The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-22 00:00:00

METROPOLITAN' SEWERS BILL,

On the motion that the Bill should be considered as
amended,
Lord EBRINGTON asked what necessity there was
for hurrying this Bill through?
Lord JOHN MANNERS said there was an obvious
pressing necessity for passing every Bill in the paper
through.—(A laugh).
The Bill was then agreed to, and ordered to be read a
third time to-morrow.
METROPOLIS WATER SUPPLY BILL.

This Bill was read a third time and passed.
GENERAL BOARD OF HEALTH (No. 2) BILL.
This Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be
committed to-morrow.
The House rose at Four o'clock.

The House resumed at Six o'clock.
Mr. ELLIOTT presented a petition against the May-
nooth grant.
The report of the Select Committee on. the Board of Cus-
toms was brought up by Mr. MrrcHELL and laid on the
table.
Petitions were presented against the grant to Maynooth,
by Mr. Elliot and Mr. Packe; from the bandloom weavers of
Paisley, complaining of distress, by Mr. Lockhart; from the
county of Fife, against intemperance, by Mr. Thornely ;
from women at a chapel in Walworth, for the inspection of
nunneries, by Mr. Lacy; from the faculty of procurators in
Glasgow, praying that the 18th clause of the Common Law
Procedure Bill might not affect Scotland, by Mr. Hastie.
IMPORT TABLES.

Mr. HUME observed that some delay had taken place in
laying the monthly returns of imports on the table of the
House, though he understood they had been laid before the
House of Lords. He was very anxious to understand the
cause of that delay from the President of the Board of
Trade.
Mr. HENLEY replied, that he was very glad to have this
opportunity of replying to the question of the Hon. Member
for Montrose. He had been extremely anxious to have a
distinction made in the returns between steam-vessels and
sailing vessels, and the returns which had gone up to the
Lords without his knowledge were without the distinction to
which he alluded. He had kept the returns for the Com-
mons, that the steam and sailing vessels might be separated,
and that was the only reason why the delay had occurred.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

A messenger from the Lords brought up the following
Bills, to which their Lordships had agreed :
Tnrnpike Trusts Arrangements.
Scutch Mills for Flax (Ireland).
Monmouthshire Railway and Canal.
Kingston-upon-Hull Dues and Docks, without amendment.
Eastern Union Railway.
Wedmore Road.
North-Western Railway.
Great Western Railway (No. 2),
Wycombe Railway, with amendments.
PATENT LAW.

Mr. B. COCHRANE wished to ask the Chancellor of the
Exchequer whether it was probable that the Patent Law
Amendment Bill would be passed this session? It was of
the utmost importance that a decision should be arrived at
immediately.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied, that
as the Bill had passed the Lords and a -Select Committee' of
the Commons, and as it was fixed for Committee early on the
paper, he had very little doubt it would become an Act of
Parliament this session.
CASE OF MR. MURRAY.

852,

Lord D. STUART, in reference to the case of Mr. Mur-
ray, now lying under sentence of death at Ancona, wished to
ask the Government if they had received any intelligence
from Rome which led them to suppose their efforts in his be-
half would meet with any success? The petition of the Eng-
lish inhabitants of Rome, praying for the remission of Mr.
Murray's sentence, admitted his guilt, or at least threw no
doubt upon it; but he was induced to call the attention of the
Government to that question because he had received letters
from Italy from persons who stated their entire belief in his
innocence.
Lord STANLEY said that Mr. Murray was still confined
at Ancona, but that there was now every reason to hope that
his life would be spared. With regard to the question of his
guilt or innocence, that was one in which he could not give
any positive reply at this moment. He could only say that
bah Sir H. Bulwer at Florence, and Mr. Moore at Ancona,
were using their utmost exertions to obtain such information
on the real facts of the case as might enable them, and
through them might enable the Government, to form a
well-grounded opinion whether Mr. Murray were guilty or
no. At present neither they nor the Government were in
possession of sufficient information to enable them to decide
that point.
Lord DUDLEY STUART said the next question he bad
to put—(Oh, oh)—was, whether the Government- had taken,
or would take, any measures to obtain the proceedings on
Mr. Murray's trial, so as to enable the public to judge of his
guilt or innocence?
Lord STANLEY must remind the Noble Lord that he was
now putting a question of which he had given no previous
notice whatever. The Noble Lord had given notice that he
intended to ask what information the Government had re-
ceived respecting Mr. Murray's probable tate. To that
question he had replied ; and he could now only repeat
that Government were taking every means in their power to
get at the real facts of the case. Further than that he
could not say.—( Hear. )
ROMAN CATHOLIC PROCESSIONS.
Mr. COGAN observed, that it had been understood the
proclamation recently issued here against Roman Catholic
religious processions would not be published in Ireland, but
he had been informed it was published in the Dublin Ga-
zette. He wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home
Department if such was the fact?
Mr. WALPOLE was not aware that the proclamation
had been published in the Dublin Gazette.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
always with great reluctance that he trenched upon the pri-
vileges of independent Members, but he now put it to the
House whether they would allow the Government to pro-
ceed to-morrow afternoon as well as in the morning with the
Government measures.— (Hear, hear from both sides of the
House.) On looking at the subjects which were to be
brought before the attention of the House to-morrow by
Hon. Members, he perceived that, though they were all of an
interesting, they were not of a very urgent, character. The
Hon. Member for Richmond (Mr. Rich) was to move for a
Select Committee upon the police force of England and Scot-
land; then, the Hon. Member for Westbury (Mr. J. Wilson)
was to call the attention of the House to the position of the
sugar trade; and another notice stood in the name of the
same Hon. Member with respect to the trade of Sinde. Now,
these were not matters of a very urgent character.—(Hear.)
Although the Government were arranging the business
with a view to the consummation which was of all things
wished for— (Hear, hear, and a laugh)—there were certain
unavoidable accidents, like that of to-night, for instance,
and that of last Monday,. which raised debates tending to
interrupt the course of business, but the importance of which
no one could question. The motions to which he alluded,
however, were not, he must say, of that nature—(Haar)
and he put it to the House. therefore, whether the Govern.
meat might not take the whole of Tuesday?
Mr. HUME had a motion upon the paper for to-morrow,
but, being very anxious for the consummation alluded to by
the Right Hon. Gentleman, he should give it up.
Mr. RICH said his observations in moving for a Commit-
tee would only take five minutes— (Oh, oh)—but was under-
stood to add, that if it was the wish of the House he would
not occupy their time.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Member for Westbury
(Mr. Wilson) was not present, but the Hon. Member would,
he was quite sure, agree, under the circumstances, to with-
draw his motion.
order to facilitate the progress of
Mr. V. SCULLY, in
public business,—(oh, oh I and laughter).—wished to ask
the Right Hon. Gentleman a
.question. He found on the
notice-paper that evening a Bill called the Irish Valuation
Bill, and no less than 69 amendments... were to be proposed.
Now, it was a Bill to set aside all previous valuations in
Ireland, and to introduce a new system; and, seeing that
very few Irish Members w. ere in town, thought the pre-
sent forward. He flur
sent was no time to bring k v . many)
had abstained from putting any of his amendments at all
upon the paper; but, if the Billnpniroeiian
proceeded, he hteoshmoualkdefseoeml it
his duty to propose some m
wished to know
short observations. —(Lauagheterdt.h)e
whether it was the intention of Right Hon. Gentleman
to persevere with that Bill, the discussion of which, he was
sure, would delay for two days. the end of the session?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, after the
menacing observations of the Hon. Gentleman, should cer-
tainly pause, and if he had reason to believe that the 69
amendments would be pressed, and that two additional days
would be thereby lost, he should not press the Bill. The
Hon. Member for Colchester (Mr. Hardcastle) had a motion
on the paper for to-morrow night, on the subject of church-
rates, and he should like to have his opinion as to its post-
ponement.
Mr. BRIGHT said the Hon. Member was not present, but
he should certainly urge him not to proceed with his
motion.—(Hear, hear.)
COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL ON EDUCA-
TION.-THE MANAGEMENT CLAUSES.
On the motion that the Consolidated Fund (Appropria-
tion) Bill as amended be considered,
Lord J. RUSSELL (who spoke in a low tone of voice,
and was but imperfectly heard) said—lt has been usual,
when the votes before the House iu Committee •of Sup-
ply are taken, for the Government to give explana-
tions with respect to the vote for education, and my
Hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Ur. Ewart)
has more than once called on the, Government to ex-
plain to the House what has been the progress of educa-
tion, and the nature of the votes connected with educa-
tion. My Right Hon. Friend the Member for Northum-
land (Sir G. Grey), when he held the office of Secretary of
State for the Home Department, made that statement to the
House, and last year, during his absence in consequence of in-
disposition, I stated to the• House the sum required, the ap-
plication intended to be made of it, and the general progress
of education during the year. I understand that in the pee-
sent year the vote has been taken without any particular
explanation having been given, and this circumstance is the
more remarkable as a minute has been issued of very consi-
derable importance on the subject of what are called the
management clauses. When I took the opportunity, a few
days ago, of calling the attention of the House to the altera-
tion made in those clauses, the minute had not then been
placed upon the table of the House, and I stated that I
thought it would have been better, considering the import-
ance of this subject, if the Government had taken further
time to deliberate, and had not, after such deliberation, pro-
posed till next year any change. The Right Hon. Gentle-
man opposite (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) then stated
that there was no intention on the part of the Government
to act otherwise than according to the ordinary course on
such occasions; he quoted several precedents to show that
minutes had been agreed upon which were not laid imme-
diately upon the table of the House; and he declared that
nothing at all unfair or dishonourable was intended towards
the House. Now, I am quite willing to leave that part of
the question as it stands; I don't wish to revive that part of
it. tile Right Hon. Gentleman stated what I have said,
and I accept his declaration that he did not intend to
act with any degree of concealment towards this House
in preparing the minute upon the subject of this change.
But, Sir, the subject is of so much importance that
I think it is desirable the attention of the House shouldar
be turned to it before the dissolution of Parliament.— (Hear,
hear.) In calling the attention of the House to it, ite is
necessary that I should refer for some minutes both to the
general proceedings which have taken place upon this sub-
ject of votes for education, and likewise to the particular
subject of the management clauses, with regard to which
the alteration has been made. The House will recollect that

after some 20,0501O;30-:0-06/. had been •Aotediniiaeverai

years, from 1832 to 1839:f0r the purpose of aiding education
by giving assistance to the National and the British and
Foreign School Societies, it was proposed in 1839 to make
the members of the Privy Council a Committee who should
undertake the application of any grants which should be
made by Parliament, and should divide those grants, under
the superintendence and supervision of Parliament, in such.z;
Mom afj might tend to PrQulote the education of the peep

generally. The proposal, when made, excited a good deal of
jealousy and hostility, both throughout the country and in
Parliament, and the present Prime Minister brought forward
the subject in this House, not supporting those who then
formed the Government, but imputing to them every kind of
dishonourable motive for introducing that change with
regard to education. The motion which he proposed,
altogether refusing any rower to the Crown to appoint a
Committee of Council on Education, was rejected only by a
majority of five, and the vote afterwards proposed by the
Government was carried only by a majority of two. How-
ever, the matter was placed in the hands of the Committee
of Council, presided
over by the Marquis of Lansdowne, and
I have the satisfaction of stating that, notwithstanding
the jealousy
and hostility were raised to the measure,
of that day were subjected,
and notwithstanding obloquy
only
wthhiecnh
butthe vernmernatl
years afterwards, as to their propositi3o'ns, that hostility and
that jealousy have been greatly allayed, and by
r ieonat
neulls._eg (uce improvementsnheeeeresfo Thatp result
the havea been made in popular
poinrtemelnt is
t of
inthata great
Com-
mittee
education
great
euo
tfo be attributed to the judgment, to the temper,
degree, consent
the discretion, the resolution, and the forbearance which
were shown by Lord Lansdowne- (Hear, hear)—in all his
acts and in all his correspondence with respect to this
important subject. He took it up with great zeal, with
great determination to further the object contemplated, hut
at the same time he listened most attentively to all the ob-
jections which might be made by the various parties inte-
rested, both by the Established Church, by those who repre-
sented the British and Foreign School Society, and by
various other bodies representing those who dissent from the
Established Church.—(Hear.) After a very long series of
conferences with the late Archbishop of Canterbury arrange..
silents were made (of which I am not able to state the
exact date), by which inspectors should be appointed, and
by which those inspectors should visit the schools in con-
nexion with the National Society. In 1831 Sir Robert Peel
succeeded to office, and immediately - although be was one
of those who had felt the objections to the original appoint-
ment most strongly—yet, seeing that by its means the
progress of education was in a fair train to be successful, he
re-appointed the Committee of Council on Education, and
placed at the head of it the late Lord Wharnecliffe. No per-
son who has filled the place of Lord Lansdowne did so with
greater ability, with greater judgment, or with a greater
spirit of fairness to all parties than Lord Wharncliffe.—
(Hear, hear.) Accordingly, the British and Foreign
School Society received grants on terms not dis-,
similar to those which were already settled for the
Church of England, and the progress generally made
in education throughout the country was still satisfactory.
In 1816 other minutes of the Council were agreed to, by
which the plan of education was, as I believe, greatly im-
proved—by which certain gratuities were to be given to the
teachers, by which pensions were to be allowed for deserv-
ing schoolmasters disabled by age or infirmity from pursuing
their avocations, and by which the most distinguished of
the scholars might become pupil teachers, and supply in a
more beneficial way than had hitherto been the case the
place of the monitors employed to assist the schoolmasters.
In 1847 the Marquis of Lansdowne, in a minute issued in
the beginning of the month of February, stated the arrange-
ments which had been made, and called the attention of the
House most pointedly to that subject. Like the change made
in 1839, very great opposition was made to the change
which was carried out at that time. That opposition was
made, however, principally by the upholders of the sy stem
of voluntary education, but it was overcome in this
House, and since that time I may say that the pro-
gress of education has been undeniable, and even those
by whom objections were then raised have acknowledged
that very great advantages have accrued by the
course adopted. With respect to the money grants, they
have advanced from 20,0001. a year to 150,0001. a year during
that period ; and with respect to the arrangements made, I
think the Church of England have had no grievance to com-
plain of as to their share in these grants, for 78 per cent.,
was granted to schools in immediate connexion with the
National Society, or with the Church of England. Arrange-
ments for inspection were made in such a manner that no
inspectors should be appointed to Church schools without the
consent of the archbishop, and the inspector might be re-
moved upon the decision of the archbishop of the province.
Arrangements Were also made that the reports of these in-
spectors should be eent to the bishop of the diocese, and there
were likewise arrangements that If on any subject relating to
religion there was a difference between the committee that
should be appointed to manage the school and the rector, or
curate, the clergyman who had the general superintendence
of religious education, that that question should be referred
to the decision of the bishop, and that the bishop's decision
should be final. I think, therefore, that the Church of
England had no reason to complain of the arrangement
which had been made. On the other hand, it was very
satisfactory to find that there was not on the part of the
Dissenting bodies any complaint that the Church of Eng-
land had so very large a proportion as 78 per cent. of the
grant. But, while it was allowed that the inspectors of
Church schools should be appointed only with the consent of
the archbishop, and while every security was taken that the
religious instruction in those schools should be under the
direction of the minister of the church and of the bishop of
the diocess, those who in the Committee of Council
deliberated on this subject made with respect to one ques-
tion a condition which they considered essential to the work
ing of the system. A question had arisen at the time when
Lord Wharncliffe was President of the Council in various
cases with respect to local committees of management. It
had been found, according to the former system. when a
grant was distributed by the Treasury, that, after the money
bad been spent, the arrangements were frequently put an
and to, and so the whole cost incurred was incurred for
no purpose. It was suggested by the Committee
of Council that permanent arrangements should be
made by which the committee of management
should be permanently established. This committee was to
be duly formed according to the population of the place in
which the school is situated—in some places it was to con-
sist of a certain number of laymen, in others of a less num-
ber, and in some, where it was impossible to find a committee
of laymen sufficient to fulfil the duties, the management
was left in the hands of the clergyman of parish. But it
was decided that there should be no absolute power in the'
hands of the clergyman of the parish ; and Mr., now Sir Kay
Shuttleworth, in one of his letters, says—
" On these grounds, their Lordships mast finally declare
that they cannot consent to permit the permanent constitu-
tion of the school in so important a matter as the establish-
ment of an appeal to the bishop of the diocese in matters
not relating to religions instruction to be determined by the
local subscribers to schools, to the establishment and support
of which it is now provided that the State should so hugely
contribute."
That was the decision made by the Committee of Privy
Council. Ido not wish to enter now into any discussion
with respect to the wisdom of that decision, but it certainly
appeared to us to be founded on fair and impartial prin-
ciples. There has been, however, from that time a great
desire on the part of a certain portion of the clergy to over-
turn that part of the arrangement, and to obtain complete
power over the secular instruction of the schools.—(Cheers.)
That this portion of the clergy was not a very large one
appears, I think, from a statement which was produced, I
believe, in consequence of a motion made by a Right Hon.
Gentleman whom I see opposite, the President of the Board
of Trade. By this document it appears that there had been,
I think, about 370 schools which had applied for grants in
connexion with the National Society, where the grant had
not been finally made, and I think upwards of 80 in con-
nexion with the Church of England schools, and out of the
370 there were but eight to which the grant had been re-
fused, on the ground that they objected to the management
clauses; and with regard to the Church of England schools
not connected with the National Society, there were but two
to which the objection was made. It was obvious, there-
fore, that it was not a very large proportion of the Church
which asked for this power to be given into the hands of
the clergy. At the same time, although it was not a very
numerous body, the activity shown by them on this sub-
ject was exceedingly great. At one time it was recom-
mended by this party that there should be an agreement
between the schoolmaster and the clergyman that upon
hnotice,
s receiving
euld, in
the course thecler
gymanthe schoolmaster
give up his situation. That would, of course, have
noticefrom
of a week from the period of
placed the whole management in the hands of the clergy;
but that course was not, I believe, finally recommended by
the National Society itself. At other times earious clergy-
men have proposed alterations in the clauses of manage-
ment, to some of which there certainly was no conclusive
objection, but which were at variance with the general
arrangements made with respect to the management of the
schools. In this condition the matter remained. Archdeacon
Denison had, I believe, proposed some alterations at the meet-
ing of the National Society, but his proposal, whatever it
might be, was rejected, and the Committee of Council and
the National Society remained on the same amicable terms.
Well, Sir, things were in this condition, much good having
been effected, and agreerrients having been made with the
various bodies who were conducting education in this coun-
try, and who each had separate reasons of distrust or a wish
to carry particular measures of their own, but all these
Lord at present at the head of the Government came into
difficulties had been generally overcome when the Noble
office. I own it appears to me that it would have been wise,
considering the difficulties there would be in the first in-
troduction of this alteration,—considering that, altoge-
ther, both the Established Church and the various Dissent-
ing bodies seemed to be satisfied with what had beeenclone,—it
appears to me that it would have been wise, inasmuch as
the Ministrydid not professi to bring forward any but mea-
sures of urgency, to have left this question so far untouched
as only to carry on the ordinary business, to entertain the
applications made by the different schools, and not to have
altered the general rules. However, such was not the view
taken by the Government. They appointed a Committee of
Education of the Privy Council, who were, I suppose, com-
posed of the responsible Ministers of the Crown. Ido not
know that there has been any formal document stating the
names of that Committee. [The CHANCELLOR of the Ex-
CHEQUER The names were published in the London
Gazette."] They were, I suppose, published in the London
Gazette, but the Government have not in any document
laid before this House given the names of the Committee
of Education. It appears that they came to a very im-
portant resolution on the 12th of June. I have stated that
up to the present moment, if there is any difference between
th local committee conducting the school and the cler-
gyman with respect to religious instruction, there is then an
appeal to the bishop of the diocese, and that he has the
sole power of determining and deciding the difference, and,
if necessary, the schoolmaster must yield to that deci-
sion and abandon his situation. But, if there is a differ-
ence between the clergyman and the committee upon any
other subject than religion, then, in that case, it was provided,
after a great deal of communication e and correspondence
with the parties, that the Lord President of the Council
should name one of the inspectors of schools, that the
bishop of the diocese should name a clergyman, and that
if the two should not agree, then a magistrate of the county
should be chosen by them—[ Sir J. Gastarsam-4, Who must
be a layman"]—and that, by these three, the question
should be decided. Now, seeing that the Lord
Church of
if
almoee
was restricted in his choice to an inspector of thee ?lib "
England schools, and that these inspectors were
of by the
every case clergymen and must be first approvd a
clergyman,
lergymen
n were c
archbishop—that the 'bishop, in his turn, "'le
and that thus two out of three arbitrators
eared eo t
f ta
hht
eha s t
kind
Churchh e e
that cases
to the pre-
was no ground for apprehensunn of the Establiseed Church, it. appears
_ aaiess
would be decided with any unfair bias. me
was not security
that this
sent Committee of Education
t d a clause which enables
have inser e
by the clergymen appointed.. But si•trer:lP
It was said in
the event of any difference respect-
enough, and they, n other grounds. .
teachers to be dismissed.no
the former minute that
y teacher on account of his or her de-
te bishop, whose decision should be
ing the " dismilsisea,loonn3fsmtarnuitettei:nooff
Ethdeuccahtilidonre,niinn rtehleigioaelt,e"readn
Now, it is quite clear that
final. But thenserted the words, "or on other moral or re-
rounds. epcpt Ta
el
shouldor
minute, have
unsoundtei
ligious groluad
master in entire de end nc p e a
this alteration hear.
upon bishop.
the view which the clergy-
) There can be no doubt as
to that, be
n t jos of what may be "moral grounds" whether he
ma- kproper to continue
may thin e
it lacesd(erpit
depends
nae rd
ss hear.e
upon
p o
00
n
the acholmaster in the charge
of the school. It is impossible not to tee that these words
uP°D --e
because
include every possible objection that can be taken against a
schoolmaster. It will be impossible for the schoolmaster to
1340§4. the C1ergY131414.09 may wish to row ye hick There

are different parties in the Church whose views are exceed-
ingly different with respect to the moral conduct of the.
schoolmaster. One clergyman may object that he is hoe
schoolmaster
the
thereforethat a
ch
lax, and that he gives too much recreation to his children,
eile another rosy think that' he is too puritanical and
stre.t.
There is no ground of objection that can be taken
to a
notolmoanatn r be
may
a
alteration in the minute feel himself dependent on the
mustid toa t be
nn a
cem,oraanlder ground,thand
c!ergyman.—(Flear.) This is the first ground of objection
to this alteration. I have'befote stated in this House that it
is in my opinion most reasonable that the status of the
scheolmaster should be raised, that he should have a com-
petent salary. and that his social rank as an instructor of
A oath should be recognised and elevated in the view of this
House and of the country.—(Hear.) Now, -the consequence
of this altered minute is to degrade and lower the condition
of every schoolmaster; and r was not surprised that some
gentlemen called upon me this morning to represent the
effect of this minute. They said that not more than
thirty teachers in those schools had been collected; but
that they had no doubt if a meeting had been Elva;
tised, there would have been a large meeting of school
maters of the Church of England schools, because they all
felt that their situation was changed, and that any opinion
on the part of the clergyman to his disadvantage would ak
once deprive the schoolmaster of his situation, and that 114
would no longer have the opportunity of earning his bread-
and maintainin his position. There is, it is true, an apeeal
to the bishop; bat there could be no doubt that the bishop;
would not, in the majority of cases, go through the psi flea-.
lars of the complaint, but that he would be disposed to
take it as he heard it from the clergyman, and that in
19
cases out of 20 he would decide the complaint in acctrd
ance with the previous judgment of the clergyman.- (Neer'
hear.) That is the first objection I have to this miuute.
The next objection is that its effect is evidently 10 weaken
the influence of the lay members of the local committee.'
ittee.
It appears to me to be of the utmost importance to hare a
body of lay members to manage these schools, and that you
should induce them to take a part in their management' to
watch the conduct of the schoolmaster, and to promote the
well-being of the school. lam fully aware how much atten-
tion the parochial clergymen have devoted to these schools,
and that they have, both by giving their money and their
time to an inquiry as to the best mode of education in their
respective parishes, very much facilitated the cause of educa-
tion. Yet I think it will be much better for the ceergnmaeldt,
himself that the lay members of the school committee should'
likewise take a very great interest in the school.—(lleara'
hear.) But if they can be told by the clergyman that 111).'
moral grounds the schoolmaster in whom they have con-
fidence, whose conduct of his school they approve of, is to
be dismissed, this cannot fail to diminish their motives to
exertion, and the lay members will be desired to leave the
school altogether in the hands of the clergyman.—(Cheera.)
I think, with regard to the clergyman himself, it is of 110
small importance that the laity of the church should er
operate with him in works of this kind.--(Hear, hear.) SA'
the Churbh of England has its elements of strength, an"
has also its elements of danger. lam of opinion that its ele:
ments of strength are very much greater than its elements of
danger. Its elements of strength are, when it carries with it
the co-operation, the confidence, and affection of the lay mem-
bers of the Church ; and its element of danger is, the being
separated from the laity of the church, seeking other means
of gaining power and authority, and not resting its power
anti influence upon that general concurrence of sentiment on
the part of the laity that has hitherto proved its best
strength.—(Cheers.) The effect of this alteration in the
minute is, in my opinion, to diminish the strength and in-
crease the danger of the Church. Its effect is to diminish
the natural disposition of the clergy and the laity to act
together, and to induce the clergyman, by the mere exercise
of his authority and will, to direct the education of the
people of this country. I think this alteration very objec-
tionable on these grounds.—e Hear, hear.) But I do not
think it will be very pernicious for some time to come. l
have heard it said that in six or seven years, by the force of
this minute, the laity will be excluded from the manage-
ment of these schools. I doubt whether so great an effect
will be produced.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial
benches.) But it is a beginning on the part of a Government
which has newly come to power which owns itself not strong
as regards the present Parliament, who acknowledged that
their position dictated this session measures which were
c
humble and useful, but who have begun with a measure. of..
--
education which has neither humility nor utility for its be_
racteristic.(Oheers and laughter.) But, if this is the case
now, what will the Government do when they have greaser
confidence and greater power—if the people of this eguntri
should give them greater power t• proceed further to an
alteration of the minutes of the Privy Council?--(gear'
hear.) Why, Sir, the consequence would be nothing less
than this, teat a series of minutes will be introduced totally
destroying the system of popular education as it now exists,
placing it upon another basis, and thereby endangering the
whole system of education as it has been approved of by Par-
liament and by the country.—(Hear.) Having been the
person who has recommended this system to Parliament,
and who has in office watched the greater part of its opera-
tions, I cannot but express my apprehension at this begin-
ning of changes commenced by the Government in the shape
of an alteration of the minutes of the Council of Education.
—(Hear, hear.) There was no danger to be apprehended or
inconvenience to be feared if the Government had gone on
listening to applications which might be made to them, and
if they had Pot during the present year changed the
general rules by which these grants had been
made. But no sooner was it announced, and from
most important source, that he had had his way on this
subject, and that they who had defeated him last
year in the National Society must now yield to a greater aii-
thority—namely, to that of the Government—no sooner was
this stated by Archdeacon Venison than a general alarm was
expressed by the members of that society. It was stated by.
some that the charter of the National Education Society had
been altered; that it did not at present give the subscribers
powers enough in the election of its functionaries and its
committee; that the committee was unfairly constituted, and
that there must be some alteration iu its elements; that an
apposl must be oracle
to the Crown not to issue the Queen's
letter, and that, if it were issued, those who distrusted the
present operations of the society must refrain from contribut-
ing to its funds. Ido not desire to say whether these par-
ties were right. I only say that this distrust and dissension
and division, if it were not caused, was aggravated by the ap-
pearance of this minute.—(Hear.) It is said on the other
hand, in the first place, that after all it is but an alternative
to the local school committees to choose in what forsn'their
own subscriptions shall be given, and under what manage-
ment they wish their schools to be conducted.—(Cheers.) If
so, there would be great force in such an argument; but that
is not precisely the case. Take the case of the promoters of
a school who, with the assistance of the public funds, intend
to maintain it. By means of this permanent trust-deed, or
deed of settlement, they have the power I have described as
being given by this minute, and that permanent trust-deed
will afiect all subscribers to the school hereafter.—(Hear.)
It may happen that, in the course of five or ten years, the
great body of the subscribers to the school may not wish this
management clause to be enforced. But this trust becomes
a permanent trust, and the subscribers to the school in all
time hereafter have no power to alter it.—(Cheers. ) It is
not a case where the local subscribers have year after year
the power to alter the arrangements, but the promoters of
the school at the present moment will have the power of
deciding in what manner the school in all
future time shall be carried on.—(Hear, hear.) An-
other observation has been made. It has been said that the
late Government, with regard:to the Roman Catholic school!.
made a similar provision. But with regard to that minute
upon the Roman Catholic schools, what was conceded to the
founders of these schools was, that the bishop and priests of
the Roman Catholic Church should conduct the religious
instruction of these schools, and decide for themselves what
it should be. That is a difference between the Roman Ca-
tholic schools and those of the Established Courch. But the
principles of the Roman Catholic- Church are very diffsrent
from those of the Established Church of these realms. Into
the nature of the constitution of the Roman Catholic Church
I will not now enter; but the established Church consists, ,
not of the clergy alone, but of the clergy and laity. Now
this is the point which I think it most desirable to keep in
view, and which I think the people of this country
will keep in view.—(Cheers.) So long as the church exists
they will think that the Church of England consiste of the
clergy and laity— (Hear, hear)—and that with regard to all
these questions of education the clergy and the laity should
together decide. I have stated my views, but this is not a
question as between one party and another in this House. I
believe that many Hon. Members who sit upon the opeodte
benches think with me with regard to the principles which I
now support. I believe they think with me that the
strength of the Church of -England does consist in its having
the support of the laity as well as of the clergy, and in
securing the general affection of the people. But, if that is
the case, I say that the Government of this country ought W
be most careful in making any alteration in the mode in
which these grants have been distributed—(Hear, hear)-
in suffering the impression to go forth that hereafter the
schoolmaster in all Church of England schools is to depend
upon the will of the minister of the parish and the Bishop,
without any interference on the part of the laity.— ( Hear.)
I understand that Lord Derby has given an assurance that
the grants shall not be distributed according to this altered
minute until some fresh grant from Parliament shall be
made. That, so far, is a security for the present. I hope
that in the interval the matter will be considered by the Go-
vernment and by the people of this country, and that they
will see how important it is not to disturb a system which has
been working harmoniously, and which is working great
good, and that they will rather maintain those principles then
seek to overturn them.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. WALPOLE said that much as the House had recently
been weighed down by the pressure of business, he was glad
there was an opportunity of discussing this matter in Parlia-
ment, and he hoped the result would be to remove certain
misapprehensions under which many individuals laboured,
and amongst them, he was bound to say, the Noble Lord
opposite, the Member for London. Now, the Noble Lord
t
did not fault with them for not coming to Parliament
previously previously to making this alteration. The point the
yh
b tne ar-
to deal with was the management clause; but
they were only
rangement under consideration he conceivedw.
_t parliament
restoring or giving back to the Church., n 4
In 1832 the vote
had always intended it should p
-"sesr material alteration
amounted to 20,C00L In 1839
aalnoa, of which the Noble
was made by the Government of ta member;
but in cense-
Lord (Lord John Russell) weeasas created, an arrangement
quence of the agitation that
was come to between the Committee of the Privy Council and
the Church. The Noble Lord had given a definition of what
ch as applied t the Protestant
o
the phrase ()bur
was meant by
and theChurchofßome Rome; but he hoped theywould not disagree,
that in the present instancea the Church meant the laity as
well as the clergy ( _ear.)
An arrangement then was
. —e Committee of
come to between the the Privy Council and
the Church In
minute of Council it was laid down that
. interference in the domestic government
of the schools. was matter of observation, that during
the whole time the Conservative Government remained in
office no objection was made to the grant to a school, but in
1846, when the late Government came in, an entire change
was made by the introduction of the management clauses,
and unless the Church contented to accept those clauses,
they were not to partake of one shilling of the greet.—
(Jete ar , hear.) Now, he thought the Church justly com-
plained of these clauses, and contended that they have the
uncontrolled management of the schools. If the Govern-
mint now resolved that that was what the Church nits en-
titled to, he was of opinion, instead of leading to divisions,
as the Noble Lord had thought it would, the change would,
on the contrary, be productive of harmony in the Church.
The Noble Lord had objected to the alteration on three
grounds, one of which was, that it would degrade the
schools, and he talked of the separating of the laity
and the clergy in every part of the kingdom. The
Noble Lord, he was sure, would not advocate anything that
restrained the free action and liberty of the subject. Taking
that for granted, let them see what was the principle of
that
the
change that had been introduced. The principle was,
the promoter of every school should have the power to
oa,,
con-
stitute these schools as they liked, and that they should
partake equally with other parties in the public moneyee—_
(taken that the public mo
Hear, hear.) He agreed that in such cases care should
ney should not be app:ied in •Y
other way than was contemplated by Parliament, amid
fit
for himself, would say, that the laity should have a
numcrbt,
u.
share in the agement.— lie tho
(Hear, hear.)on a
however, that any one promoting a scheor „t
shoula tied to
right to come to Parliament and say they were en" Dap
Partake 9f a pOrti9l4 id the public unuey,—(Sear.)