The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-12 00:00:00

HEMSWORTH HOSPITAL.

Viscount GALWAY asked the Attorney-Genera?
whether he had decided on the steps he intended to take
with respect to the better regulation of Hemsworth Hos-
pital ; and, if he had, when the scheme was likely to be
brought forward ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that a scheme had
already been brought before the Court of Chancery by
which, after providing for the management of the hospi-
tal, 10001. per annum would be appropriated to the Hems-
worth School, 2001. to the neighbouring village school,
and the residue of the funds to other schools.
THE DEAN OF CHRIST CHURCH.

Mr. G. VERNON asked the First Lord of the Trea-
sury whether the appointment of the Dean of Christ
Church bad been made subject to any conditions or alte-
rations as to emoluments or otherwise, which may be re-
commended by the Oxford University commissioners ?
Lord PALMERSTON said he was not aware that the
commissioners proposed to make any recommendation for
altering the emoluments of the dean of Christ Church,
but they might undoubtedly recommend such an altera-
tion if they should think proper. For his own part he
ha,.: only to observe, that having recommended to the
Cr own a person who, from all he had heard of him, he
thought eminently fitted for that situation—(hear)—and
who, he had reason to believe, was imbued with the right
principles of improvement, be should not have consi-
dered it fitting to have exacted from him any conditions
as to the course he might pursue. He was quite satisfied
that that gentleman would be most anxious to insure the
success of any measure which would be likely to promote
the improvement of the University of Oxford. (Hear.)
Mr. OTWAY postponed until Friday next his ques-
tion with respect to the conditions which, on the forma-
tion of the Government, certain members of it stipulated
should not be asked of Russia.
THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT BILLS.

In reply to a question from Sir J. PAKINGTON,
Lord J. RUSSELL stated that it was his intention to
proceed on Thursday next with the Victoria Government
Bill and the New South Wales Government Bill, taking
them in the order in which he was then stating their
titles.

DESPATCHES OF THE LATE BOARD OF AD-
MIRALTY AND OF ADMIRAL DIINDAS.
Mr. E. ELLICE wished to ask his right hon. friend
the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he would have
any objection to lay before the house the despatches from
the late Board of Admiralty quoted the other evening by
the right hon. gentleman the member for Wiltshire, as
well as as any communication in reference to those des-
patches which might have been received from. Admiral
Dundas

Sir C. WOOD said he was at that moment prepared
to lay on the table of the house the despatches in ques-
tion, as\ well as those portions of the letters of Admiral
Dundas which related to them.
The right hon. gentleman accordingly laid on the table
the despatches, as well as those portions of the letters of
Admiral Dundas which had reference to them.
THE SWEARINC-I- IN OF NEW MEMBERS.
Sir G. GREY said that in compliance with what
seemed to be the general wish of the house, he had to
ask leave to introduce. bill for the purpose of
ing the doubts which had been raised as to the right of
those new members sworn in in the absence of the
Speaker during the last week to sit and vote.
Mr. E. ELLICE expressed a hope that a bill would
be introduced at the earliest possible opportunity, for
the purpose of preventing the recurrence of those incon-
veniences which must arise from the absence of the
Speaker under the existing state of the law.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill, and it was
immediately read a first time.
EDUCATION (No. 2) BILL.

The order of day for resuming the debate on this
bill, which had been adjourned on the 2d of May, having
been read,
Mr. ADDERLEY resumed the adjourned debate.
He replied to thehrgnments Mr. Henley had used against
the bill, and condemned the assumption of the right
hon. gentleman that schools established on the system of
this bill must necessarily be irreligious in their character.
He did not attach much importance to the statistical
dispute whether the number of children educated was
one in eight or one in nine, but he thought no one could
be acquainted with the condition of the poorer classes
without knowing that there was a lamentable want of
education. He admitted that the Continental system of
education had failed in acting upon the morals of the
people, but he traced the reason of this to the system of
State patronage on which the Continental schools were
founded, and argued that, no conclusion could be drawn
from this against a system of local rating by which the
people would pay for their own education. He was for re-
jecting Mr. M. Gibson's bill, but he believed that the

-bills of Sir J. Pakington and Lord J. Russell were iden-
tical in principle; but, upon the whole, he preferred the
religious clauses of the right honourable baronet to
those of the noble lord. He believed, however, that
if both bills were sent to a select committee, a valuable
measure might be compounded out of them. In conclu-
sion, he urged upon the extreme parties on all sides to
accept the practical and practicable compromise which
was now offered them.
Mr. E. DENISON objected to the plan of rending
these bills to a select committee, as one unworthy of
Parliament. On the general question he called the at-
tention of the house to the present phase of the educa-
tion question, as showing the difficulties encountered in
the progress of the work. It appeared that the pupil
teachers, trained at great expense by the State, were
found in great numbers to desert the work of education
for commercial pursuits, while, on the other hand, the
children were sent to school at an earlier age than for-
merly, and were sooner taken away for work, so that
the necessity began to be pressed upon the school in-
spectors of having a compulsory system of educa-
tion. His own opinion inclined in that direction,
for he could not understand why a country gentle.
man should be allowed to employ uneducated children
while a manufacturer was forbidden to do so. Another
argument in favour of this plan was, that when industry
and education were carried on together, the tendency
was to improve both, as any bon. gentleman might see
by a visit to that most interesting institution, Price's
Candle Factory?
Lord J. MANNERS rose very reluctantly to oppose
the bill, which he said would not meet the great difficulty
of educating poor and populous districts. The difficulty
at present was to raise subscriptions in these districts ;
and how would that he met by laming it to the option
of these parties, as the bill proposed, whether they would
rate themselves or not. Neither would it have any
effect in compelling the attendance of children at
school, though it was reported on the authority of
Mr. Moseley that of every 100 children in England
fifty-seven absented themselves from school for no
assignable reason but the indifference of their pa-
rents. He objected further to the bill that even if
it were passed it would not be found to work. English
society was at present convulsed from one end to the
other on the subject of church rates, which had a pre-
scription in their favour of more than a thousand years
and he could not believe that the people would
pa.iently submit to this new education rate. He ob-
jected also to the machinery provided for in this bill,
which seemed calculated to introduce endless confusion
and religious bickering into all the parishes of England ;
in this respect he said he preferred the Manchester bill
to both the other two, as the simplest and most straight.
forward of the three ; but he hoped the house would
deal one vigorous blow, and reject them all.
Mr. W. J. FOX argued that the effect of this bill
would exercise a beneficial effect upon the indifference
of the people towards education ; for when people were
rated for an object of which they were to have the con-
trol, they were sure to take a deeper interest in the ques-
tion than they bad done before. He supported the send-
ing of all these bills to a select committee, on the ground
of the many features which they had in common, and
regretted that Mr. Adderley was in favour of excluding
the Manchester scheme. He thought the time had no .v
come when all the parties in the country felt they must
give up their extreme views on the question, to agree to
some compromise, and to put an end to the present
transitional condition of the question.
Sir J. PA KINGTON rose to address the house under
very great disadvantages. He did not not impute any
blame to the Government. On the contrary he had re-
ceived from them every possible courtesy and kindness:
But he thought there must be something wrong in a mode
of proceeding in 'which an assembly could adjourn a mat-
ter of such vital importance, and six weeks should elapse
before the debate could be resumed. He wished now to
take the first opportunity of answering the able and
remarkable speech delivered by his right hon. friend (Mr.
Henley) six weeks ago. His right hon. friend avowed that
he was replying to his (Sir J. Pakington's) speech.
pointss— thoan
which he (Sir 3. Pakington )replied in introducing thist
ni fhrei esnt dr
nwgaess
tt hi
hNeo
either
t hisher
aonmswitteerdtoorhiesvraigclhet
bill. The noble lord near him (Jord J. Mannsrs) had
followed the course taken by his right hon. friend. They

did not object to one bill or another bill, but contended
that no change was required. His right hon. friend
said, "Beware how you adopt a system which is produc-
ing such good effects ; it has not failed, is not failing, and
will not fail." Now, that was the proposition with which
he (Sir J. Pakington) bad to grapple, and which he in-
tended to contravene ; and he contended that if Parlia-
ment consented to allow matters to remain in their pre-
sent state, they would abandon the first duty of legisla-
tors. The question at issue was not to be decided by sta-
tistics of Austrian crime to which him right bon friend had