The Express.
London, England, 1867-08-02 00:00:00

the enirefiL

TO CORRESPONDENTS.
alverlisementa intended for "The !spree'," London EVOlthlii
must bo at the Moe, 10, Bouverleetteet, by Two
Kook on the day of publication.

DRURY LAN L
Trite rcrtited. TWAT RASCAL JACK. Stews. Roues and
Werllle. %toe lan." Alleyne and Thompson,—To conclude with
MN ORE r CITY. Ness's Cowper, Irlotyre, Villiers, Irvin&
Roe" litanunee, d Warner; lleedame, Robertson & La Mere.

IIAYMARKET.
Tins Evroxo, THE LOVE CRAnit, yea, Chippendale,
Noire, Rogers, Kendal, Clarke. Weathenhy, ete. ; Mesdames
Bedirerlea, Chippendale, Burke, itc.—TO *'Ally AND BACK
45.--Asid THE XIPLY, AND BOW TO USK IT.

?animism.
TIM ITIMMna, THE DAY AFTER THE WEDDINO.—THE
MAN (r AIRLIE. James Harebell, Mr. ((errata Venn Messrs.
R. Price, Forrester, Gresham, Maclean, and Ellerton : Mosses E.
Ilteart, Melly Moore. ac..—And THE CLOCKMAKILICS HAT.

STRAND.
Tin EVISINS, REVERSES. Messed Emery, Pandla, Rob-
son. and sdanhomugh . Mesdames Ada Bwanboeoagb and John.
slow.—And THE LATEST EDITION OF FRA DIAVOLO
Mesas. Thorne * James ; Mesdames llolt, Newton, &c.

BRITANNIA.
Tyres IMMO, SCARLET DICK OR, THE ROAD AND ITS
RIDERS.—Lava Williamson and Craven Mr. k Yrs. 11•Haille
the Champion Skaters —And JACK LANTERN OR, THE
RACECOURSE, AND THE BLUE RIBBON OF THE TURF.

NIGH WAITS AT LONDON BILTLIGIL
VIM DAT —Morning. 33 ISEA......Afternacm, 311. 41OL
TO-Mol.lloW—Homing. 4b. 3m.._..A[Nenoon, 411. 2.". m.

LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 2.

WE do not regret that Mr. FsweErr should have
withdrawn his Agricultural Education Bill. No
doubt the object sought to be obtained is most im-
portant, but it must be admitted that the manner in
which Mr. FAWCETT proposed to obtain that ob-
ject is open to serious criticism. At the same
time, the discussion cannot fail to be attended
with beneficial results. Mr. HENLEY, indeed,
maintains that the English agricultural labouicr
stands in no need of education. In his opinion,
he is the best specimen of the class in the world,
and education would only iipair his excellence.
But in this opinion Mr. Hentev, even among
the country gentlemen of the House of Commons,
standsalone. Both the mover and seconder of the
amendment, and those who supported them,
frankly admitted that the education of the Eng-
lish agricultural labourer requires improvement ;
all they venture to assert is, that the Bill of Mr.
FAwcerr is impracticable and would not accomplish
theobject which he has in view. It is surely a very
remarkable fact that in Scotland the number of
persons who can sign their names is much larger
Ira the rural districts than it is in this towns,
and whatevei 111 Y. nENLEY may say, nobody
who is acquainted with the agricultural labourers of
the north will assert that they are less useful or less
industrious than the same class in Oxfordshire, or
in any other county in England. It is mere waste
of time to argue with those whoinsist that the stare
of education is satisfactory, especially in the rural
districts. Such a statement is notoriously the re-
verse of the fact, however reluctant Mr. HENLEY
may be to admit it.

The real question is, in what way this serious
evil is to be remedied. Some remedy must be
devised, and that speedily. The people must be
educated, but the most important thing is not
simply that efficient measures shall be taken, but
that they shall be taken in the right order. L. is
vain to pass a stringent law which shall prevent
the employment of children under a cer-
tain age or shall require the possession
of a certain amount of education, unless
measures are first taken to provide efficient schools
for the children of the poor. Parliament has no
right to interfere betweenthe parent and the child,
and to deprive parent& of the money which they
may earn through the labour of their children,
until Parliament provides efficient schools which
the children can attend. It may seem just to in-
sist that no child shall be allowed to work unless
he has received a certain amount of instruction,
but it is the grossest injustice to impose this con-
dition upon those who have not the means of
complying with it. This is a point which attracted
the attention of the Duke of NEWCASTLZ and his
colleagues. They admit that in many cases parents
exercise little self-control and show considerable
indifference. But they add, when parents are cen-
sured for not prolonging the attendance of their
children at school, it rests with those who censure
them to show that the most has been made of the
attendance already given. If a child of ten years
old who has attended school with moderate regu-
larity for four or five years can hardly read and
write, and cannot cypher to any useful purpose,
it is very hard to call upon the parent to keep
him at school four years longer, and to tax him
with selfishness and ingratitude because he does
not choose to forego a large addition to his family
income in order to do so. In the same spirit
Mr. MITCHiLL, one of the Inspectors, declares,
that in many of the schools the instruc-
tion is so bad, that, he says, " I can
" only rejoice that parents are so sensible
" (as to withdraw their children), for more
" complete waste of time than one too frequently
" grieves over in these schools it is scarcely pea-
" Bible to imagine." These considerations show
that if educationis to be insisted upon as a condi-
tion precedent to a child's being allowed to work,
the State is not only bound to provide a sufficient
number of schools, but to see that the schools are
thoroughly efficient.

The conclusion is obvious. The first thing to
be done by the Legislature is rot to extend the
Factory Acts to other employments—not to im-
pose penalties on parents or children—but to pro-
vide an adequate number of efficient
schools. But curiously enough, while men of
every variety of political and religious opinion
agree upon the necessity of extending the opera-
tion of the Factory Acts, it is difficult, if not im-
possible, to obtain anything like agreement upon
the mode of providing schools or the means of
education. Even assuming that the most strin-
gent law were passed for the purpose of prevent-
ing parents and capitalists from employing chil-
dren, the results would be as futile as they have
already proved in the case of the Factory Acta.
So long as no means exist for the purpose of com-
pelling children to attend efficient schools where
they exist, or of compelling the owners of property
to erect and maintain efficient schools, any exten-
sion of these Acta must prove worse than useless.
Strange to say, this is the very point upon which
Parliament seems utterly helpless. While one
party can suggest no other means except a rate
for the supply of such schools as may be needed,
the other party professes the utmost dislike to
sanction any such measure, and at the same time
Ends it impossible to suggest any alternative
measure. A dead-lock such as this cannot last.
If the state of education could be said to be satis-
factory, Mr. HARDY and the Government might
unite with Mr. HENLEY, and resist any attempt
to meddle with the subject. But the facts are