The Sun.
London, England, 1855-04-28 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 28 1855

that the charges which had been made through the I
honourable member for Aylesbury--if he wishes it to be
put in that way—and which were false and calumnious—
I
should have expected that a due respect to himself would
have led him to acknowledge that he had been misled, and
to Lord Hardinge. (Cheers.) Sir, the
to oo
no ff.
membere r a n apology
hasbrought charges against men and classes.
He has brought charges against my noble friend at the
head of the army which are unfounded and calumnious.
(Cheers.) He has been made, no doubt, the mouthpiece of
others, who wish to undermine and destroy the character
of that distinguished man. Sir, my Lord Hardinge is not a
man who has risen by favour or accident to the situation
which he holds. Lord Hardinge is essentially a soldier.
He has won his way to the honourable position he holds
through many a long campaign, and many a hard-fought
battle. He has shed his blood in the field of action,
and there is no man who, by his long experience and
his distinguished services, is more prominently pointed
out than he for the proud and honourable position in
which he has been placed. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) I
can say so, because he was placed there by others, not by
us, but the Government which conferred upon him the
office of Commanding-in-Chief did themselves honour by
their selection. (Hear.) Why, is it likely that a man who
owes his position, as Lord Hardinge does, to merit and
long service—who has passed his life with soldiers —who
has seen them in every climate of the globe, and in every
position, whether of camp, of fatigue, of battle, of march,
or of danger from foe or disease—is it likely that such a
man should have his feelings so perverted by the power he
possesses, as to be induced, for some trumpery motives of
personal affection or political influence, to undermine the
efficiency of that army upon the glory of which his fame
has been resting, and upon the efficiency of which his
honour is to be maintained ? I say, again, that the charges
against Lord Hardinge are as unfounded as they are de-
void of any reasonable presumption in their favour.
Then the honourable member brings a charge against
classes. He says the army is filled with the sons and
relatives of the aristocracy, and that it is a shame
it should be so. I say to the contrary. I say
it is au honour to the aristocracy of this country that they
flock to the ranks of the army, and enrol themselves in the
navy; that when the danger is to be encountered and
honour won, they are ever to be found foremost in defend.
ing our interests and maintaining our dignity. (Hear.)
Depend upon it when the day comes, if ever it should
come, when the aristocracy of a great country shall ab-
stain from entering the ranks of its army and navy—when
they shall seek the pleasures of private life and pass their
days in luxury and idleness, instead of encountering the
danger of battle, and submitting to the fatigues of cam-
paigns—l say, whenever you see a nation come to that state,
then indeed you may predict its fall, then you may raise your
voices in reproach against classes that would be so destitute
of true patriotism; then you may say that abuses exist, and
may raise popular odium against a degenerate aristocracy.
I am proud to say that that reproach cannot be cast upon
the upper classes of England, and instead of those acts to
which the honourable member refers being acts which imply
any censure upon the aristocracy, I accept them as so many
testimonies in favour of the public spirit and manlylfeeling
which characterise the gentry of England. (Cheers.)
THE INDIAN ARMY.
In reply to a question from Sir E..
Lord PALMERSTON ssid he would consult with the
Chancellor of the Exchequer as to when the discussion
could be taken on the motion of the hon. gentleman, with
respect to the constitution of the Indian army.
NEWS FROM THE CRIMEA.
Mr. WARNER wished to know whether by means of
the telegraph there had been received any news from the
Crimea in the course of that day or the day before. If

there were no news at that moment, he should feel inclined
to move that the house meet at 12 to-morrow (this day), in
order that such news might be communicated.
Sir C. WOOD said that the Government were not in
possession of any news.
LOAN BILL.
The house then resolved itself into committee on the
Loan Bill.

income tax upon the poorer classes, and as one which bore
with tenfold force upon those who had large families.
Mr. MACGREGOR said that, finding that were so few
members present, and such apathy on their part to pre-
vent a press of taxation, he should under the circumstances
withdraw his motion.
The house then went into committee on the bill.
On clause 1,
Dr. MICHELL said he thought the budget was as good
a one as could have been produced under the circum-
stances, had it not been for the tax upon chicory. He com-
plained that the tax was proposed and explained, not by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but by the Secretary for
the Treasury. He asserted that the tax was one of protec-
tion, but he did not see how it was to be collected. He
thought some explanation ought to have been given before
the tax was imposed. He complained that the tax was not
alluded to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his finan-
cial statement, but that it had been placed on the resolu-
tions by the Secretary for the Treasury. He was not
aware that this was the custom of the house, and he hoped
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would withdraw it.
Mr. WILSON said if the hon. member had paid atten-
tion to the question he would have found there was no
duty upon raw chicory, and the duty placed upon ground
chicory was merely to prevent coffee being imported from
abroad under the guise of chicory.
Dr. MICHELL said that the chicory must be ground
before it could be used, and that there was then a duty
upon it.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there
was no Customs duty upon raw chicory imported from
abroad, still less any Excise duty upon that grown in the
country. An objection to the present state of the law,
which had been forcibly urged upon him by a most influ-
ential deputation, was, that there was not sufficient pro-
tection for those interested in coffee against the competi-
tion of chicory.
Dr. MICHELL would be satisfied if the words "or
ground" were left out.
After a few words from Mr. MACGREGOR, several al-
terations in the clause were agreed to.
On *he motion that the clause as amended do stand part
of the bill,
Mr. GREGSON proposed to add to the clause the fol-
lowing worts :—" That the duties Le made payable on
coffee, sugar, &c.. until the sth day of April inclusive
which shall first happen after the end of twelve months
from the date of a definite treaty of peace with Russia ;
from which last-mentioned date the same duties shall be
paid as were payable previous to the passing of this act."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
seemed to him that the words proposed by the lon. mem-
ber would not have the effect which he had intended. If
it were the wish of the committee that the additional
sugar duty should be a war duty, it should be done by
special enactment. It was better not to press the amend-
ment then, but to bring it up on the third reading.
Mr. HANKEY trusted that his honourable friend, after
the observation of the right honourable gentleman, would
withdraw his amendment. He considered that the
colonial interest should have some hope held out to it that
after the war it would be put on the same footing as before
the war.
Mr. HILDYARD thought they should not be antici-
pating these questions ; but if they did, they should take
as much care of the interests of the colonists as they did of
foreigners.
Mr. BLACKBURN suggested that the Government
should undertake to introduce a clause on the subject to
which the hon. member hid referred.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER undertook,
WI it was the wish of the house, to introduce a clause for
the purpose suggested by the hon. member.
Captain LAFFAN called attention to the fact that

whit© uniform duties were levied upon tea and coffee,
without any distinction of the different prices paid for
those articles per pound, discriminating duties were levied
upon sugars, which had caused great dissatisfaction. The
colonists complained that the discriminating duty was
kept up for the benefit of the London refiners. It prevented
the manufacture o a superior class of sugars in the West
Indies, because the duty on such sugars under the discri-

On clause 1,
Mr. JOIN MACGREGOR said he considered the right
hon. gentleman had fallen into a great error in proposing
a loan according to the terms of the bill. The right bon.
gentleman might have raised a loan of twenty millions at
par, for an annual rate of interest not greatly exceeding
that now proposed to be given. He would propose now
to substitute in the bill the words "twenty mations," in-
stead of " sixteen millions."

minating system would amount to a prohibitive duty.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 2, which has reference to the Customs duties on
spirits, was also agreed to.
Clause :3 and 6 were likewise agreed to, the chairman
was ordered to report the bill with amendments, and the
house resumed.
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion being made for the second reading of this

The CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES (Mr. Fitzroy)
ruled that no motion could be made in that way.
Mr. MACGREGOR would move in that case that the
chairman report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. FITZROY said the hon. member was not in order
in making that motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER regretted
that the hon. gentleman could not, consistently with the
forms of the house, make the motion he wished to make,
and carry it with the consent of -the house. The only
practical difficulty which occurred to him in the we) of
giving effect to such a resolution was, that it was not
improbable that the contractors for the loan would
make some objection to paying the Government 20,000,0001.
when they had only contracted to give interest for
16,000,0001. (A laugh.) He hoped the hon. member,
having recorded his protest, would not further oppose the
motion.
Mr. MACGREGOR withdrew his motion.
Mr. WILKINSON remarked that a Chancellor of the
Exchequer very often could only do what it was in his
power to do, and not what it would be most advisable to do.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that undoubtedly the main ob-
jects of free trade had been accomplished, and tho duties
most adverse to free trade got rid of. He entirely agreed
with what had often been said, that it was not unreasonable
that all high duties upon articles of import into the country
should be likewise got rid of. But, besides the matter of pro-
tective duties, there were various other subjects of great
importance to which the principle of free trade would un-
doubtedly apply—for instance, to a gradual reduction of
the taxes laid upon articles produced at home by way of
Excise. Another description of legislation to which they
had also lately taken with great advantage was the total
abolition of low nominal duties, which were unproductive
in point of fact. Duties had in that way lately been taken
off from 1,000 to 1,300 articles. But he could not altoge-
ther dismiss from his mind the apprehensipn that should
the burden of the war continue and the existing inconve-
nience be increased (and he had no doubt, for his own part,
that it would be increased); Parliament would find itself
—he would not say under the necessity, for he could not
undertake to say what constituted a political necessity—
but Parliament would, whether reasonably or unreasona-
bly, return to the free imposition of protective duties. He
hoped that the day would not soon arrive ; it would not
be a happy day for the country; but the possibility of its
arrival was a contingency he could not altogether dismiss
from his mind.
Mr. HEY WORTH thought it quite likely the country
would be obliged to return to the imposition of protective
duties.

bill, several petition; were presented in favour of and
against the measure.
Mr. BLACK riTJB.N moved that the bill be read a
second time that day six months. The people of
Scotland were fortunate in already possessing a sys-
tem of education that was supposed to work well,
and they should be cautious how they attempted to
disturb it. The system was first proposed by John
Knox 300 years ago, and by those men who were called the
fathers of the Church of Scotland. They did not at once
procure its adoption by the State, but in the year 1600 a
number of parochial schools were established by the Church
itself, and in 1616 the schools were recognised by the Privy
Council. In the year 1613 an act was passed by the Parlia-
ment of Scotland in reference to them, and although that
act was repealed at the Restoration, it was renewed in
1696, and the measure passed in that year was the funda-
mental charter of the schools of Scotland. The • 'um-
Con to be given in the schools was to be a religious educa-
tion under the charge of the Church of Scotland, but the
principle on which they were established was proposed to
be entirely overthrown by the bill now submitted for the
consideration of the house. The schools had worked re-
markably well, and had done a great deal to raise the cha-
racter of the Scotch people. (Hear, hear.) In support of
his assertion respecting the utility of the system he would
quote the opinions of two persons to whose views the hon.
gentleman opposite would be inclined, he thought, to at-
tach importance. The first was the right hon. gentleman
the member for the city of Edinburgh, who stated that,
owing to the operation of the system, improvements such
as the world had never seen had taken place in the moral
and intellectual character of the people. The second per-
son to whose opinion he would refer was the Marquis of
Lansdowne, who stated in the House of Lords that he
would very much regret to see any system of education
adopted in Scotian t the basis of which would not be
founded upon the principle of the parochial schools.
(Hear, bear.) He (Mr. 'Blackburn) did not deny that those
schools had their faults, but a bill bad been brought iu by
the hon. member for Perthshire to correct those faults; but
nothing could be so distinct as Lord Lansdowne's testi-
mony in favour of the principle of the schools, which was
founded upon their connection with the Church. (Hear.)
He had another witness to name in support of the system,
and that was the learned gentleman who introduced the
bill, and who told them that the present schools were more
efficient than they had ever been before. (Hear, hear.) It
was admitted by the preamble of the bi 1 itself that for 200
years the schools had given instruction in religious matters
to the great body of the people, and had given secular
instruction to those who dissented from that rel.

Ageing
On clause 7, teaching. (Hear, hear.) The bill did not, it must be ad-
Mr. MACGREGOR wished to know why the dividends witted, continue the present principle, because it would
were made payable on the Ist day of January, instead of sever the existing connection between the Church of Scot-
at a term calculated from the day on which payments land and the schools. Therefore it would destroy the
were made to the Government? principle that had produced su many good results up to
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was the present time, and would substitute another principle
customary to pay the dividends on Consols in January and for it. (Hear, hear.) Why had such a bill been brought
July, and as the loan was contracted for in Consols it had in, when it was admitted that the schools were working so
not been thought advisable to depart from that custom, well? He should not like to give an answer himself to
On clause 22, relative to the sinking fund, that question, but he would quote the reason given for it
Sir F. KELLY said it was a very important principle of by a distinguished Scotchman in the House of Lords. That
the financial administration of the country that the house individual said he need hardly say that the agitation that
or the committee should have an opportunity of determin- had been raised to overthrow the parochial system was
ing the question whether—he would not say in the present caused by the feeling which all Dissenters bore to all esta-
loan, but whether in any future loans that might be ef- blished churches, and especially to those they had lately
fected for the prosecution of the war the-system was to be left. The individual who gave that opinion was no less a
adopted of charging posterity for a limited period with the Person than a member of the present Cabinet, his Grace
annual payment of a very large sum. He wished to give the Duke of Argyll, who, on the 224 of March, 1850, as-
notice that upon the bringing up of the report, or upon the signed that as the reason for the agitation on which the
third reading, he ghoul t move the rejection of the clause. measure now before the house was founded. (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it He thought the present proposal of those who had gone
was the intention of the Government to introduce words out of the Established Church was against their own prin-
into the clause which would bring it more in unison with ciples. It had always been an admitted principle that
the hon. and learnedgentleman's ideas. Those words would schools should be attached to the Established Church.
be found in the copy of the bill in the hands of the chair, Yet now it was proposed to 'take them all away, because
man. With respect to the general policy of the clause, he they no longer regarded that Church with approbation.
would go into ; fiat question on the occasion of the motion The whole principle of the bill was to transfer the manage-
of which the hon gentleman had given notice. meat of all the schools in Scotland to a board. The first
The bill then pessed through committee. point to be looked to was, if the board was a proper au-
CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL. thority for such a purpose. He much doubted that, and
would prefer seeing the inspector of schools report to a mi-
nister ot to
education in London, or to some functionary more
On the motion that the house should go into committee
on this bill,
Mr. MACGREGOR said be thought he should fail in his
particularly conversant with Scottish business. The con-
duty if he did notoppose the intended increase of the duties hestitiliatid ever on
seen, consisting of seventeen members, eight
of whom were nominees f Government, four philosophers,
of the proposed board was the most extraordinary
upon tea, coffee, and sugar. Considering the high duties to,, which those articles were already subjected, he looked with
representing the four universities of Scotland, and four
alarm on the consequences of the measure proposed. Had
provosts from the es of urgh, Glasgow,
the right hon. gentleman raised 20 millions on terminable
Perth, and Aberdeenmunicipaliti
. To set suchEdinb a board over the
annuities and three millions on Exchequer-bills, there whole educational institutions of the country appeared to
would have been no necessity for increasing the duties upon him ;one of the most monstrous proposals he bad ever
articles of daily and universal consumption. Had 14s. lierard. The people of Scotland, members of the Free
been put upon Muscovado sugar, the desired object would
Church and others, who were petitioning in favour of this
have been attained ; but as they had made the maximum
bill, had not the least idea of what they were asking for,
duty 10s., and now altered that amount, everything was
and thought it sufficient in order to stigmatise anything as
disarranged, to the great inconvenience of commerce and
abominable to call it Erastian. The board was invested
of the public generally. Then as to coffee, there was no
trade that had been in a more suffering condition. He
with arbitrary powers of dismissing schoolmasters, which
concluded by moving that the house resolve itself into would reduce them to a servile condition. He maintained
committee on.that bill this day six months. that the new measure would act very ill indeed, and thought
Mr. DAVIES thought that the Chancellor of the Each°. he had at all events shown reasons for the house to pause
before assenting to it. It was not as an exclusive test, but
quer had exercised a wise discretion in so equally dividing
the burdens of taxation. Although he felt the greatest as a test of qualification, that the advocates of the present
sympathy for the lower classes, still he thought it was not system wished the religious test to be maintained. Again,
fair to exempt one class from direct taxation and throw all it was said that the defenders of the present schools wished
the burden of that taxation up:in another.
Sir H. WLLLOUGHBY wished to k the hon. member to maintain a monopoly, but they were perfectly ready,
IperaornvieddedLtohrdeirAodwroen
astcehoionlseswtaehrelishleitngalothnee,
mtoosjtopinerfteheet
for Glasgow, who, as he understood asproposed to raise system of education that could be devised, and to support
twenty millionn by terminable annuities, how he proposed
to pay the interest upon them. Any gentleman who could waneyreoathlseorfsecahrosotlhs
the might
schoolsbe
mightdeemed h
e requisite.
sectarian;
solve that problem would be justly considered nancial
the fact was that the parochial schools of Scotland had
atthat
minister. Ile found that the objections in thea
any sort of taxation were so inconsistent that housethe to
never been sectarian, and he had the testimony of a late
swered one another ; but if they were acted up to, there (Mr. Hume), to the fact of their exemption from sectarian
Chancellor of the Exchequer for some information the character, and of the utter absence of class distinctions or
respect to the increase which was made in the malt tax prejudices. By the Act of Union the schools were to be
last year. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer estimated secured in the management of the presbyteries, and he
that by a certain increase of the malt duty there would be thought it would be admitted, that, as in the case of the
an addition to the revenue of 1,600,000/. He wished to Act of Uniformity in England, the greatest cantion should
know if that estimate had been realised. He did not like be used in altering such a statute. He denied that the
duties on articles of general consumption, but he could the
of sound public opinion in Scotland was in favour of
not conceive how Government could propose a tax of • measure. He found that 117 petitions with 5,870
150,000/. on coffee whilst at the same time they were signatures had been presented against the bill, and six
taking off 150,000/. on newspapers., He did not see the Petitionsy with but six signatures in its favour. The
necessity for taking off this amount. Nobody complained bird
to clause was left out, and the learned
of the impost ; and, for his part, ha confessed he liked Opidnitoonsk
of the
for having done so in deference to the
the luxury of a good newspaper, and he thought this to the 45th la Scottish members ; but if they turned
was a direct violation of the principles which had pre- in an th c ause, they would find the same principle
o er form. Under this
the Committee of Council
veiled of late. He wished to ask the Chancellor of the might continue
also if he was aware that large quantities of and was the
their grants to denominational schools -
qExcheuer
e only body that was t b
o e excluded from
tea had been recently taken out of bond posee could not the benefits of publicgrants h
t a tax levied for general purp should Ibe bushed Church of Scotland? ereafter to be the Esta-
agree tha
He called on English mern-
of public corn- bers t
turned to private advantage, to the injuryo lend their aid to the representatives of Scotland in
He did not know whether this was tree,
t but it '
petition.
but
I resisting the attempt new made to upset a syste that
had been recently reported. He, however, trusted that e universally acknowledged to have worked well and was
and con-
right hon. baronet would be able to contradict it. ferred benefits of the highest kind upon the count
The ry in
that ;order to it
CHANCELLOR
of the EXCHEQUER said treplaceby a new and quite untried plan. It
was a fact well worthy the
, notice of the house, that alretdy
the right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford had last .
the
additional duties upon sugar, malt, and —in towns of Glasgow and Edinburgh-82 per cent.
session proposed
there had been of the children between the aces of 5 and 12 were at school,
spirits. With respect to sugar and spirits,
additional and he • h 1 dthat it *
eppre ent e
an increased consumption notwithstanding the
impost; but with respect to malt, the result at present 1 a larger attendance than this, and that the expectation of
had been, as far as he was able to _state, less favourable. having 100 per cent. at school under the new scheme was
The accounts at present were in that state that it'eras im- abeolutely chimerical. He moved as an amendment that
Possible to ascertain the result with accuracy, but it col.- ; the bill be read a second time that day six months. walappeared that it was less favourable than the esti. , Mr. DUNLOP denied that the public opinion of Scot-
.. 0_
' h price I land was against the bill. The number of petitions pro-
of burl.) One cause of that undoubtedly was the hi
in ,
e the principle of the measure was 872,
the e
ty since the last harvest. However that might be, seated support I
whilst to the petitions against the
taxati4ooltattf of his right honourable friend of the year's ) with 85,689 signatures,
42 381 signatures. The
million seeori been exceeded by the produce by about a I bill there were appended only , _
Mr. lieloylal-,D
' constituencies whose representatives had supported the
formed on the'''‘lFl said, if the people had been well in- bill of last year consisted of a population of 66,651
would have purbiect of these changes, he was sure they whilst those by whose representatives it was opposed gave
He protested erred tkm, I._. .
agai„,d. a. ricome tax to indirect taxation, a population of only 23,878. The principle . .
of the measure
deprived
the poorer oleo_alaT•eireof taxation which not only I was that the y should no longer lb '
have a denominational u., a
12,..i5h, ettho ecuirc fr----"'‘ of th • • • ' national -
ea o,e,_
o. ear earnings, but dimi- system of education,
=lie. Eie objeot,ea to""Ave.eire lebe made 'control .1 of the educe-
d, . . .ur was pro- . apteinpt at the exclusive or monopo y_ ...
bey to
lzklUstic, of this tax Ulla Sion of 0 % nary met be abaudosed• were t
A ;

forego the hope of such a measure, under which dl creeds ,
might meet on common ground, free from every particle of
religious dissension, in order that the exclusive niank4e-
ment of the schools might rest with the Establish d Church
of Scotland, which numbered less than one-third of the
inhabitants ? It was, in fact, proposed by this bill that
nineteen-twentieths of the inhabitants of many of the
counties of
:Scotland. should be placed under the instruc-
tion of persons from whom they differed in religious
opinions, and who represented merely the opinions of
a very small fraction of the people. The proposal was
not only inconsistent with justice, but inircicai to the
success of the measure which was now proposed. (Hear,
hear.) They had really some claims on the attention and
consideration of the English members on this subject. He
appealed to their generosity and just feelings, for it was
not owin,, to any difference of religious opinions among
the people that Scotland was split up into so many sec-
tions ; the secessions which had taken place were, in
reality, traceable to the conduct of the Parliament of this
country, both at the time of the Union and subsequent to
that event. He trusted that the House )f Commons would
not now, by its conduct, tend to perpetuate those divisions
among the youth of Scotland, but would grant to the Scotch
people at least the benefit of common schools. (Hear.)
Mr. BAILLIE opposed the bill, on the ground that its
clauses were not in accordance with the principle con-
tained in the preamble of the bill, which was that the
people of Scotland should be provided with the means' of
religious education. The effect of the clauses would be to
place the school under the management of the chairman
of the board, but there was no guarantee in the bill as to
the religious character or opinions of the chairman, and the
system of education might therefore be an entirely secular
one. The Free Church of Scotland opposed the bill on
the ground that the schoolmasters to be appointed were
required to be of the Established Church of Scotland ;
they also opposed it on the ground that the appointment
of those schoolmasters rested with the heritors and clerks
of sessions ; and a third ground of objection was the pro-
posed supervision of the Presbyters. He thought that a
bill might be introduced which would remove a groat many
of the objections which ho entertained against the bill,
and would also obtain for it the support of the Free
Church. The Synod of the Free Church of Glasgow had
recently agreed to resolutions disapproving of the pro-
posed bill, and he felt it his duty to oppose the measure
on the grounds stated in those resolutions, and which had
already been referred to by hon. members in the course of
the debate. The Government might, perhaps, be able to
carry the bill through the House of Commons; but if they
succeeded in doing so, he warned them not to ascribe their
success to any change of public Opinion on the subject, and
expressed his strong opiaion that, even if passed through
that house it would not pass through the ordeal of the
other house.__(Hear)._

Mr. BAXTER, saidthat the hon. member who had just
resumed his seat had said that this was a Free-Church
measure. Now that was not a correct statement, for he
believed that it was much more ardently desired by the
Dissenter• than the Free Church--
Mr. BAILLIE said, that on the contrary, he had said
that he did nut think the Free Church desired this bill.

Mr. BAXTER was sorry that he should have uninten-
tionally mistaken the purport of the hon. gentleman's re-
marks. The hon. gentleman had dwelt, upon the fact that
the Free Church Synod of Glasgow and Ayr had pronounced
against this bill. But he did not tell the house that on the
occasion when these resolutions were passed not more than
23 out of 300 members of the synod attended the meeting.
Great stress had been laid (luring the debate upon the be-
nefit conferred upon Scotland by these schools. He was
not about to deny this, but it did not follow that because
these schools, under the direction of the Church, had been
of great advantage to the country, when that Church em-
braced the great mass of the people in its fold, they should
be attended with equal advantages at a tithe when the
Established Church did not comprise more than one-third
of the people. It was admitted that the Church of Eng-
land could not substantiate a claim to the superintendence
of the education of the people, and be could not under-
stand why they should give to the Church of Scotland
powers which they refused to that of England. He be-
lieved that this was regarded by moderate men as a fair
arrangement, and as one which would be likely to place
this question on a satisfactory basis. Nor was this merely
the opinion of the Free Church and the Dissenters, for he
believed that a large body of the lay adherents of the
Church of Scotland were highly favourable to the bill of
his right hon. friend the Lord Advocate. He believed
that if the house rejected this bill hon. gentlemen opposite
would be the first to discover that they had made a serious
mistake in taking that course. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. JOHNSTONE objected to this bill, because, while
it took away the existing securities for religious teaching
in the schools, it substituted no.ie in their place. It was
proposed to remove both from the schoolmaster and the in-
spector all those religious tests which had operated so bene-
ficially since the schools had been in operation, but it did
not contain a single provision supplying their place with
any other arrangement calculated to secure the same end.

Lord DUNCAN said that this bill was intended to be
one for the general and not the partial education of the
people of Scotland. Now, while one gentleman had opposed
it on the ground that it was a Free-Church bill, another had
opposed it, as he said. on the very grounds on which the
Free Church were hostile to it. The objections which had
been raised to the bill were, as these rival objections might
show, rather on matters of detail than of principle. Well,
then, looking to the difficulty of legislating on such a sub-
ject, he must appeal to the house to pass the second read-
ing, and allow the bill to go into committee, where such
objections could be considered much better than in that
stage. It was no doubt true that Scotland had long been
favourably distinguished for the education of its peope;
bat the report of tie commission for inquiry into the sani-
tary condition of the labouring classes of Scotland, shoved
conclusively that there were serious educational deficien-
cies both in the agricultural districts and in the towns.
Were they then justified in withholding from that country
a measure of general education so obviously necessary ? It
was sought by hon. gentlemen on the opposite side of the
house to give the Established Church the entire control of the
education of the people. But with what justice could that
be done when her members did not include more than one-
third of the population? The principles of the bill were so
well known that he would not detain the house by en-
larging upon them. All parties were united in the deter-
mination to secure a truly national and comprehensive
system of education ; such a system would ho secured by
the present bill, and he hoped therefore the second reading
would be passed by a large majority. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGT')N slid, that after giving the best at-
tention he could to the measure before the house, he failed
to see in it anything which could justify its supporters in
appealing to him to give it support. It varied in I ilany re-
spects from the measure he had proposed for England. One
leading feature of his scheme was to maintain and en-
courage every existing means of education. The bill of
the Lord Advocate, on the other hand, was intended to
destroy a system of schools. He proposed to give every
school in England a religious character. The Lord Advo-
cate provided no guarantee in his hill for the continuance
of religious teaching in the national schools. Nor did he
give any security for the religious faith of the teacher.
The present system of education in Scotland, as was proved
by the late census, was supported by the great bulk of the
people. There were more schools connected with the
Established Church than with any other religious deno-
mination. Moreover, the parochial schools were conducted
on the broadest principles of toleration. They were open
to Roman Catholics as well as Protestants. Iu fact, S,ot.
land enjoyed a system of education as near that which he
wished to establish in England as could possibly Else ima-
gined. For what reason, therefore, was he asked to de-
stroy the existing system in Scotland ? They were told
that the present bill was supported by the Free Church.
That was not a recommendation in its favour. The bill,
if adopted, would have the effect of widening the breach
between the Established and Free Churches, would in-
crease the religious animosities which prevailed in Scot-
land, and at the same time would not improve in any re-
spect whatever the existing system of education. Never-
theless, ho was indisposed to oppose the bill as a whole.
He admitted that increased means of education were re-
quired in the larger towns and cities of Scotland, and if
the Lord Advocate would introduce a measure for that
purpose he should give it his cordial support. Further,
if the hon. and learned lord could show that even is the
rural districts of the country the moans of education were
deficient, he would be glad to support hill in any measure
which he might introduce for the supplemental schools,
such as those which he had proposed with reference to
England. (Hear.)
The LORD ADVOCATE said ho would ask the.house to
consider the questions of what was proposed to be done by
the bill, how that was to be done, and what were the
grounds on which it was proposed to throw out the bill on
the second reading. The bill proposed to reform the parish
schools, to ascertain the educational wants of the people, and
to supply those wants as they arose. IL was a great sub-
ject of congratulation and encouragement that on the last
two of those objects, which were by tar the most important,
the Scotch members of every caste were agreed. He had
heard no proposal from the other side to supply those
wants. He had heard expressions of strong conviction
that something must be done, and he had been told in
plain terms that if he would only allow the parish schools
to remain as they were, hen. members on that side would
be willing to accept the measure. (Hoar, hear.) Now,
Government had eevised a measure for the supply of the
wants of the great towns and populous districts, in which
the Scotch representatives on one side of the house an-
quiesced, and to which those on the other agreed. Why,
then, was it not to pass? (Hear, hear.) He knew hon.
members opposite would tell him Oast that was his own
fault, asking him why he did not leave the parish schools
as they were, and deal solely with the large towns, as to
the remedy for which they were all agreed. He was asked
why he did not apply the same reform to the parish schools
as he did to the town schools, and why he did not intro-
duce the popular element there. But the popular element
was introduced there. Were there no parties interested
in a parish schoolmaster being a proper person but the
landholders, who did not send their children to his school?
He was told that he was pulling down the parish schools.
Nothing could be further from his wishes or intentions.
(Cheero.) On the contrary, it was perfectly clear that the
Government had done all that the right hon. member for
Midhurat and others had propo-ed should be done ; they
had dealt separately withthegroat towns and the parochial
schools. If those impediments were always to arise in the
way of education; if they found that no conoession- would
produce conciliatory results ; if the landholders were to be
for ever deaf to the voice of public opinion and experience
and blind to the course of events, the time might come
when it might be the duty of those who had in their
hands measures of educational reform entirely and
utterly to remodel the system which seemed now to be
the only obstacle in the way of its own reform.
(Cheers.) He would now state the three reasons why
it seemed to him quite impossible to allow things to
remain on their present footing. In the first place, he quite
agreed with the right hon. gentleman that no partial or
temporary cure need be tried. Reforni must be applied
upon a system or not at all. The right hon. gentleman
said the voluntary system had failed, and so it had. He
also said that the denominational system had placed schools
in the rich districts, and left the poor unprovided, and so
it. had. Unless things were done on a system, they need
not be attempted at all. Now, it was impossible to leave
the schools on their present footing and do anything on a
practical system. They could not afford the expense, and
ips
would be destroyed.
eatnep ofp footing
oeniatgnirnaeutgd
ott
ntho
wae Bblyo
dnuttefsohurt
oarb
an
arre
they could not adopt the machinery. The intention of the
bill was that they should know from year to year where
schools were required, and that by a uniform machinery
those schools should come into existence. If the parish.
schools were to be taken out of that system the whole thing
erttr lacee recir eiving
nert present
esaed:kne
resu9lnt
between 700 and 800 Free Church Schools in Scotland, all
e.
Ewdausoathtiaotn;
whereand oifnetsheehosoclhwoooluslwdebree
cituoiteresmuffisienieonnt
such
ethxeTeaphi
code
nfr.
seCe
Tau°
and
billsandering the public money. His object in the present
was to supersede the denominational by a more com-
prehensive system; but it was his belief that if the house
were
not prepared toadopt
a rational system on that basis,
then the denominational was the only hystem which could
be taken inland• Thuid
• co/ co not have both the aygtepos
lrict
incurring
aeac Committee
uovoasmeui svbmse
ue second
practical

and, therefore, to the present scheme operative f.r
the towns, and not for the parishes, was impossible. Bat
there was a third reason, and a convincing one Shu
they settle the question by bringinc, in a bill solely for the
great towns ? Should they settle the question by leaving
the parish schools in their present state?. Did any Scotch
member believe that the constittition of the parish schools
could remain as it was? A fresh agitation would be got up in
favour of the parish schools, for their constitution Was utterly
dissonant to common sense. Let them look at the northern
districts, where the census showed that of the people nine-
teen-twentieths were Free Church, and but one-twentieth
Churchmen. Was there any reason for saying that the parish
schoolmaster must be a member of the Established Church
when nineteen-twentieths of the children would not go to his
school ? Now, if the present measure were rejected it was
not because they refused to deal separately with a part of the
subject ; it was because hon. gentlemen would not accept a
measure which they admitted to be beneficial, for in two par-
ticulars only was it that the bill did not square exactly with
the objects they had in view. With reference to tie.. right
hon. gentleman and the educational measure he proposed, ho
(the Lord Advocate) wood say this much, that the right hon.
gentleman frankly admitted the main point. If they were
legislating for England, he (the Lord Advocate) would admit
that there was a great deal in what the right hon. gentleman
said. But the right hon. gentleman forgot they were legis-
lating for Scotland—a country which would accept of nothing
but a religious education. (Hear.) Accordingly the Govern-
ment had it in their power to do in Scotland what could not
be done elsewhere— they could rely to a very great extent
upon the religious feeling of the community. Had he not
known that the result of the passing of the bill he proposed
would be that the Bible and Catechism would be taught in
the schools just as before, he should not have brought for-
ward the measure. (Hear.) But the opposition of certain
Scotch members rested ntirely on the ground that the paro-
chial schools should be left entirely in the hands of teachers
belonging to the Established Church. T.tat was not at all in
consonance with the opinions of the right hon. gentleman,
who had said that he would respect the feelings of the majo-
rity of the people in a district, and 'support education in ac-
cordance with those feelings. Then, if it could be shown that
in the parishes of Scotland the religion of a denomination was
one way and the religion of the masses another, the right ben.
gentleman could not refuse to give his assent to the measure.
On •no ground could honourable gentlemen opposite vote
against the second reading of this bill except because the
parochial schools were to be thrown open to persons of all
denominations. They saw that these schools were part of an
ecclesiastical establishment. What right had hon. gentlemen
opposite to claim to represent the whole of the Church of
Scotland, as though the two dissenting branches did not hold
the doctrines of Knox and the other reormers ? The Presby-
terian citadel was strangely garrisoned with foreign troops,
when Episcopalians were using their best to keep opt the
very men for whose protection it was designed. What did
this bill intend to do? The parish schools had done much for
Scotland, not because they were administered in the best
way, or the discipline was the purest, or the provision for the
masters most lucrative, or the qualifications of the masters
the highest. . They had done what they had in spite of defi-
ciencies in these respects. What was proved was how much
might be done by not trusting schools to optional voluntary
efforts, but by the State discharging its duty and establishing
schools where they were required. (Hear.) In spite of a groat
deal of mismanagement, of a pittance to the schoolmasters
absolutely contemptible, of supervision at many times most
superficial, of discipline at many times most lax, these schools
had done much for Scotland, and he now asked the house to
proceed on that principle, and to extend its bounds, to have
a national system for the towns as well as for the country, to
reform the parish schools, and to create new ones where they
were required. (Cheers). The first things proposed to be done
in regard to the parochial schools were to increase the salaries
of the masters and to provide a ready mode of removing. an
improper master. To these honourable gentlemen opposite
assented. Next it was proposed that they should be under in-
spection. That was a reform which had been recommended
by the General Assembly, and the value of which was evi-
denced by the flourishing state of the schools in Banff and
Murray, to which the hon. member so frequently alluded. In
one of the reports of the inspectors of these schools he found
that when they first examined the 'masters of these schools
only twenty-four out of eighty passed the examination. In
the following year thirty more passed, but the largo propor-
tion were unable to pass the examination. From the course of
the debate it might be sipposed that it was proposed to alter
the mode of electing the schoolmasters, and to take the ma-
nagement of the schools out of the hands in which it was now
vested. All that was proposed, however, was that the
minister and the heritors, who had been described as the
props of the Established Church, should be allowed to elect
the best man whom they could find, whether or not he be-
longed to the Church.- They would be allowed to elect a
schoolmaster from the Free Church, and was it not desirable
that, where the majority of the inhabitants of a district held
opinions which prevented their sending their children to an
Established Church school, they should have a master whose
opinions were consonant with their own. The Established
Church, though still influential, did not include more than
one-third of the population, and nothing could be more dan-
gerous to it than to endeavour to assume the attributes of a
power without reality, and to maintain a supremacy which
had long been destroyed. He believed that the best thing
for the interest of the Established Church of Scotland would
be that this bill should pass, because it was impossible to say
what heart-burnings would arise if it was longer delayed.
With regard to the denominational clauses, the effect of
passing the bill would be to do away with denomin ttional
grants to Presbyterian congregations. In large towns where
there were such large masses o the Catholic population living
in ignorance, it would be a fair matter for the consideration
of the Privy Council whether in such localities it might not
be right to continue these grants for their education, but that
was left for the decision of the Privy Council. What would
be the result of the division ho coul. i not foresee, but he hoped
the house would assent to the second reading of the bill. If
it did, it would be a victory, not over any denomination, or
in favour of one party and against another—it would be a
victory over a common enemy, the worst enemy a State could
have—a victory purchased with no blood and watered with no
tears, carrying desolation to no happy home, but one which
would make tho heart of the widow and the fatherless re-
joice. They would build up for their country what might
be truly called " the cheap defence of nations"—a barrier
which would hold buck the tide of ignorance and crime for
years to come. (Cheers.)
Mr. WALPOLE rose to oppose this measure, not because
he was opposed to all reform, but because in this case the re-
form went too far. The system of education in Scotland had,
according to the acts of Council, advanced the country " in
godliness, and civility, learning, and knowledge ;" by it the
people had been enabled to go from the ru al districts to the
colleges, and many of them had afterwards risen to the highest
eminence and renown ; and by it the people generally had
been trained morally, intellectually, and religiously to the dis-
charge of the great duties of life. The Lord-Advocate s tid
that the people were tired of, or
_at least desired to change,
this system. The returns of education' showed that one in
74 of the population obtained education by means of this
system ; 1,8110 heritors had signed a petition praying that
this system might be extended, but not subverted ; and of the
33 counties into which Scotland was divided 19 or 20 had, at
their annual meetings, declared their opposition to this bill,
and only four had given in their adhesion to it. These facts were
reasons why the existing system ought not to be subl;erted,
although he was of opinion that it might be improved. What
ought to be done, was not to subvert the existing system, but
to extend and enlarge, to amend and improve it. The board
was to consist of secular, official, and political people, and this
was the sort of persons who were to be introduced to the people '
of Scotland, contrary to. their wishes, and to the desires of,
the heritors. The Lord-Advocate had said that the real
secret of the opposition was, the endeavour to maintain a use-
less
test, and to secure the superintendence of the presbytery.
It was asked why should not they do away with tests? Be-
cause they' gave the only guarantee that could be had in Scot-
land that the masters would maintain the religious creed and
doctrine consonant with those held by the people of that
country. The arguments with respect to tests did not apply
to Scotland in the same way as they applied to England.
The Lord-Advocate knew that he only two years ago had to
consider the question of tests in reference to the professors
in the Scotch universities, and in that case the Lord-Advo-
cate's test was applied in a similar manner to that which
applies to the schoolmasters. Then came the other argument,
of doing away with the superintendence of the presbytery;
and on that he might remind the Lord-Advocate that last year
he told the house that of late years, owing to the conflict that
had been going on, increased vigilance had taken place in the
management of,schools, and he said that the people might
get back to their old lethargy, and that they should be
roused. (Hear.) But the Lord-Advocate would have the
house reform not only what was bad, but what was good- -
reform not only institutions which had failed, but institutions
which had worked well. This was what the Lord-Advocate
was attempting to do by this bill. (Hear, hear.' He (Mr.
Walpole) agreed with the Lord-Advocate that it was wise to
increase the salaries of schoolmasters. He also agreed with him
that it was just to provide for their retired allowances. He
agreed likewise that it was well to extend the system to those
places where a deficiency existed. He especially agreed with
him on the necessity of establishing reformatory schools in
Scotland and elsewhere, though he thought that in doing this
the charge should'be made national and not local. (Hear.)
Agreeing thus in many of the objects of the bill, he entreated
the Lord ;Advocate to divide the bill into parts, the one con-
taining the provisions to which so many agreed, and the other
the provisions upon which so many diffe:ed. He could toll
the LorteAdvocate that he would never succeed in reconciling
ho house to this objectionable parts of the measure, and that
he wo dd only aggravate dissensions by persisting in it. If
he felt confident that the object of the bill was simply to sup-
ply the deficiency of education, and not to subvert the system
now in existence, he would give it his support ; but he be-
lieved that it was intended to effect the total subversion of a
system that had done more for the religious and moral instruc-
tion of the people of that country than any other system ever
established in any other country ever effected, and therefore
he was compelled to vote against it. (Cheers.)
Mr. HADFIELD said that no provision having been made
in the bill for the Catholics, who were one-fifth of •the popu-
lation of Scotland, they were virtually excluded, and that
exclusion, he contended, was fatal to the measure. It was an
unnecessary bill on every side, and by adopting it they would
be doing injury to the cause of education in• Scotland. He
advised the housetto allow the people of Scotland to educate
themselves, and they would do it cheaper and better than it
would be done under this bill.
The house then divided. The numbers were—
For the second reading
Against it l7l.
Majority for the second reading 39
The bill was then ordered to be committed.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL.
This bill was recommitted, and several verbal. amendments
were agreed to.
On clause 39,
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD proposed to leave out the proviso at
the end of the clause.
Mr. WILSON objected to the proposition, on' the ground
that building and other societies had so extended their ope-
rations that they were no longer legitimate exceptions, and
that under their operations the revenue suffered consider-
ably. s
The committee then divided, when the numbers were—
For the proviso 37
Against-
Majority —ll
The clause was then agreed to.
Lord EBRINGTON moved the addition of a clause tp
exempt militiamen, in certain cases, from forfeiture of their
interest in a benefit society.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER objected to the
clause. _ _ _ . . .

VAN •
After some discussion, in which Mr. Atherton, Mr. Spooner,
Mr. Sotheron, and Sir G. Grey took part.
Lord PALMERSTON observed that the object of the claule
was to protect friendly societies at the expense of the militia-
men. It was a mistake to suppose that when a man entered
the militia he bound himself to go and serve in such cam-
paigns as the Crimean. All that a militiaman could be called
upon to do was to serve, at his own option, at such places as
Gibraltar, Corfu, and garrisons in the Mediterranean, where
the prospects of health were just as good as at home.
Mr. HENLEY doubted , whether the chances of health
were as good in the places named by the noble lord as at
home, and he therefore hoped some time would be given for
considering the proposal contained in this clause.
Mr. MOWBRAY cited the case of an assurance office, which
would not insure the life of a militiaman who was liable to
be called upo to ierve th tr9l7 • . 4 the Oat war,
- - - - 40