Prelate) really should like to see their books.—(Laughter.) Mr. Mann, the secretary of the Massachussets' Board, said there was an alarming deficiency of moral and religious instruction. llf that Board could succeed in collecting a library of books upon general, and not including special religion, he (the Right Reverend Prelate) would acknowledge that they had done that which he had considered to be mainly impossible. It seemed, however, that the Go vernment of the States required that the books should be of that character. As for the higher ranks, he (the Right Hon. Prelate) would admit that intellectual education improved them considerably—it filled up the time that might otherwise be dissipated in degrading relaxations—it sharpened the sense of honour, which was often the only substitute to be found for pure religious feeling—it opened the mind to inferior mo tives, in cases where it was inaccessible to the highest of all. But intellectual education would have no such effect upon the lower classes. They must have religious principles or they would have none at all.—(Tlear, hear, hear.) Referring to the Ame rican statistics he found that in the State of New York that out of a population of 2,0 )0,000, there were at school 500,000, or one-fourth of the whole. In Connecticut one-third of the whole population were at school. Yet in both those States, where the education, as he had before said, was secular—crime had increased to an alarming extent. Certainly intellectual education seemed to have the effect of diminishing murders, and other outrages upon the person, but it increased thefts and frauds. In Rus sia, where a similar system of education was being pursued, out of 15,800 crimes, 3,509 were cases of personal violence, In Pensylvania, out of 7,500 crimes, 640 were cases of violence. Our own criminal statistics showed similar illustrations, The report of the Chaplain of the New Clerkenwell Prison, who was a very able person, and paid much attention to this sub ject, stated that a great portion of the crimes were committed by persona who had received a secular education ; in . fact, these men were the most depraved. Of three in the prison last year one had been committed eight times, the second seven er eight times, and the third had been committed twice. The Chaplain had lately assured him (the Right Rev. Prelate) that his report for this year would fully corroborate his views of last year. He (the Right Rev. Prelate) feared lie was rather te dious—(Hear, hear)—but he was desirous' to appeal to facts. He was now desirous to direct their Lordships' attention to the great efforts the Church in this country had made in the pro motion of education during the last 25 years, still he would ad mit that the system now in operation was far from being as per fect as it might be made and as it ought to be. He had called the attention of the clergy of his diocese to those facts. While he reverted to what the clergy had done with limited means, he would venture to say, if their Lordships had done their duty— if the Legislature had done its duty—the clergy would have done much more.—( Hear, hear.) In adverting to the paramount importance of religicets education, he was not oppo•ing himself to secular education in connection with it. He thought that such study as geography, history, astronomy, and natural philosophy tended to make the student more fit to re ceive the truths of the Bible. This he knew from his own ex perience, for he, too, as well as his Right Hon. Friend, was an Arcadian.—( Laughter. ) He thought that a judicious admix ture of secular knowledge sharpened the mind for the research into scriptural knowledge, and he thought that it might be made to bear upon it. He had never denied the right of the State to interfere with the education of the people—it, in f act, was so intimately connected with it, that the present was a most important State question.—(llear, hear, hear.) It was a duty most incumbent on Governments to interfere with the edu cation of the people, and he was sorry to say that the present Government had too much neglected its duty in this respe c t. judicious educa tion, interfering actively in th e p romot i on of educa tion, the State was preventing the necessity of punishing crime. By giving the people a system of education which united secu lar and religious instruction, the Government would institute the mist efficient system of public morals. If they had ex pended one tenth of the money which they had laid out in gaols, houses of correction r and asylums, in founding schools, 50 years since, they might have saved nearly the other nine-tenths. The manner in which .the State should use this right must be modified according to circumstances. For instance, we should not imitate the system of the Prussian, which was a despotic Govern ment, and which imprisoned two of the Archbishops of its Esta blished Church, for such a mode of interference woilld not suit the habits of the free people of this country. Yet that was the system which the Central Education Society and its allies would introduce into this country. They would make the State the universal pedagogue, the trustee of all the funds, and the whip per in of all the loiterers.—( Laughter, hear ) He considered, that the State by appointing the Established Church had already settled its right to interfere in the education of the people. Ile was of the opinion of Mr. L. Horner, a gentlema n with whom he was sure the N o bl e and Learned' Lord (Brougham) would agree on this point. But this scheme went too far. He proposed to give the board the power of schoelmasters in every point, except that of chastisin g the children.—(Loud laughter, and hear, hear.) But lie would maintain, that neither practically nor constitutionally could the Govern ment act in this manifold capacity. They could not do it practically, because it was not likely that four or five members of her Majesty's Governmeut, whose thoughts and whose time were chiefly taken up with practical questions. who held their offices at the pleasure of the Crown, or rather it, even t o t s h h e ou c h o l un t t h r e y y . i at the pleasure of the Hous e o f Commons--( 1 aughter, and hear, hear)—could attend to th e d e li cate and difficult task of tey administering would the not advantages to do of education be inclined. The President of the Council would soon become a puppet in the hands of the designing men he had alluded to. The Noble Marquis' would make the gesticulations, while the others would pull the strings.— (Laughter.) They would probably delegate their functions, to their Secretary, who would be an authorised but yet an irresponsible minister of education. What security would they have that the Secretary would not be a member of the Esta blished Church, or a Socinian, or at least a Roman Catholic? —( Hear, hear.) Those considerations excited in his mind a strange impression of thosefantocci n i symptoms which he had just alluded to. Why should not the Government continue that system which had been experienced during the last five years? He would not object to his continuance, though perhaps those Societies were not quite consistent with the principle for which he contended Parliament had voted 20,000 e, for the purposes of education towards the erection of schools. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had very properly insisted that the Lords of the Treasury do fix principles, and then they knew what their mo ney was granted for—( Hear, hear)—but the great evil in the present ease was, that they could not say what it was to be granted for. He must repeat, that the system presented a frightful prospect of latitudinarism—elthough in saying so, he did not mean to offend the Noble Marquis.—( Hear. ) It might be said that it would be impossible to instruct the children of the Churchman and the Dissenter together. If these discussions were continued it would no doubt be so, and in his opinion it would be better if it were so, if Church prin ciples were to be abolished in our schools.--( Hear, hear.) He knew that they could be educated together. He was President of a national school for nine years, during which time he more than trebbled the number of scholars, and in that school the children of all classes of Dissenters were educated, and even the children of Jews were not excluded. He knew .that it was a difficult matter, but it could be done by a system of kindness and without any attempt to oblige the chil dren of Dissenters to attend on Church worship. It was impossible to educate them together, and nothing would Ond so much as the language used by the opponents to the national schools. If those connected with those schools were charged with bigotry, was it not natural that they should hold firmer by those doctrines which were derided—that they should draw tighter those reins, the hold upon which had been relaxed in order to admit the children of Dissenters to the be nefit of the schools? If they should come to separate . education, he for one, could see no great harm in that. The children would not in after life look with envy or distrust upon each other, in consequence of being taught in separate schools, but most decidedly they would learn to look at the fundamental duties of Christianity, as of no impor tance, or at least of a little importance compared with those that were merely moral and worldly. The Rev. Prelate then quoted long extracts from the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons of 1818, amid from the works of Mons. Poussaint, the French p hil os opher, in order to show that it was absol u t e l y necessary that the clergy ought to be allowed to fulfil their first duty,that of teaching the reli g ion of the coun try—that was t h e on popular instruction which could last. The State was bound to give the Church means— adequate means —for the education of the people, and they might rely upon it that those means would be efficiently, anti as far as possible, effectually a dministered. Belonging, as he did, to that E s t a bli s h ment, o f which her Majesty was the temporal head, it was with pain that he found himself op posed to that Governisient in which she placed her confi dence ; but there was another head to whom he owed higher obedience, and he was bound, even in duty to her Majesty, steadfastly to resist any measure, from whatever quarter it came, that was calculated to impair that Church to which lie diminish its influence, or to had the honour of b e l ong i ng , to ( Cheers.) make it less effi c i en t t h an i t ought to be . Lord BROUGHAAI—If the Rev. Prelate (Durham) who your Lordships, had occasion some time ago rose t o a dd re ss e to regret the late hour o f the ev ening, and state as a reason reason have I to lse afraid for doubting wh e th er h e wou ld be favoured with the attentio n of your Lordship s , h ow muc h mot.e r who rise at thi s l a t e p er i o d o f the night. A more able, a mor e convincing, and a more concise speech it has never been my fortune to hear on so diffuse a subject,--a more temperate and a snore candid speech I have never heard upon a question above all others calculated to excite the feelings, connected as it is both with p o liti cs and religion.—(Cheers.) But I can use no dis cretion in the matter. lam obliged to take part in the dis cussion after what I have heard from the Rev. Prelates (the Bishops of L on d on an d E xeter ), a nd to a certain extent, but to a small one, after what fell from the Most Rev. Rev. Prelate. If any person had entered this House after the greater part of the speech of theßev: Prelate who spoke from the table (Exeter) —if that person had not heard the speech of my Noble Friend the President of the Couneil, or had never read the papers upon the subject of education which are on your Lordship's table, could he ever have conceived for one moment that this discussion was at all bordering upon, or in the slightest degree had any reference to the discussion now before your Lordships. Could any man for one moment dream, considering that he only heard the able and very elaborate speech from the Rev. Prelate, taken frinn the general text, that above all things re ligious instruction is objectionable to the morals of the country, and is most hurtful to the character of the people ? Could any man for one moment hear him charge the N..ble Lords, my friends in the Government, that they were the ready and willing tools, only waiting to be taken up by the Central Society for Education —that they were ready made- tools, anxiously waiting to be put to use by the So ciety for the Promotion of Religious Equality—a Society of which I have heard for the first time to ni s ,ht.—( Hear, hear. ) I put it to the candour of pair Lordships, whether any person entering the House, without having heard the speech of my Noble Friend, or having read those papers which are now lying before me, could he, by 'possibility, my Lords, believe, after hearing the eloquent and elaborate declamation of the Reverend Prelate, against an irreligious education being highly demo , ralizing to the country—l put it to you, my Lords, is it pos sib:e that he could have conceived that speech was used as an argument against a plan of education, on which it is fairly and fully set out in the paper the motion is founded, and which was staring the Rev. Prelate in the face during the whole of his speech, that the fundamental quality of the plan is that there shall be a general and especial religious education ; that it is to be combined and is to imbue the whole manner of instruction ; that a chaplain is to be employed to conduct the religious education of the children b e l ong i ng t o th e Establish ment in every school, and that the parent or natural guardian of every child was to have free liberty to instruct him in the principles of his own religion ? My Lords, could any man fancy that that speech was' directed against a plan of which these were the fundamental principle§ ?—( Hear, hear. ) Surely the Central Society must repudiate this principle. One would think we were discussing a general scheme for the edu cation of the people :—all the apprehensions and alarms were pointed at this—all the mischief apprehended, or affected to be apprehended, is to be derived from a general system of educa tion—,compulsory in its nature—in the hands of the Govern ment—irreligious—based on a design to pull down the Esta blished Church.—( Hear, hear.) " Anti-Christian" was the term applied to it m one petition,—" Popish," by another, — and one petition, culling both the flowers, applied them both— probably thinking that " Popish," was " Anti-Christian." —( Hear and laughter.) But what is the plan ? No general system whatever. A mere minute of Council, re cognizing the doings of a certain function by four Members of the Pi ivy Council which heretofore has been done by one : namely, the suiserintending the distribution of the annual isarliamentary grant, and establishing one normal school, this last having been abandoned. lam sorry for it.—(Hear, hear.) I wish there had been any grotind for the change res pecting this; I complain of the system as not going far enough. I regret that the Government, in deference to the senseless apprehensions of some—the miserable affectations of others— and the foolish !prejudices of the rest—have pared down what ought to have been a general measure for the education of the people, into a mere plan for founding a single school in Lon don, and appointing a Committee of their own body, to super intend the grant of 20,0001. or 30.000/. lam mortified that Parliament is not ready to do its duty to the people—that after . 25 years spent in deploring the want of public instruction in this country—after it has been by all parties confessed, that the people of England are less educated than tnore of Central Europe, and only better educated than the people of Spain or Italy—l am ashamed of our inglorious singularity in this res pect—of our shameful exception to the character o the age in which we live—that after all that hest been confessed, even by the Right Reverend Prelate—of the utter inadequacy of our present means of education—that all we have been able to screw our courage" to, has been the asking Parliament for a paltry 30,000/., and appointing a Committee of Noblemen to distribute it.—( Hear, hear.) But it is still more mortifying to find that there exist millions in this country who have been so far childish, thoughtless, and unreflecting, as to be led away by the cry—the clamour—the vulgar exploded outcry of danger to the Established Church !—( Hear, hear, hear) — while 20,000/ a-year has been annually distributed by Govern ment at their discretion, without any such cry being raised.—( Hear, hear.) How much must I fear then for my plan, which is to furnish every parish with the means of M .. - fording to all classes, without distinction of sects, the benefits of education. However, my Lords, I must do my best to defend the plan of the Government, which, as far as it goes, is in the right direction, and which is only to be attacked by ignorance and misrepresentation.—( Hear. ) My Lords, one,great error which pervades the whole argument of the Right Reverend Prelates, I wish to clear up at theoutset, because, till the terms in which we are contesting are ren dered intelligible, we are but fighting in the dark. If th ere i s one proposition more dwelt upon than another by the oppo nents of the Government plan, when they' condescend to argue, which is but seldom, it is this, that to the Church the State has committed the religious instruction of the people, and that therefore the Clergy should have the secular education of the people. First they claim a right exclusively to educate the children of their own persuasion. How is it possible that there can be any plan of education based upon the exclusive right of the clergy to teach the children of the Church ? Are no Churchmen to be suffered to send their children to be educated by the Dissenters?—(Hear, hear.) Take care, however, that you do not give some preference to Churchmen over Dis senters. Remember that funds raised by the represen tatives of all, should be applied to the benefit of all. But, then, it is said that the Church should be provided by the State with ample means for giving secu,ar instruction to all classes, Churchmen and Dissenters. How is that. to work? . The Members of the Established Church are to teach not only secular, but religious instruction? Of course they can teach none but their own religion. To the Dissenter's child as well as the Churchman's? That is impossible ; unless, indeed, the Dissenter consents. But how is his consent to be obtained ? And if you cannot get it, are we to allow you the exclusive ap propriation of money voted for general instruction ?—(Cheers.) For, after all. though you may think this a vulgar point, it is a necessary one—it is that on which the whole dispute really arises. If the clergyman is to teach his religion to all classes, the Dissenter will not send his child to be, as he thinks" per verted," or as the Church thinks " converted "—( A laugh)—and thus loses the benefit of a grant,—towards which, neverthe less, he contributed—( Hear, hear)—for it is not as with the , two Bishops in the reign of James 1., who asked one whe ther the King might not take his money? to which the an swer was, " Assuredly,"—and on asking the other Prelate, he answered, " Please your Majesty, you may take my bro ther's money, for he gives it you."—(Laughter.) But the Legislature compelled the Dissenter to pay, and than it is proposed that he should not participate in the benefit of the grant.—( Hear, hear,) Well! is the clergyman only to give secular instruction? If so, for that the Dissenting tea"her is, ex concessis, equally qualified. If he is to give religious instruction, therefore, the Dissenter is excluded. If secular instruction, the'Dissenter is as well qualified.—( Hear, hear.) What is meant by leaving all instruction in the hands of the Clergy? The Right Rev. Prelate said that no men could be more unfitted to act as schoolmasters than her Ma jesty's Ministers—that they were incapacitated by other duties, and so on—and it was wittily suggested whether they were to whip the boys ?—( Laughter.) Nobody ever dreamt of such a thing. The words of the Minute are, that the Committee of the Privy Council are to " consider ail matters affecting the education of the people;" was it ev er i mag i ne d t h at t hi s meant they should see to the etails of the education—to the books and slates used—to the declensions and inflections of grammar ? Certainly they might as well look to the operation to which I have just alluded, and on which I abstain from further remark. —( Laughter.) The Bishop of LONDON—I was not speaking of the Government plan at all, but of tie plan whit'( the Government were urging us to adopt, and of which, I understand, the pre sent plan to be preliminary. Lord BROUGHAM—ReaIIy, my Lords, this it too hard, to have to defend not only the plan which is adopted and pub lished, but a plan which I know nothing of—which nobody knows any thing about—which may at some uncertain period, by some unknown person, be proposed : which has no existence, save in the fancies ~f imaginative' individuals.—( Laughter. ) But the argument is, that the Government are unfitted, by other duties, for the business of education. I wonder, my Lords, that the acuteness of the Right Rev. Prelate did not lead him to discover that other men besides her Majesty's Ministers had their time fully occupied. I have often heard it said, that the clergy of this country are badly paid, and hardly worked. No man has more than myself, both privately and officially, seen and regretted this. I know that no class of men are more hardly worked in their vocation than the clergy. —( Hear, hear.) I have often exp essed my humble gratitude for their efforts in the cause of education. Hut the faithful dis charge of their regular duties, with the visitmg of their flocks, are quite sufficient to occupy their time.--( Hear, hear.) And secular instruction is as sufficient to occupy the time la schosl master as are the duties of religious instruction to engage the time of a clergyman. Where, then, is the reasonableness of talking about committing to the clergy the education of the people exclusively? In what way are they to perform it? I deny that the clergy are any more the teachers of the people than the laymen. I deny that they have that right any more than the laymen. They are teachers in the highest sense of the word, bat they are teachers and preachers—they are to teach religion and and the others are to teach learning. They may even combine the two together, but to talk of the clergy as a body having a pre-eminence in secular education ap pears to me the most absurd and gratuitous of all propositions. The Right. Reverend Prelate said that intellectual learning is all very well for men of high rank and learning, because in them it might operate as a substitute for religion, but in the common people religion alone could insure moral conduct ; and I believe that in some he would be disposed to regard learning. My Lords, Ido not understand this.—( Hear.) Ido not think the upper classes can dispense with the sanctions of religion any 1 more than the poor. Ido not agree in that code of moral laws laid down by the Right Rev. Prelate; if he will allow me to say so, I think he has laid down a very unsounddoctrine. (Some Noble Lords near the bar were conversing together in rather a loud tone, and the Noble and Learned Lord exclaimed.) If Noble Lords are fatigued with the course of this deba' e, I will relieve them by moving an adjournment, for I am more fatigued than they. The subject is very important and lam determined it shall be discussed. You may divide either to-night or Mon day, but I will be heard. My Lords, I was grappling with the distinction made by the Right Rev. Prelate, that you might dispense more safely with religion in the one el••ss than the other—the sanction of honour was sufficient with men in a high station of life— The Bishop of EXETER—Might be. Lord BROUGHAM—The Right Rev. Prelate said that men in the lower station of life were not influenced by that sanction of honour which produced good effects in men of higher ranks. Now the sort of sanction honour makes is of a doubtful kind in the upper classes— to pay damages in certain actions rather than tradesmen's bills; to prefer paying debts of honour incurred in gambling, contrary to the law of the land, in preference to just and lawful debts ; to take offence at a word, and go out and kill a man ; *to give up all intercourse with a neighbour, and friend, and re lation who has refused to go out and kill a man. That is the code of honour of the Right Rev. Prelate. It is an odd, whim sical, and grotesque code.—t Laughter.) I don't say anything against it ; it is the moral dispensation under which we live, and which I should hope when the schoolmaster is abroad, some twenty years' hence will be entirely annihilated. I know of no such distinctions between different classes of society. I call vice," vice"--crime, " crime"—unlawful conduct, " unlawful conduct," whether committed by a peer or a peasant ; and whether honour induces the one to do what religion condemns, what law denounces, what morality abjures, what the feelings of the natural man abhor and despise, I call that wrong, I call it crime, I call it sin, whether is is committed in a high station or a low ; and here the moral law, the secular doctrine of the schoolmaster, coincides entirely with the spiritual teaching of the priest. I know it is very often said, and indeed has been said to-night, that the poor have too much to do in the way of gaining their daily bread, to cultivate learning. Those who say that are ignorant of their habits—are ignorant of their tastes—are profoundly ignorant of theircapacities—and more ignorant of the salutary effects which that kind of tuition is calculated to produce. Why, there has existed fur the list half century in the eastern part of this metropolis, a society composed of the humblest journeyman labourers, whose reading has been the mathematical sciences—confined to the most ab struse of those sciences. Five men out of those whom I now address, " who sow not, neither do they spin, who toil not any more than the fillies of the field;" who have money, and fonds, and teachers, as well as time at your command, not five of you, I would venture to say could read those books. which are complained of by this Society of journeymen artisans as not profound enough in the mathematical sciences.—( Hear, and a laugh.) Now, that is a fact, for I am connected in the pub- lishing of those very works that are said not to be deep enough. Some of the works published by this Society are most scientific, and they have had the greatest circulation among the working classes. Indeed, men who have aprons round their haunches and paper caps on their heads, have come when their day's work was over, with their contributions to those scientific publica tions. It betokens great ignorance of their manners and cus toms—of their tastes and capacities, (and there is a habit of un derrating and of cruellydepreciating their capacities and tastes) to draw the invidious line which I have often heard drawn between the upper and lower classes by saying that the delicacies of science are to be reserved for the upper classes. ={ Hear, hear-) My Lords, I would ask why is it that the clergy are more than the laity peculiarly adapted to teach those primary objects of instruction. But I am told you must combine religious with secular instruction. Who thought of separating them ?—( Hear, h .ar.) Not cer tainly the authors of this plan.---( Hear. hear.) Religion is to be combined with the whole matter of instruction, and not to be separated at all from it. The rule adopted by the Bri tish and Foreign School Society is this, that secular instruction is taught by secular teachers, and religious instruction by religious instructors. The Most Rev. Prelate (the Arch. bishop of Canterbury) said what difficulty was there between them and the Dissenters—" there is not so much discrepancy between their creed and ours—pass over the slight differences and come at once to our schools." Now Ism astonished it did not occur to his tolerant and acute mind, that if there was . but little difference between the Dissenter and Churchman, there was but little between the Churchman and the Dissen ter; and that it was just as easy for a Churchman to go to a Dissenters' school, as for a Dissenter to go to a Churchman's school.__( Cheers.) I must say that the line of argument adopted by the Most Rev. Prelate s?voured of the creed of the inquisitor. He said your difference is but little. Cannot yon come with me into the bosom of the Church—it is for the interest of your soul, and I will make it for the good of your body. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY—I founded no argu ment upon it. I stated the clergy were accused of intolerance, and in order to show they were not intolerant, that they ad mitted the children of Dissenters to their schools, and that a great number of the children of Dissenters were educated at their schools. I founded no argument upon it, and I think the Noble and Learned Lord has done me great injustice, in founding so invidious an argument upon what t said. Lord BROUGHAM—Nothing could b further from my in tention. I quite agree with the Right Rev. Prelate (the Bishop of London) that the Established Church is much more tolerant, in practice than in theory. But in what does the tolerance consist? Is it in permitting Dissenting ch ldren to be in 'tructed in those schools in which the Church doctrines alone are taught ? If you throw open the deers to Dissenters in those schools in which the Church doctrines and the Thirty.. nine Articles alone are taught, and the Dissenters are induced to go there, that does not prove that the Church of England is more tolerant, but that the Dissenters are either indifferent or insincere. You cannot view it in any other light. If the Dissenters are induced to attend at schools where the Thirty nine Articles, which some of them termidolatrous, and others blasphemous (I am speaking the language of the Dissenters, not' my own), this does not prove that the Churchmen.are more to lerant, but that the Dissenters are either indifferent or insincere.. It is one species of persecution to say' Come over to me,' and it is another species to say, " There is little or no difference between us." My Loris, no difference conscientiously entertained upon religious matters can be slight.—( Hear, hear.) If any man says that he thinks the difference important, and that he ho nestly, and sincerely, and conscientiously sets a value upon that difference, no man breathing has a right to say the difference between us is slight—we are to .be listened to and you are not—come over to us—endow us more, enrich us fur ther, amplify our powers, enlarge our sphere of action, encou rage us, discourage others. My Lords, from the earliest times, and among other persons, this has always been the forerunner of persecution. The Most Reverend Prelate is too humble minded, too elevated in piety. too philanthropic and charitable to have any such ideas ; and I will tell him his own reading must have taught him that these are the doctrines by which persecutors have worked in all ages, and wherever they have been allowed to act upon them, they have never failed in the end to arm themselves with the scourge, the faggot, the pincers, and the torch. Men who valued religious liberty do not in chose (lays dread anything that can be called persecution, but they do dread privileges and oppree sive exclusions, preferences to one sect over another, and upon another thing they were absolutely determined, - which was ab solutely irreversible--they were resolved never to pay to man any tax to support education, if the fruit of the tax does not go to maintain education to which all shall have an equal access.— ( Hear, hear.) My Lords, it never entered into my head to propose any general system of education which would not be combined with religious instruction. It is a common thing to talk of the revolution in France as having undermined religion and destroyed education, but I believe, even the warmest friend of the ancienne regime will not assert that there was a very large amount of religion in France just previous to the revolution. The plan now before your Lordships is liable to none of the objections that have been urged against it, hut the crime of not having been brought before Par liament. Whoever thought of introducing any general system of education without consulting the wisdom of Parliament. The law stands thus—the Ministry can giveaway a million of money to any person they please without ever asking your Lordships whether you will or not—without asking your Lord ships' consent. All they have to do is to have a vote of the other House. The resolutions, therefore, merely ask the Crown to ask its Ministers to do so and so. More uncalled for resolu tions—anything mire uncalled for I have never seen. If there were any document to show that there was the slightest inten tion even to attack the Established Church—were there even the scrap of the letter of a Secretary of State to show that there was any intention to make even the slightest attack on the Established Church or the established religion of the country, as it has been called this night, I might understand holy men buck ling on the armour of the taith. 1 could understand men meeting in vestries and sending up 3,000 petitions praying your Lordships to take decided steps against the Antichris-, and for the pre servation of our holy religion. But, my Lords, there is nut a word, not one whisper against the Es'ablishment : so far from that, there is a clear recogni-ion of the Establishment by the appointment of chaplains of the Church to every school. That, my Lords, is an integral part of the plan—that, my Lords, is the corner-stone of the plan.—( Hear.) I have• lived long enough, my Lords—too long—for I am ashamed to say I have lived long enough to hear the cry of No Popery—No Catholics —The Churn in danger.. Not one of those cries have I ever known to have arisen from rosy but the most insignificant of aims that the wit of man could possibly devise. In 1807 the whole country was convulsed—the Government was changed— England, Scotland, and Ireland were agitated by a general election—the cry was " No Po , sery." " Rally round the altar and the Throne" for one never could be shaken without the other falling. Such was the language of the Rev. Prelate to night. Is there now one word said against the Church ? Is there now a single whisper against the Establishment any more than there was in 1807? No one word or single whisper is heard of such a character. On the conirary. professions r f attachment to the Church are numerous. In 1807 the cause of the cry of " No Popery" arose from a Bill being brought in to allow an Irish Catholic colonel to perform his 'uty upon coming to England. That was the real origin of the cry of "No Popery." Aid as trifling is the cause of the cry now made- A single sc soul is to be formed for the purpose of teaching t news. volt school the Established Church is to h we a Chaplain of that single shool is to ruin the whole Established Church, and sap the very foundations of religion. My Lords, there is another ground of similarity ; the Bill in 1807 was only shown and withdrawn, still the cry continued; the pro posed school was no' longer even in proposition; it was only shown and at once covered up, and still the cry centuries. When the atmosphere had cleared away, when tee storm was dispelled, when the clouds no longer hung around. I won't say the Establishment, for that reared its pinnacles above, and never a cloud was ever at the base of it—but when the clouds dispelled which had been obfuscating men's understandings, it was found that five years afterwards the Bill had passed in silence and neglect, and the first that we heard of it wis a year afterwards, when it was found in the Statute-book. This is not only matter of amusement, but it is pregnant with in struction. The men who now feel, and others who 'affect to feel so much apprehension about this harmless and trivia! measure will in a very short time forget it. Much more than this will pass, I believe will pass without exciting a single murmur or whisper of discontent or feeling of alarm. New I venture to form a cheerful hope, which amounts to a sanguine expectation that the same course well be taken now weich was taken then, and men will begin to (seen their understanding to reason, will cease to make religious matter the ground and ob ject only of feeling, but will make it matter of sound moral, intelligent reason also; and then I have not any fear of the work of education being checked by any clamour of danger to the Church, or of danger to the cl 'rgy, or of dagger to re ligion ; but. I shall live to see the Parliament of England per form at length its too long-delayed and most sacred duty, or giving instruction to all classes, of all descriptions, all ranks, and all sects of people, upon the broad, universal, and eternal principles of religions as well as of civil liberty.—( Loud cheers ) The Duke of WELLINGTON was not surprised at the remarks made by the Noble and Learned Lord on the speeches of the Most Rev. Prelates, and that he should have directed the greatest part of the speech which he had addressed to their Lordships, to endeavour to do away the effects of their speeches by the exercise of those powers of ridicule with which he was so liberally endowed ; and until a few mo ments of the conclusion of his speech, he had evaded re ferring to the particular question immediately under discussion of the House. The Most Rev. Prelate had moved certain resolutions which he had followed by a proposition to present an address to her Majesty. The Noble and Learned Lord had said that such a system could not be introduced without an Act of Parliament, but he thought lie could show the Noble and Learned Lord that these Orders in Coun cil, and the very thing which they desired should be done by Act of Parliament instead of by Order in Council They should see if it was not essentially necessary that no such measure should be entered upon without having the consent of Parliament. It was necessary that they should_ understand clearly what the measures were which her Majesty's Govern ment roposed for the education of the people. The Noble Marquis had put a question to the Most Rev. Prelate, which had been arswered by the Right Rev. Preletes but, in his opinion it was the business of the Government to state what were their intentions on this subject. What did they intend to do with the Church in this system of education? He should have stated that, instead of calling on the Right Rev. Prelate to state what were the pretentions of the Church. On that subject the Noble and Learned Lord had stated that the system of 'education put forward by the Minutes of the Order in Council was really nothing at all; but it appeared to him that the system put forward was very important. It seemed to him very much like the Irish system of education, which, from every thing that he had heard of it, he considered had utterly failed in Ireland, and he was sure it would not suc ceed in this country. It seemed that in these normal schools the Douay version of the Scriptures was to be used, or the versions of the Socinians, or of the Anabaptists, or of the fo 1 lowers of Courteney, or of others. Would the people of this country, after having established the Church at the Reformation, now consent to be taxed in order to educate the people in Popery, or in the system of the Socinians and of the Anabaptists. The country had a right fairly to understand what were the intentions of the Government on this subject, and he thought he should prove that the Order in Council was not quite so innocent as he was willing to make it out, nor so harmless with respect to the Established Church. —( Hear, hear.) Let them see what would be the effect of this system on present benevolence. What did the Order in Council state? that if any school accepted assetanee from the pubic, such school should immediately come under the direc tion of the Board, and be liable to inspection ; but did it say under the inspection of the Clergy, no such thing -the Clergy ware prevented from superintendence. This was no question of rich or poor--let them ask themselves if in their own neighbourhood they had founded a school would they like it to be placed under the superintendence of their inspec' ion what would be the questions they would be asked ? Have you the Douay version, or the Socinian version, or the Anabaptist v ers i on ? The clergy would be excluded from the superintendence of these schools, and would they like to subject themselves to such in terference ? This system would go directy to put a stop to private benevolence, and he felt that they would be wanting in their duty to the public, and to the system of education itself, if they consented to go one step further before having this system fully and fairly laid before the House and the public. Viscount MELBOURNE said he might have been very well content to leave the case of the Government upon the pre sent subject in the hands of the Noble and Learned Lord who had lately addressed their Lordships, but considering the great importance of the question itself, and the unusual nature of the motion made, perhaps it would be expected that he should address a few words to their Lordships before the conclusion of the deb to They were all . EVENING PD agreed upon the want of education—they were al agreed upon the benefit of education, and it would he a strange thing if they should be p %Tented from carrying their object into effect because they could net agree upon the manner in which it should be carried into effect. lie could not help thinking that this would be a matter at which some might laugh and some might weep, hot would afford to those who drew di s p arag i ng v i ews of human nature some nod for their satire, and some matter upon which they might ground themselves. He trusted their Lordships would not upon the present occasion, by adopting the motion of the Most Rev. Prelate, throw obstacles on the object which hey all had in view. The Reverend Prelate who presided over the metropolitan districts, in the course of a very able and powerful speech on the subject, stated the objeetion he had to the present measure, and the apprehension be ent-rtained of it. He would not deny all the facts stated by the Rev. Prelate ; there might possibly exist in the country a party hostile to the religious institutions of the country. that might be so—such an intention might be entertained. There was only one part of the Right Rev Prelate's statement that he denied. H e was p l ease d to assert that her Majesty's Go vernment were in the hands of that party—(Hear, hear. hmr)—that they were so many puppets, and that all their power and influence were derived at the hands of those persons. He ( Lord Melbourne) knew not what the Right Rev. Prelate meant, but of this he was sure, that there was no foundation whatever for the apprehension he ent•r -t ained. The Right Rev. Prelate had passed a eulogium upon the clergy of the Established Church. He stated the exertions they had made in the cause of education, no doubt they de, served that praise. It had never been stated in that House in express terms that the Clergy of the Established Church were hostile to the spread of knowledge, it had not been even hinted at, and he only wished to t ike notice of this in order that it might not be supposed that there had been on the part of any one any imputation or insi nuation against any part of the Clergy of the Established Church with respect to their zeal, industry, or their talents. He had listened with great satisfaction to the speech of the Most Rev. Prelate, who had introduced the debate ; but there was a great deal in that speech that had no reference whatever to the question which had been introduced to their attention. The Rev. Prelate would agree to the grants made by Parlia ment to the Societies, but his objections to the Committee of the Privy Council would apply stronger to the Lords of the Treasury. He complained that the Committee would be ex clusive administrators of the funds, so were the Lords of the Treasury ; that they were liable to the changes of administra tion, so were the Lords of the Treasury; that they were liable to be influenced by political purposes in dispensing the grant, so were the Lordsof the Treasury. Surely such a charge might be made with more force against the Lords of the Treasury. But the. Rev. Prelate the Bishop of London threw overboard a great dea. of the arguments that were brought forward by the Most Reverend Prelate, feeling that he was putting himself out of Court by the approl a.ion of the Lords of the Treasury. But he should think there was a difference between the late mode and the proposed mode; and here the Noble Duke cosin curred with him —namely, that the Lords of the Treasury pointed on the grounds they meant to act upon. Whereas the Committee of the Privy Council meant to proceed in the dark hear, hear, hear.) Rut the order of the Privy Council went to depart from the principles ailed upon by the Lords of the Treasury in some instances. He did not mean always to ask for a proportionable grant according to the local subscription. The Rev. Prelate said that was right, foe otherwise it was the wealthy only that would benefit by the grants. They also proposed to assist other parts of the country which heretofore derived no benefits from the grants. If they felt that they could have no confidence in the Committee of the Privy Coun cil, their Lordships were right in stating it—but he then knew no grounds for refusing all confidence to those who were to take all their steps in the face of the publi,e , who would come before Parliament every year for the money that was to be voted. To refuse to place confidence in these men would be to show a degree of diffidence and suspicion which would appear in the highest degree absurd. But the Not le Duke said that if they accepted the money, they did so under terms which would subject their schools to the direc tion and controul of the Committee of the Privy Coun cil. Now, surely, even the Reverend Prelate must "ad mit that if the public money is advanced towards a school by the Government, the Government have aright to adopt means for ascertaining whether or not the money is rightly applied, according to the principles of the granters. But th:s would be all. It implied no submission of schools to the direction of the Committee, it only implied that they were to permit them to see that the schools were rightly conducted. The Noble Duke stated that the Government should have expound ..4 what they meant to do. Had not his Noble Friend the President of the Council (the Marquis of Lansdowne) made a clear and ample statement? The course of the Committee must be public and promulgated, and he begged to assure their Lordships that the Government bad not the slightest idea to supersede or undermine the Esta blished Church, to hurt its right, to weaken its vigilance, or to diminish its respectability He most emphatically repelled such a charge. He thought there was a great Parliamentary aed Constitutional objection to- the results proposed by the most Reverend Prelate, besides the objection of his Ho. nourable and Learned Friend. They meant to address the Crown not to take any steps in this matter until theh• Lordships had given their opinion on it. Now; did they mean to say that the Crown had acted wrong, or had exceeded its prerogative ? The House had a right to remonstrate aeainst an exercise of the prerogative," but it ought not to ask the sovereign to do by Act of Parliament that which it might do of the sole and constitutional act of the prerogative. He, therefore, thought the Rev. Prelate was - pro. ceeding unwisely —a course which would neither tend towards the dignity of the Church, nor the interests of the country'. plaThe Duke of W ELLINGTON and Lord BROUGHAM ex. ined. Lord MELVILLE, amidst loud cries of " Question," asked the Noble Lord whether the measure proposed extended to Scotland, which used hitherto to receive 10,0001. a year under the grants? In Scotland the Church of Scotland had the exclusive superintendence of schools, and the Govern ment had better not attempt to cross the Tweed w;th such a measure as this.--( Laughter.) If the Committee of the Privy Council did more than inquire, they would come into collision with the Church. who, on such a subject as this, would not relinquish her privileges. Lord Ha , lIGHANI and Lord MeLvir.i.x explained, The Marquis of LANSDOWNE could assure their Lord ships there was no intention of excluding Scotland from the grant. He should take the sense of the-House on the Trevtous question ; and after that he should move the omission of certain words in the second resolution, so as to reduce it to the enume. ration of a matter of fact. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House then divided, when there appeared for the Re; solution : Contents Present ... Proxies ........... . ......... 58 229 Not-Content Prese n t — BO Proxies 38 ----I 18 • Majority in favour of the Resolution The Marquis of LAMDOWNE then moved the omission of the words of which he had given notice, which was agreed to after a few words from Lord Ellenborutig,h. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY then moved that the address of which he had given notice be presented to her Ma= jestv by the whole House, and the Lords with white staves wait upon her Majesty to know when it would be her pleasure to receive it. The motion was at once agreed to, and their Lordships ad journed at a Quarter past Three o'l:lock this morning. HOUSE OF COMMONS. GULP 5. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock. • Pembertou's Divorce Bill was read a third time and passed. M. WILLIAMS brought up the Report on Hall's. Estate Bill, which was read a third time awl passed, Mr. HODGES brought up the Report on the Ships, Propeller Company Bill. The Bill was ordered to be engrossed. Sir J. Y. BU LLER brought up the Report or ,the . Committee ou Davies' Estate Bill, which was read a. third time and passed. On the motion of Sir J. Y. BULLER, the Lords amendments to the Sid Mouth Market Bill were agreed to. Sir WM. MOLES WORTH presented a petition from a parish in Lancaster of favour of a penny post. Mr. ESTCOURT brought up the Report of the Select Committee upon the Standing Orders: The Committee reported that in the case of the Dublin and Drogheda Railway Bill the Standing Orders ought not to be dispensed with. Lord STANLEY presented a petition from Lan cashire against the Government scheme for national educatian. Mr. E. TENNENT presented a petition from a society in Belfast against. the Belfast Water Works Bill. Mr. D. W. HARVEY presented a petition from the parish of Christchurch, Southwark, in favour .of penny postage. - SMALL DEBTS BILL. Mr. W. PATTEN inquired when the Report of the Committee on the Small Debts Bill was likely to be. presented ? Sir GEORGE GREY replied that, in all proba bility, it would be presented on Monday, but it was un certain on which day it would be taken into consi deration. Mr. W. P ATTEN thought the best course he could take, was to move, on Monday next, that the Small Debts Bill should be forwarded another stage,: and then 0 1 the third reading, if it were the pleasure of the House , they could be put off till another Session. CANADA. Sir W. MOLES WORTH gave notice that on Thursday, on the House going into Committee on the Canada Government Bill, he should move, " That every consider.►tion of humanity., justice, and poliCy, demands that Parliament should seriously apply itsslf without delay to le!islate for the permanent govern. meet of her Majesty's Provinces in Upper and Lower Canada." ROYAL ACADEMY. Sir ROBERT INGLIS gave notice that on Mon day next be should present a petition from the Royal Academy in reference to certain returns ordered by that House to be made on the 14th of March last. GERMANIC COMMERCIAL LEAGUE, Mr. BAINES gave notice that on Tuesday next he should move that there be laid before the House a copy of the contract entered into by the States of Germany in 1833, usually called the Germanic Commercial League, and for'copies or extracts of correspondence betwee n the Government of Prussia and Great Britain on the C onvent i on , t o be held a t B erl i n in July, for the regulation of the Germanic Commercial League SHIPWRECKS. Mr, G. PALLIER gave noti ce t h at on Monday be should move for leave to bring in a Bill for the purpose of preventi ng shipwreck s th rough overloading the deas of vessels with timber. The Brick Duties Bill, the Paper Duties Bill, and the Prisons (Scotland) Bill were severally read a third time and passed. 'The Glass Duties Bill Went through Committee. METROPOLIS IMPROVEMENTS. Sir R. INGLIS wished to know what course was to be taken by the Government in respect to the Re port of the Metropolis Improvement Committee ?' —TheCHAN-CILTOROT77. CACHEQUER7,II7I3 trnmedi deb , upon reeei% jo g the Report the Treasury had directed their attentio n to the subject. But In the mean time a Private Bill had passed this House, to effect some improvements in the approaches to London Bridge, Al