The Express.
London, England, 1866-11-15 00:00:00

DRURY LAP.7I.

TIM ERRING, rAvii7iii Phelps. Messrs. E. Phelps. W.
Thustson, H. Vandenhoff, snd J. Johnstone : Mrs. Herman
Veda and Miss Poole.—And KATHERINE AND PETRUCHIO.
Es. T. Ehrinbourne and Was Isabel Adams.

ILAPIA*kr.T.

Tins ERNINGI, OUE MABY ANNE. Mr. Howe and Mr.
Clark Miss C. HEL —A DANGEROUS FRIEND. Means. C
Mathews, Howe, Kendal, dm : Mesdames C. Mathews,
dale, Moore, ite.—USED UP.—And A KISS IN THE Herrn-

llll4Clart

TN Evmmic BAciasfauDila mum a Wham,
F. Vilikes, J.G. Shore, de. Mns. John Wood. Misses Augusts
Thomann and Katherine BC Mrs. H. Vining, and His C.
Horsinan.—To conclude with LODGINGS.

LIMAL

TIM Erimnre, BADTI7BIIiIiaIBAP.. Mee Hearada—And
THE LONG STRIKE. Mums. Emery, WeNieuwe. Cowper, Fitz-
patrick. olds, and Moreland ; Ilau Hands.—ConcladLng
what LKTONE TAIL GOAT. —Commons at 7.

Me Vain, WEIGHYOUSS7 M. rarselle, Belford,
and Murray; Mesdames limuMosoash, Johnstone, and Hughes.
—MUG FRIMBCROTZ: OR, A 000 D CAST FOB A PIZCL
—And BOOTS AT THE MAN.

HOLBORN.
TIII9 EVENDIG, at 7, LARKIN'S LOVE LETTERS. Mr. Del-
more and Mies C. Saunden.—Aid FLYING SCUD. Mews.
Neville, Belmore, Blake, Vollare, ace. ; Mesdames P. Josephs,
C. Saunders, Berrie Foote, Bidden Lennox, Raymond, &a.

muTAtonA.

THIS Iviorllta, WHAT 171T1211r. ”Daschig Mad" Bryan
MI K. Cardona ; Paul Dwain; Master Osage Puri:A.—THE
OLD CHERRY TREE. Mrs. Lam.—Conclading with MARY
LIVEiGSTONE.

HIGH WAITS AT LONDON BRIDGE
TM DAY —Morning, Ob. Whn Afternoon. 6k 89m.
To-lloiaow—Morning, 711. Sim Afternoon, Bh. Tm.

LONDON, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15.

ARCHDEACON DErasott and the clergymen who
are associated with him in opposition to the Con-
science Clause did a wiser thing than they were
perhaps aware of when on Tuesday they carried
their grievance up to Lord DERBY in Downing-
street. Even for Lord DERBY himself it may be
an advantage that his present term of office gives
him an opportunity of looking from the aide of
practical statesmanship at a clan of questions on
which he has been accustomed to press the claims
of an exacting party. But a large number of
clergy, it seems, have yet to begin their education
in much that concerns their position, privileges,
and duties in tho State. As long as they huddle
together in Convocations and Church Congresses,
no important improvement is likely to take place ;
but the arguments which sound convincing when
uttered in the Chapter-house at York, to an audi-
ence thinking of nothing but the Church, collapse
terribly when questioned at Whitehall by a Minis-
ter who cannot be suspected of hostility to their
authors.

Mr. HuseARD, who was chief spokesman of the
party, told Lord DERBY that the clergy were so
alarmed by the terms of the Conscience Clause,
that the number of grants received by the Church
of England in aid of the building of schools is
falling off. Inasmuch as every school built leaves
one the less to be supplied, the falling off may
not be wholly due to the cause assigned : but we
believe it may ho taken for granted that the un-
willingness of the clergy to come under the Con-
science Clause is limiting the aid which Parliament
has authoi:sed the Government to extend to
popular education.

The grievance, according to Archdeacon Derr•
SON, is that under the Conscience Clause a
parent may require as a right that his child shall
receive only secular instruction in a Church
school. But who is wronged by the exercise
of such a right ? The character of the school
is not affected by the exemption of a few in-
dividuals ; the Church school remains such ; the
Catechism and Creed are still taught there to the
great body of the children. The withdrawal of a
child from the established order of religious in-
struction would take place in very few cases.
Experience teaches that the unbelieving or irreli-
gious parent would rarely insist on the exemption.
The objectors would generallybepersonsholding very
positive religious views, in which they were anxious
to bring up their children. The very nature of
the objection would thus be a guarantee against that
neglect of religious teaching which the opponents
of the Conscience Clause so loudly deprecate. This
is so obvious that it is impossible not to holler°
that they aro apprehensive not so much of the di-
vorce of secular and religious education as of the
separation of secular instruction from tluir religious
teaching. The Conscience Clause, however, is not
an expedient for separating the elementary edu-
cation of the country from the teaching of the
Church of England, but rather for securing the
combination of the two, for in the absence of some
such provision fur the rights of the minority it is
difficult to see how the grants hitherto made to
Church Schools can be maintained. Mr. WIL-
SON urged upon Lord DERBY that the religious
character of the Church would be ignored if the
clergy were required to admit children to their
schools without having unlimited rights over
them as religious teachers, and there is reason to
fear that very many of the clergy aro possessed
by this notion. What alarms them is the prospect
of having to recognise the right of the parent to
fix the character of the religious education of his
child as superior to that of the priest.
The Earl of DERBY pointed out to the deputa-
tion that the matter was not nearly so simple as
they supposed. " How," he asked, " would
" they deal with the case of a pariah where
" there were Dissenters, and where there
" could be only one school ?" Such cases
are very numerous. Prior to the opening of a
State-aided school in a village private teachers
provided, not, indeed, a sufficient, but an equal
supply- of the general want. The opening of the

new school, in an imposing looking building,
with its certi'cated master and complete appa-
ratus of instruction, at once makes private comp
tition impossible, and the whole population is
reduced to absolute dependence on the Church
school. A state of things like this puts a clergy-
man to the test, and reveals his quality. He can,
if he likes, keep the children of Dissenters out of
school altogether, except on condition of the full
surrender of their parents' rights. It is only in
very few cases, however, that matters proceed to
this length. The more usual course is to make the
dissenting parent feel his utter helplessness, and sue
for a relaxation of the rules of the school in
favour of his child. Now, it is just this system
which Archdeacon DENISON and his friends want
to sustain, and which prudent and honourable
members of the Church of England, both lay and
clerical, say must be put a atop to. If there can