The Express.
London, England, 1847-04-20 00:00:00

,T -J Ettß*Si TUESDAY

Qi12:112-- 1.4
afforded you the opportunity, as far as in as lay, of
that knowledge which should lest you to virtue and es re-
spectability, and it does not lid at our doors that pm -hem
yielded to temptations and followed the paths of priess.'•
(Cheers) Such is one of the more general objectless es
tai &tempt for the further edueeticn of the people. Them
ash hewever, other objections of a more specific kind with
sagged to the particular plan now before the house ; and with
regard to some of those objections I than be obliged fo, say,
that I think myself there in great force iu them-41mm,
kear)—but that, upon the whole, we have proposed that
whim we thought most practical— (hear, hear)—that which
we thought would be most generally acceptable, and that, II
we have not done more and better, it is to be considered that
the ground was in a great degree occupied by those various
societies which, according to their various opinions, have
covered the field of education, and in their own way esta-
bibbed systems ler themselves. (Hear, hear.) This sem
sideration is ose of the utmost importance. I cannot but
think that at the commencement of this century, it
would have been desirable that, instead of various
parties and various schemes of education, there
had been some serious attempt made to reunite the
various clauses of die-enters and members of the established
church in the same school. (Hear, hear.) I will not say
how that should be done. For my own part, being a mem-
ber of the British and Foreign School Society, I should be
of opinion that the plan proposed by the late Duke of Kent
to the Archbishop of Canterbury, that all should meet on
the common ground of daily reading the Bible, and that
instruction in the liturgy and catechism of the various
churchesshould be begun at different hours, was one which, if
carried into execution, would have led teen united education.
Different opinions may be entertained on this subject, but
the question which we have to deal with is the great
amount of schools, and the great amount of money which is
given from year to year in support of schools already estab-
lished. The first of these, m point of numbers, is the Na-
tional Society in menu item with the Church of England.
They profess that in their schools there are more than 900,000
daily scholars, and their amount of funds is very Barge.
Their rule is, that in all their schools the liturgy endow*.
chitin of the Church of England shall be taught. They had
Lkewhe inserted that all the children should go to the estab-
lished data on the Sabbath. They have now relaxed with
roped te that rule, and they leave the matter in the handsof
the amnsgers of these schools. But with regard to the
ether rules, we had to consider in 1839, and at the present
time, we had to consider whether we should have attempted
to spread over the country some general system which did
not agree with their schools, which did not agree with the
British and Foreign Society's Schools, or any one of the dis-
senting sects, but which, ill our opinion, would be preferable
to anyoue of the a. We are of opinion that it would bsee been
objectionable to make the attempt in 1839, or now. Practi-
cally, such an attempt would lead to division, end in failure,
and we should not have advanced but retsrJed education by
It. Well, then, we said, as in 1839, that with regard to
the church schools, they should act accerding to their
own views, and that we would nut interfere with the reli.
glees Instruction in their schools in any other way than con-
senting to the propositious made by the heads of the church,
sisighat inspectors should be appointed by the corimittee of
the Privy Council, to be approved of by the archbishop, for
the purpose of tinting the schools, and reporting to us with
'impact to the secular and religious instruction given. With
regard toother schools, wo mated that we would not make
any inquiries with respect to the religious instruction gine.
la them; but that with regard to the secular par: of educw
tion, we should require the inspectors to report to won the
state of the school-. Now, the rule which we adopted in 1839
with regard to tile building ofechools we adopt now with regard
to the education of public teachers. With regard to pupil
teachers and stipendiary monitors, we cause them tobe'ex-
&mined, for the church schools, by inspectors, in the bible,
the church catechism, tad liturgy. With regard to those
schools not connected with the church of England, we pro-
pose no examination of this kind, confining our examune
tier' to seedier branches of learning. It seems to me exceed-
ingly strange that some who agree with me in what I have
hitherto stated, that education ought to receive some
eminence from the state by grant of the public money—
that it is not aweigh to say that voluntary efforts
are sufficient that the state of crime calls for
some efforts on the part of parliament, yet think that these
rules contain such a violation of liberty of conscience that
they could not assist in or partake of a grant proceeding from
such a source. Yet these are the same parties, /A fir as I
can understand, who since 1839 have consented that schools
should be built in the proportion of 18s. 6d. or IBs. 941. in
every pound for church of. England schools, knowing that
these would be schools in which the liturgy and catechism of
the church would be taught, and that the inspectors
would examine as to the religious attainments of the
children. (Hear, beer.) I own I cannot wider-
stand the very nice distinction between consenting
to the building of these *climbs and refusing to consent to
the payment of the stip. ndiary monitors and pupil teachers.
It is a refinement of 4i.lielation which I cannot understand;
for, be it remembered that there is no question now of the
church undertaking the education of the whole people, and
claiming for itself the right of educating the people accord-
ing to the established religion of the state. (Hear, hear.)
AU that the church aria, or rather consents to take, is. that
in Church of England schools—schools built by the sub-
scription, of the members of that church—the liturgy and
catechise of the church shall be taught; while, in all
other wheels belonging to the dissenters, there is to
he se ingseeltion of any catechism or formulary whatever.
lOnelliteek seems to me that this, so far from being a secu-
rities'', scheme, give. the utmost religioas liberty, and ought
fay to satisfy the diameters. it they make ooniinensurate
exertions they may obtain I. mush as any others of this
greet (Hear, hear.) But if the church aubecribes a much
er sum, then a greater proportion will be given to
re them;
but this is not a diffence of principle, but a difference of
amount with equale yof principle. (Hear, bear.) It is to
be observed that this is not what it is carefully repreetested
to be in some quarters—a whole system of education
imposed by the state. (Hear, hear, hear.) It is
a system coming in aid of voluntary exertions (Hey,
hear.) We take the 'mesas which the people furnish;
we find schools in existence and we come 111 aid of Mow
schools, begun and continued by the people. We:heroes no
terms on say school, so that to say, as has been reproseie ted,
that the state cannot with advantage undertake the educa-
tion of the people, ie an objection, good or bed, ageinst Some
other abeam, but 10 ninineedtin to that now under Masi-
derider. (Hear, hear.)' it is said that some other scheme
of ethiention would be much better, that it would be touch
Meter for the state to confine itself solely to moular °dune-
lion, and that with regard to religious knowledge the km*
oven to have no cognizinie whatever. ("Meer, how," boil
Mr. Roebuek.) No* those who urged this proposition
j mesh, I think, two very different things. As her en I
tian understand Dr. Vaughan, and thaw who think with him
' he has no objection to education by the state--no objettion
to the state coming "in aid of voluntary societies, of the
church societies', or eny of the dissenting societies' wheals;
but objects to the inspectors of the state taking any notice of
the religious instruction given in those schools. I own it
appears to me that, for the sake of • very nice distinction,
thee is to do very nearly the same as we now propose
browse it is obvious the national wheals, the Wesleyan
schools, others, would continue to teach their ceechism
and • darks as they now do; and if govern- '
meet Mapleton, appointed with the consent and con-
currence of those Mastics, made no observations with
!egad to religiois` Instruction, it is obvious Mom
societies would apppint their own inspectors, to be
paid from their own funds, that the teething would be
the same, and the same amount of state assistance would be
given. Therefore this is for the sake of some apparent painci-
ple, making.a distinction in which I can see no difference.
But there are others who. speak of secular education, and
who mean a differeat thing. What they mean in that there
should be schools rstablisheil by the state us which secular
education onlyehould be given, in which the secular limiter
should be, what we do not propose to make him, a state
lotflose ; that the state should be the great teacher in respect
of secular knowledge; and that with regard to religious
instructioo it should be a matter in which the school-
master should bare no . concern, and should be
left to the ministers of the different penuanoos
Now, sir, this, I think, was brought forward by the boo
and learned member fur Bath some years ago. To such a
I scheme I entertain the most decided objections. (Cheers.)
I think myself that that would be for the state to take cern,-
lan" Inachoohi set up by itself, of only onehalf, and that we
semi Important half, of what was taught to the children in
the school*. (Cheers.) I think that to omit altogether the
lova of God and the love of oar neighbour es a part of the
wheel teaching, would be a grave, a serious, and an irre-
parable course ; I thiek that ao advantage which might be
poised by uniting different sects could fee that
apparent declaration by the state that secular lerkeakri Ind
secular learning only, was that in whisk it luoi my ammo
wr took any interest. I think fare seppiphsh!is
at objection, which stands the MA i
to be overruled, yet emetically? the
.f the working cams of thm country, end. he the
time of the children must be occupied wonsisteringiikeerbe
how the time of the teachers of religion is, and meat be,
occupied, you could nut obtain in that way a sullbaleut
amount of religious instruction. I bold, therefore,.that
both in principle and in practice, such w scheme would be
objectionable. I think, moreover. that even if seek •
scheme had is my eyes greater advantages, it would mein
acceptable to parliament, and far loss would it be assept-
able to the people, of this country. I think they would bete
confound the omission of religion, and the d that
religion was to be left to its ministers, with irreligion ANIL
They would certainly be wrong in their interpretation of she
intention, but still there would be the feeling whisk I bars
intimated, and I thiuk that that feeling woad be se Weep
.as to overpower, and pat an end to, mg esimme pro-
pmed on such a. foundation. (Hoar bear.) Well,
them, dr, if what we propose he. istaini on what :is
now established ; if it be isapmeihie be. ea to propose
Blether scheme which *mid, am* es to asn_.pfeasal.
into effect a mastoid focedssathet l floo Dr. Yamaha,
,it would be useless to peeps= sop 4slAfa
lissom it would be sure to fail, the ipmetlin whisk=
to ask such mein as Dr. Vaughan aallebee which I
have t• ask this house, is, whethei, those to be,
the hots, they are prepared to pa olitt min allow se a
grant of this sum of money, to itiorpai et ,T.
the minutes of council, or .whithei Ow •wt
Ito
ntuits that grant, and, with the betAggmlleMelethe her
for Finsbury, to pass a vote of OSUMI epsa is ter even pro
Ironing such a scheme. (" Hear, bar, lien Mr. T. Dun-
a comb.) Sir, that is the effect of the assakin of which the
hon. gentleman has given entice. (Hear, hear.) Before I
ask the house &ally to cylinder that question, I must maim
one or two other points which have been raised both in this
house and out of doors, with respect to other omissions in
this scheme. It has-been- asked, whether we puerne that
any part of this grant should go to Roman Catholics.
(Hear.) Now, with respect to that sultjt et, 1 may say that
in the minutes of August and Diveuttlier, IS-16, that question
never came under dasconion. According to our view the
question did not arise upon those minutes. There wire