The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-06-11 00:00:00

MR. FORSTER ON THE EDUCATION
QUESTION.

On Saturday Mr. FTftster had an interview at Bradford
with two deputations from public meetings lately held
in that town on the question of education. The right
hon. gentleman in answering soue objections to the
measure ii which he has charge in the House of Com-
mons, pointed out that the machinery called into exist-
ence under the bill would take immediate action, and
he looked forward to its extent with some anxiety.
Mr. Punster's declaration that he had become a convert
to the principle of direct compulsion was received with
enthusiasm, but be added that he did not think this
the opinion of the mttjority of the people, and doubted
whether the proposal will me, t with the acceptance of
the House of Commons. The opposition which had
be en raised to the provisions respecting the imparting
of religi. us instruction deserved the best attention,
and the Government would closely consider this point
in committee.

In the course of a lengthened speech, reviewing the
different phases of the question, Mr. Forster re-
marked
do not think the rich parent n his child would he able to
despise the poor child, bec.lllBo ite pence paid for it, while
the rich man's child was paid or by it, parents. This is my
reason for saying so: In all these schools two-thirds of the
cost is not paid by the parents at all; consequently, no one
would have the very bad taste, or 'could commit the reseed-
ing abmrdity, of throe ing it into the teeth of the child for
Whorls the whole 393. of the cost of his education was paid,
when he himself was having toe. of the cost of his educa-
tion paid for him. We must bear in mind that this is not a
question of free education against the parent paying the
whole cost. The question is whether it is desirable that the
parent should be expected to pay none of the cost directly.
Now, my chief argument in favour of parents being called
upon to pay part of the cost is that I think, taking parents
generally throughout the country, they are able to do it ;
and I think it would he a very bad thing for the Government
of the o ientry to relieve the permit of any direct pecuniary
responsibility tsr the ediscation of his children. Again, to
do suci a thing wont I make an enormous additional charge
upon the exchequer, because the question of free education
would Cot stop with the elementary schools. The middle
classes would then demand free education for their children,
and the fees which they now paid thetoselvee would be put
upon the titspilyer. A case had hems stated of a mail who
paid education ratea anti was also asked to pay the school
fees, which be seemed to think was unreasonable. f said it
would not be unreasonable The amount he would pay in
the rate would be nothing compared to the value he would
receive. Take the case of a man who pays £lO rent )early,
and who has three children. At the rate 01 )1. in the pound,
which is the maximum we contemplate, he would only have
to pay 2e. CI. a year in rates. That MMI has no right to come
forward and say, "I perform my duty by paying Os GI, a
year." The public have a right to ask Islas if lie is able to
pay at least as much as 31, each f. his three chtdren every
week while they are at school. In asking that we are not
treating eemh a man unfairly. But there may be persons
who earshot properly do that. The hill provides that they
should be assisted; and, since it tenet their fault that they
cannot pay the fees. I am quite sure you will not outsider
them paupers because they are so asisted.