The Sun.
London, England, 1839-07-06 00:00:00

lishing of those very works that are said not to be deep enough.
Some of the works published by this Society are most scientific,
and they have had the greatest circulation among the working-
classes. Indeed, men who have aprons round their haunches
and paper caps on their heads, have come when their day's work
was over, with their contributions to those scientific publica-
tions. It betokens great ignorance of their manners and cus-
toms—of their tastes and capacities, (and there is a habit of un-
derrating and of cruellydepreciating their capacities and tastes)
to draw the invidious line which I have often heard
drawn between the upper and lower classes by saying
that the delicacies of science are to be reserved for the
upper classes. ={ Hear, hear-) My Lords, I would ask
why is it that the clergy are more than the laity peculiarly
adapted to teach those primary objects of instruction. But I
am told you must combine religious with secular instruction.
Who thought of separating them ?—( Hear, h .ar.) Not cer-
tainly the authors of this plan.---( Hear. hear.) Religion is
to be combined with the whole matter of instruction, and not
to be separated at all from it. The rule adopted by the Bri-
tish and Foreign School Society is this, that secular instruction
is taught by secular teachers, and religious instruction
by religious instructors. The Most Rev. Prelate (the Arch.
bishop of Canterbury) said what difficulty was there between
them and the Dissenters—" there is not so much discrepancy
between their creed and ours—pass over the slight differences
and come at once to our schools." Now Ism astonished it
did not occur to his tolerant and acute mind, that if there was.
but little difference between the Dissenter and Churchman,
there was but little between the Churchman and the Dissen-
ter; and that it was just as easy for a Churchman to go to a
Dissenters' school, as for a Dissenter to go to a Churchman's
school.__( Cheers.) I must say that the line of argument
adopted by the Most Rev. Prelate s?voured of the creed of the
inquisitor. He said your difference is but little. Cannot
yon come with me into the bosom of the Church—it is for the
interest of your soul, and I will make it for the good of your
body.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY—I founded no argu-
ment upon it. I stated the clergy were accused of intolerance,
and in order to show they were not intolerant, that they ad-
mitted the children of Dissenters to their schools, and that a
great number of the children of Dissenters were educated at
their schools. I founded no argument upon it, and I think
the Noble and Learned Lord has done me great injustice, in
founding so invidious an argument upon what t said.
Lord BROUGHAM—Nothing could b further from my in-
tention. I quite agree with the Right Rev. Prelate (the Bishop of
London) that the Established Church is much more tolerant,
in practice than in theory. But in what does the tolerance
consist? Is it in permitting Dissenting ch ldren to be in-
'tructed in those schools in which the Church doctrines alone
are taught ? If you throw open the deers to Dissenters in
those schools in which the Church doctrines and the Thirty..
nine Articles alone are taught, and the Dissenters are induced
to go there, that does not prove that the Church of England
is more tolerant, but that the Dissenters are either indifferent
or insincere. You cannot view it in any other light. If the
Dissenters are induced to attend at schools where the Thirty-
nine Articles, which some of them termidolatrous, and others
blasphemous (I am speaking the language of the Dissenters, not'
my own), this does not prove that the Churchmen.are more to-
lerant, but that the Dissenters are either indifferent or insincere..
It is one species of persecution to say' Come over to me,' and it is
another species to say, " There is little or no difference between
us." My Loris, no difference conscientiously entertained upon
religious matters can be slight.—( Hear, hear.) If any man
says that he thinks the difference important, and that he ho-
nestly, and sincerely, and conscientiously sets a value upon that
difference, no man breathing has a right to say the difference
between us is slight—we are to
.be listened to and you are
not—come over to us—endow us more, enrich us fur-
ther, amplify our powers, enlarge our sphere of action, encou-
rage us, discourage others. My Lords, from the earliest times,
and among other persons, this has always been the forerunner of
persecution. The Most Reverend Prelate is too humble-
minded, too elevated in piety. too philanthropic and charitable
to have any such ideas ; and I will tell him his own reading
must have taught him that these are the doctrines by which
persecutors have worked in all ages, and wherever they have
been allowed to act upon them, they have never failed in the
end to arm themselves with the scourge, the faggot, the
pincers, and the torch. Men who valued religious liberty do
not in chose (lays dread anything that can be called
persecution, but they do dread privileges and oppree-
sive exclusions, preferences to one sect over another, and upon
another thing they were absolutely determined, -which was ab-
solutely irreversible--they were resolved never to pay to man
any tax to support education, if the fruit of the tax does not go
to maintain education to which all shall have an equal access.—
( Hear, hear.) My Lords, it never entered into my head to
propose any general system of education which would not be
combined with religious instruction. It is a common thing to
talk of the revolution in France as having undermined religion
and destroyed education, but I believe, even the warmest
friend of the ancienne regime will not assert that there was a
very large amount of religion in France just previous to the
revolution. The plan now before your Lordships is liable to
none of the objections that have been urged against it,
hut the crime of not having been brought before Par-
liament. Whoever thought of introducing any general system
of education without consulting the wisdom of Parliament.
The law stands thus—the Ministry can giveaway a million of
money to any person they please without ever asking your
Lordships whether you will or not—without asking your Lord-
ships' consent. All they have to do is to have a vote of the
other House. The resolutions, therefore, merely ask the Crown
to ask its Ministers to do so and so. More uncalled for resolu-
tions—anything mire uncalled for I have never seen. If there
were any document to show that there was the slightest inten-
tion even to attack the Established Church—were there
even the scrap of the letter of a Secretary of State to show that
there was any intention to make even the slightest attack on the
Established Church or the established religion of the country, as
it has been called this night, I might understand holy men buck-
ling on the armour of the taith. 1 could understand men meeting
in vestries and sending up 3,000 petitions praying your Lordships
to take decided steps against the Antichris-, and for the pre-
servation of our holy religion. But, my Lords, there is nut a
word, not one whisper against the Es'ablishment : so far from
that, there is a clear recogni-ion of the Establishment by the
appointment of chaplains of the Church to every school. That,
my Lords, is an integral part of the plan—that, my Lords, is
the corner-stone of the plan.—( Hear.) I have• lived long
enough, my Lords—too long—for I am ashamed to say I have
lived long enough to hear the cry of No Popery—No Catholics
—The Churn in danger.. Not one of those cries have I ever
known to have arisen from rosy but the most insignificant of
aims that the wit of man could possibly devise. In 1807 the
whole country was convulsed—the Government was changed—
England, Scotland, and Ireland were agitated by a general
election—the cry was " No Po,sery." " Rally round the altar
and the Throne" for one never could be shaken without the
other falling. Such was the language of the Rev. Prelate to-
night. Is there now one word said against the Church ? Is
there now a single whisper against the Establishment any more
than there was in 1807? No one word or single whisper is
heard of such a character. On the conirary. professions r f
attachment to the Church are numerous. In 1807 the cause
of the cry of " No Popery" arose from a Bill being brought
in to allow an Irish Catholic colonel to perform his 'uty upon
coming to England. That was the real origin of the cry of
"No Popery." Aid as trifling is the cause of the cry now
made- A single sc soul is to be formed for the purpose of teaching
t news. volt school the Established Church is to hwe
a Chaplain of that single shool is to ruin the whole Established
Church, and sap the very foundations of religion. My Lords,
there is another ground of similarity ; the Bill in 1807 was
only shown and withdrawn, still the cry continued; the pro-
posed school was no' longer even in proposition; it was only
shown and at once covered up, and still the cry centuries.
When the atmosphere had cleared away, when tee storm was
dispelled, when the clouds no longer hung around. I won't
say the Establishment, for that reared its pinnacles above, and
never a cloud was ever at the base of it—but when the clouds
dispelled which had been obfuscating men's understandings,
it was found that five years afterwards the Bill had passed in
silence and neglect, and the first that we heard of it wis a
year afterwards, when it was found in the Statute-book. This
is not only matter of amusement, but it is pregnant with in-
struction. The men who now feel, and others who 'affect to feel
so much apprehension about this harmless and trivia! measure will
in a very short time forget it. Much more than this will pass,
I believe will pass without exciting a single murmur or whisper
of discontent or feeling of alarm. New I venture to form a
cheerful hope, which amounts to a sanguine expectation that
the same course well be taken now weich was taken then, and
men will begin to (seen their understanding to reason,
will cease to make religious matter the ground and ob-
ject only of feeling, but will make it matter of sound moral,
intelligent reason also; and then I have not any fear of
the work of education being checked by any clamour of danger
to the Church, or of danger to the cl 'rgy, or of dagger to re-
ligion ; but. I shall live to see the Parliament of England per-
form at length its too long-delayed and most sacred duty, or
giving instruction to all classes, of all descriptions, all ranks,
and all sects of people, upon the broad, universal, and eternal
principles of religions as well as of civil liberty.—( Loud cheers )
The Duke of WELLINGTON was not surprised at the
remarks made by the Noble and Learned Lord on the speeches
of the Most Rev. Prelates, and that he should have directed the
greatest part of the speech which he had addressed to their
Lordships, to endeavour to do away the effects of their
speeches by the exercise of those powers of ridicule with
which he was so liberally endowed ; and until a few mo-
ments of the conclusion of his speech, he had evaded re-
ferring to the particular question immediately under discussion
of the House. The Most Rev. Prelate had moved certain
resolutions which he had followed by a proposition to present
an address to her Majesty. The Noble and Learned Lord had
said that such a system could not be introduced without an
Act of Parliament, but he thought lie could show the
Noble and Learned Lord that these Orders in Coun-
cil, and the very thing which they desired should be
done by Act of Parliament instead of by Order in Council
They should see if it was not essentially necessary that no such
measure should be entered upon without having the consent of
Parliament. It was necessary that they should_ understand
clearly what the measures were which her Majesty's Govern-
ment roposed for the education of the people. The Noble
Marquis had put a question to the Most Rev. Prelate,
which had been arswered by the Right Rev. Preletes but,
in his opinion it was the business of the Government to
state what were their intentions on this subject. What did
they intend to do with the Church in this system of education?
He should have stated that, instead of calling on the Right Rev.
Prelate to state what were the pretentions of the Church.
On that subject the Noble and Learned Lord had stated
that the system of 'education put forward by the Minutes of
the Order in Council was really nothing at all; but it appeared
to him that the system put forward was very important. It
seemed to him very much like the Irish system of education,
which, from every thing that he had heard of it, he considered
had utterly failed in Ireland, and he was sure it would not suc-
ceed in this country. It seemed that in these normal schools
the Douay version of the Scriptures was to be used, or the
versions of the Socinians, or of the Anabaptists, or of the fo 1
lowers of Courteney, or of others. Would the people of
this country, after having established the Church at the
Reformation, now consent to be taxed in order to educate the
people in Popery, or in the system of the Socinians and of the
Anabaptists. The country had a right fairly to understand
what were the intentions of the Government on this subject,
and he thought he should prove that the Order in Council
was not quite so innocent as he was willing to make it out,
nor so harmless with respect to the Established Church.
—( Hear, hear.) Let them see what would be the effect
of this system on present benevolence. What did the Order in
Council state? that if any school accepted assetanee from the
pubic, such school should immediately come under the direc-
tion of the Board, and be liable to inspection ; but did it say
under the inspection of the Clergy, no such thing -the
Clergy ware prevented from superintendence. This was no
question of rich or poor--let them ask themselves if in their
own neighbourhood they had founded a school would they like it
to be placed under the superintendence of their inspec' ion what
would be the questions they would be asked ? Have you the Douay
version, or the Socinian version, or the Anabaptist version? The
clergy would be excluded from the superintendence of these
schools, and would they like to subject themselves to such in-
terference ? This system would go directy to put a stop to
private benevolence, and he felt that they would be wanting in
their duty to the public, and to the system of education itself,
if they consented to go one step further before having this
system fully and fairly laid before the House and the public.
Viscount MELBOURNE said he might have been very
well content to leave the case of the Government upon the pre-
sent subject in the hands of the Noble and Learned Lord who
had lately addressed their Lordships, but considering the
great importance of the question itself, and the unusual
nature of the motion made, perhaps it would be expected
that he should address a few words to their Lordships
before the conclusion of the deb to They were all .