The Sun.
London, England, 1839-06-25 00:00:00

of his supporters. But did that Noble Lord think
that if a Bill, supported by the vast majority of five, were
sent to the other House, their Lordships would pass it
sooner than thwart the wishes of the people, expressed so
strongly through the voices of their representatives.
(Laughter, and Hear.) . And those who were on their
trial were•included in that majority.—( Hear, hear.) Nor
could the Noble Lord expect to have-the measure on the
ground of the full and just confidence placed in her Majesty's
Ministers by the majority of the people. —( Hear, hear.) As
for the merits of the scheme, no two men appeared to agree,
and the merit therefore was doubtful. Could it be expected
that the House should now confide in the Noble Lord be-
cause he had abandoned the former plan? If it were aban-
doned because it was a bad scheme, it showed that they
were incompetent to form a good one, and should not
be supported—if, because they had not the power to carry
it out, they, at that side of the House, would give the Noble
Lord the desired power, by agreeing to the present vote.—
( Hear.) Thus be had placed the Noble Lord in a dilemma,
from which he thought thole was no escape. He (Mr. C.)
thought the silence of those who petitioned against the
first scheme proved that they did not like the second. In the
former the Noble Lord had desired to have schools of his
own—in the present he gave up that power ostensibly, but
he would induce other parties to set up schools, and would
then support them.—( Hear, hear.) Ai he (Mr. C.) had
said a few days ago to an objector to the Beer Bill—
who said that the publicans principally cried out against
it because at the immorality it caused by allowing the beer
to be drunk on the premises-4' Oh," said he (Mr. C.),
" it would not be enough to take away that potter, for
then the beei.sellers would induce others to op.n houses
next door, in which they would take care to have the beer
effectually consumed."—( Hear, heir, and laughter.) One
of his ( Mr. C.'s) great objections to the vote would
be, that it would be a violation of his conscience. It
would not violate his conscience if the party opposite
should take his money to pay for general education-abut
it would if he (Mr. C.) were to vote for it. ( Laughter,
and Hear, hear.) As in the case of their esteemed
countrymen of the Society of Friends, against whose con-
science_ it was to go to war, yet it would
not be a violation of their conscience to take
mo coy from them to maintain our fleets and armies.—
(ll ear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman at the other side
h ad alluded to the success of a similar scheme at Liverpool,
taus he (Mr. Ewart) had very much exaggerated the re-
Its of the experiment tried there. The fact was, that so
far from the clergy of the Established Church, and the Pro-
testants in that town having acquiesced in it, they opposed
it as strenuously a; they could at first, and next, seeing that
they could not preveot it, they subscribed in a single
summer 10,0001. towards the Protestant schema, and that
support bad been most gratefully received ; and now;
while the Roman Catholic children, and some of
the Dissenters had books composed of extracts
from the Bible, the Protestant children had the
whole Bible.—( Hear, hear.) Since 1837, no Roman
Catholic clergyman, no Dissenting clergyman, had visited
the ccbools alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Etvart). They had beer, visited by the clergymen of the
Church of England only. This proved that the alleged
combined religious education in Liverpool was a failure.—
( Cheers ) It might be combined secular education, but
it certainly was not religious. The failure would be still
further proved by reference to comparative numbers. The
Protestant children educated at free schools of the Esta-
blished Church of Liverpool were B,9s7—those of the Dis-
senters of different persuasions, 3,o9B—the number of
Scotch children amounted to 304—total 12,359. The total
number of Roman Catholic children at the free schools was
I 230. Where now was " the system of combined religious
education at Liverpool working with complete success?
The system was found to have failed in every foreign
country in which it was tried—in Liverpool it was
nothing lass than a miserable failure.---(Cheers.) The
caet was, that in religion there was no neutral ground.
Wherever people thought they had found it, it soon re-
ceded from under their feet: It had been found impussi-
tale to unite the children in Liverpool in any one act of
common religious worship. A clergyman of the Church
of England had offered himself as most willing to instruct
the children as far as he coulJ, provided this could be done,
but it could not. It was even proposed that they should
commence in the morning by repeating the Lord's Prayer
in common. But the Roman Catholic priests would not
agree to this, although they all agreed in receiving that
prayer from the same Divine authority. The Roman Ca.
thoiic clergyman was not to blame here—he undoubtedly
did what he thought to be his cloy. St-me hymns had
been proposed to he sung in common, he knew. But if
those were said, they were said by rote, not accompanicp
by any devotional feeling. lie was asked, if he himself
tunic ved the truth of the Protestant religion why oppose this
vote? nil answer was, the more he believed in its
truth the more be was afraid to let it be invaded. —( Cheers. )
Beliaving that they would be proceeding in a most wild
and rash, and improvident course, in attempting to subject
the judgment and consciences of the people to the controul
of a Committee of the Privy Council; and believing that
they had no right to deprive the co-ordinate branch of the
Legislature of its undoubted right ty interfere in the ex-
penditure of the public funds, he should oppose the vote.
Mr. V. SMITH and Mr. Sumo rose together. The latter
gentleman gave way, although there were loud calls for him
from all pseta of the House. Mr. V. Smith observed that
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had last spoken, in
remarking upon their interference with the privileges of
the other House of Parliament, appeared to have forgotten
that it was the exclusive privilege of that House to vote
the public money.—( Hear, hear.). He could out under-
stand upon what grounds the Hon. and Learned Member
would agree that they were not authorised to vote it alto-
cc:her independently of the other branch of the Legislative.
If they referr, dto the poceedings of that House for the
lest twelve years, they would fiud many votes of a similar
tendency, without any assent having been sought from the
other House ? Ile wou'd appeal to the Noble Load, the
Member fs,r North Lancashire, whether his Irish national
education scheme, and others of a similar character,were net
c rried into effect without any interference on the part of
;he other House. Were not the grants for colonial educa•
Lion similarly carried ? and, in the case of the West
India negrocs was .not the very same sum, 30,0001.,
granted with the same provision, that it should be a liberal
and comprehensive plan.--( Cheers.) Hon. Members
opposite had, he believed, expressed their determination to
light the grant inch by inch. It would be admitted that
his ( Mr. Vernon Smith's) side of the House had gained
one inch—the assent of the House to the Order in CVUL.
Cil.--( Ironical cheers from the Opposition.) He admitted
that the majority was a scanty one, but if Hon. Members
on the other side would try it over again, he would be
rejoiced at it. • In the male of the debate it had been
stated by sonic of the Hon. Members behind him that
they saw no difference between the present and the former
Government ; but the principle put forward by some of the
late adherents of the Government must have convinced
them that such was not the' case. The Government had
abandoned their original plan, because it was unpopular—
( Hear, hear)—but they had not abandoned its defence
although they had abandoned the plan.—(Opposition
cheers.) He wished, however, to confine the attention of
the House to the plan of the 34 of June, that now before
the Ho use. In 1833, Lord Althorp first brought forward
a vote for the National and the British and Foreign
School Society. That was merely a temporary expedient
to satisfy the great thirst for education until Parliament
hal bad time to devise some plan of general education.—
( Hear, hear.) Committees of inquiry were subse-
quently appointed in the years 1834 and 1835, but without
any result ; and in 1838. another bad been appointed
on the motion of the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury, which
had merely reported in favour of an extension of the grant.
Why, it was absurd to call a grant of 30,000/. a Govern-
ment scheme of education—many of their convict votes
were larger. A sum of 30,0001. to two Societies, neither
of which could exercise any controul over the schools con-
nected with them, would not certainly impress any one
with a profound idea of the provision made by the State
for a plan of national education. It was merely putting so
much money into the bands of the two respectable gentle-
men who acted as secretaries of these Societies, while the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
collected subscriptions.—( Hear, bear.) He should
most decidedly object to a continuance of that
scheme, if it was recognised or acknowledged as such.
The Hon. and Learned Member for Liverpool had urged
a point that was frequently put forward in the course of
the former debate. He had said the Church was the
sole educator of the people, and had asked what was re-
ligious liberty ? He (Mr. V. Smith) would reply that it
d.d not consist in the Church being the sole educator of the
people.—( Hear, hear.) But then the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman had said he would not consent to the circula.
lion of erroaccus opinions. Why did be consent to votes
of money for the purpose of supporting different reli-
gious establishments in the colonies wich were not
in accerdance with the principles of the Church
of England, and why did he support Church
extension in Scotland ?—( Hear, bear.) The Hon. and
Learned Member next taunted the Government about the
smallnes.s of their majority, and had asked if it was an opera
question. He thought that question might with better
propriety . have been put to his own side of the House—
( Ilear, bear)—and certainly; judging from the opinions
that had been expressed by Hun. Members opposite, it
was pretty clear they had not been all educated in the same
school.—( hear, hear.) This however he would say, that
throughout the late debate it was shown the Noble Lord
and those who supported him, and not lion. Gentlemen
opposite, were the champions of education.---( Hear, hear,
and Oh, oh.)

Sir GEORGE CLERK said the reason which in-
duced him to make a few remarks was, that he could not
but feel the deepest alarm at an extension of the Govern.
ment plan to Scotland. The resolution was for a vote of
30,0001. for the purposes of education in Great Britain,
and that was to be placed in the hands of a Committee of
the Privy Council. There was a system of National
Education in Scotland which bad given the greatest sa-
tisfaction—( Hear)—and what was the merit of that plan ?
That it was intimately connected and interwoven with the
Established Church—(Tory cheers)--that it was under
the superintendence and inspection of the Established
Church—( Hear, hear)—that it formed a necessary part of
the ecclesiastical policy of this country—that it was a reli-
gious and a scriptural education.—( Hear, hear.) He ob-
jected to this sjstem because it made a material change
•n the system. Now either Scotland was to be excluded
'from any participation in this grant, or they must submit
to the inspectorsnominated by the Privy Council superseding
the inspection of the schools, which was at present vested
in the Presbytery.—( Cries of " Divide, divide.") The
o`•;jcct of the present motion lie believed was to enable the
Government to establish Catholic schools in Scotland.—
( Oh, oh.) Such was the anxious wish of many Gentle-
men who supported it.—( Oh, oh.) He believed that be
spoke the sentiments of nine-tenths of the people of
Scotland upon this • subject, that they would rather
not receive one shilling of the State grant for education
than that it should be distributed on the principles of the
Government scheme.—(Hear, hear.) It was only be-
cause they had been led to believe that this scheme would
not extend to them, that public meetings had not been held
against it from ono end of Scotland to the other: and that
petitions had not been poured in against it in thousands.
And he pledged himself that if her Majesty's Government
would postpone their scheme, to afford time for the ex-
Fusion of public opinion on this subject in Scotland—

(Cheers)—the result would be what he had described.—
( Hear.) He should give his decided negative to thevote
now proposed to be taken, but at the same time would
avow his perfect readiness to agree to an increase of the
educational grant, to be distributed in the usual way, for
he was deeply sensible of the great importance of the ex
tension of education, upon what he deemed right prin-
ciples.—( Hear, bear. )
Mr. SHELL then rose and said—Sir, the Hon. Baronet
who has just sat down has adverted to a fact of great im-
portance in relation to Scotland, which shows that the in-
tentions of Government upon this subject are not what he
imagines. He says, that a Roman Catholic priest applied
to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for a grant of money
for a school, in which the Roman Catholic religion was
exclusively taught. The application was refused :
Why ? Because the Government aid would not be
given to schools confined to any exclusive faith.—( Hear.)
What right, then, has the Hon. Baronet to attribute in-
tentions to the Government, which are at variance with
that which he himself stated.—( Cheers.) He speaks of
the intentions of the Goveriiment—l cannot dive into his
own. I trust one of them is not to raise the "No Popery
cry," in his own country.—(Cheers.) Sir, I listened with
great attention to the speech of the Hon. and Learned
Member fur Liverpool, because he has distinguished him-
self in his profession—because he represents a town con-
nected with education—and because I myself, before this
debate, took the trouble to inquire into the facts. And I
must say that I have documents in my possession which are
utterly contradictory to those statements which the Hon.
Member has put forth.—( Hear, hear.) There were
Corporation schools in Liverpool before corporate reform.
What took place ? I have the proof here, that before cor-
porate reform there were only three Catholics in the whole
town of Liverpool—containing nearly 70,000 of them—
who received the benefit of the instruction in those schools.
—( Hear, hear.) After corporate reform, the Counsel ap-
pointed a committee, of whom Mr. Blackburn was at
the head, and be states,—" The property committed
to the management of the Council does not belong to one
party or sect, but to the whole community. It is ob-
viously, therefore, the duty of the Council to employ these
funds for the benefit of all. In considering the way in
which these schools are to be conducted, the first question
is, what system should be adopted to render them accessi-
ble to children of all denominations, and the means of
moral and elementary instiuction, without compromise of
principle, to all. To confine them to exclusive sects
would be an act of gross and palpable injustice, and a
flagrant violation of their duties, who ought to represent the
interests of dll classes of the people. Looking at the
state of society in Liverpool, it is impossible to forget, that
a very large portion of the popelstion are Irish Roman
Catholics, who are permanently settled among us, and are,
upon the grounds of humanity, justice, and sound policy.
entitled to our sympathy and kindness."—( Cheers.) Well,
they have adopted the Irish system of National Education,
How has it worked ? The Member for Liv rpool says,
badly. Sir, I have here a letter from Mr. Rathbone, late
Mayor of Liverpool—(Jsers from the Opposition).--a gen-
tleman who, though opposed to the Noble Lord ( Sandoz') in
politics, will I am sure be admitted by the Noble Lord to
be of the highest respectability.—( Hear, hear, from Lord
Sandon. ) He writes thus—" We have the gratification
of believing that the system works admirably, though exposed
to reckless misrepresentation," The lion, and Learned
Member for Liverpool said the Catholic Priests would.
not attend—hear what this Gentleman writes :—" The
Catholic Priests have acted with great liberality-4 Chem s)
—allowing and encouraging the children to come to the
schools, tinder the direction of a Committee at one time
wholly Protestant—and it has been proved that, without
any compromise of principle, a system of National Educa-
tion may be established practically beneficial to all classes,
in secular eduestion, without interfering with the iestree-
t ion of each sect in its religious dogmas—proving that they
are Christians by loving one another."—( Lend cheers.)
And the testimony of many orthodox Dissenting Ministers
is given to the beneficial- working of these schools, in
diffusing instruction over a large mass of pepulatioa
hitherto immerst d in ignorance.—(Cheers.) Now, Sir,
is that not decisive as to Liverpool?—( Hear, hear.) But
ought we not to turn our eyes to Manchester and Salford,
with 70 000 Roman Catholics; and is it not our duty to
supply instruction for them.—( Cheers.) Ido not know
what is the number of Roman Catholics in the country.
They have been estimated at 2 000,000—(0h, oh,
from the Opposition)—by a - writer in Fraser's
Magu2ine —( Hear, bear, from the Ministerialists.)
Now only see what anomalies you commit, you let the Ca-
tholic arrive at the highest stations both at the bar and on
the bench, yen let the Catholic enter this House and the
Palace, but you turn upon the child of the Roman Catholic
you show your last effort- at intolerance by shutting the
door'of the village school to the unhappy Roman Catholic.
Hear, hear.) lam not so unjust as to believe that the
gentlemen on the other side of the House wi-h that. the
Roman Catholics should rot be educated. lam sure they
wish them to be educated, but then cornea the question how
is it to be done. The Hon, Member for Tame orth did not
advert very distinctly, at least to any general principle on
on which he would build his system of education ; he said,
however, that he was not responsible for all that had
been said on his side the: question--( Hear, hear)—but in
what respect he agreed cr dissented front those gentle-
men, whom I will call his auxiliaries, he did not state.—
( Hear, hear.) He did net deal in general principles, and
he was right in apt doing so.—( Hear, hear.) His object
was this—you ought not to have a Board of national edu-
cation unless you put the Dignitaries of the Church upon
it.—(Hcar, hear.) If you did that, in what condition, I
would ask, would the Bishop of London he placed ?
( Hear ) Could he agree to educate them in terets from
which he disser.ted? Could he allow the Douay Bib'e
be read in those schools? I know he is a great Greek
scholar—(laughter)—but he is bound to hold that the
Church was infallible. Then the Homan Catholic is to
be excluded. 1,1,)w I will pass from the ltioit lion.
Baronet to two N,ble Lords, the Members for North
Devonshire and South Hampshire. One of tho.=,e Noble
Lords opposed the education sy tem ; he said it was not
consistent with his principles to give any sum for the edu-
cation of any class of her Majesty's subjects who held
tenets different from the Church. Let the Wesleyan
Methodists, who have been so often referred to, hear this
fact, that the Noble Lord the Member for North Lanes-
shire, in 1825, [novel a resolution, that every Catholic
Bishop should be paid in Ireland, and that a' sum of
250,0001. should be given annually to maintain the Catho-
lic Church in Ireland ; and now he comes forward and
denounces the Government scheme of cdacation, because,
forsooth, Christians of all denominations came in under it.
Noes I will pass from the Noble Lord the Member for North
Lancashire to the Noble Lord the Member for South [lamp.
shire. The Hon. and Learned Member for Liverpool had de-
nounced a mixed education ; now, I appeal to the Noble
Lord:himself with respect to that question.—(Great con-.
fusion, and cries of " Order, order,")—in the midst of which
Mr. B A RRON rose ar.d said, there is a Noble Lord
at the end of the House—(Great confusion.)
Mr. SHIEL--I entreat my friend the Member for
Waterford• not to interfere. If I have said anything that
appears offensive to any individual I should be extremely
sorry for it, but as long as I am pursuing a legitiniate argu-
ment I trust the House will allow me to proceed.—( Hear,
hear, and cries of " Bar, bar". )—I feel that the subject has
already been more than amply discussed.—( Hear, hear.)
I was: suggesting, without the slightest intention of say•
ing anything discourteous—l was adverting to the
anomaly that the Noble Lord, the Member for North Lan-
cashire, that be should at one time int, oduee education for
Ireland, and at another that he should set up against
it.---( Hear, hear.) I know that Ireland is in a different
condition from this country ; I am not so unjust as to say
that because you do one thing England that therefore you
should do the same for Ireland. I will not say because
there is a Church in England that therefore there ought
to be one for Ireland.—( Hear, hear.) We ought to have
a system of education which would meet all legitimate
scruples, and lam satisfied that the Privy Council-will
take such a course as will lead to that end. Upon this sub-
ject the Right Hon. Member for Pembroke got up after
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who followed the Mem-
ber for Newark, of whom all speak with respect, and I
never heard a stronger case made than was done by the
Chancellor of the exchequer. What did the Member for
Newark state ? Why, that it was against his principles to
advance money for a religion which he did not profess.
The speech of the Hon. Member for Newark was com
pletely overwhelmed by the arguments of the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. It was proved over and over again, that
money was granted in all the colonies for the very perpose
that was required here. The Hon. Member for Pembroke was
obliged to confess that the principle had been violated by'
the very men who laid it down with such a peremptory
tone. The Hon. Member for Newark passed a pane-
gyric upon - the Wesleyan Methodists, which I con-
sider most .uncalled for on his part.—(hear.)
They seemed to him to be actuated by a most undue hor-
ror of Popery. As they resembled so nearly in many of the
tenets he wished the Church resembled them also in their
fearlessness. What had that Church to fear—the cry was
raised that the Church was in danger. In what manner—
had not one of their own poets, who had gone from one
camp into the other, said of her—

" Without unspotted, innocent within,
She felt no danger, as she knew no sin."
dantgh the State, er—t
l'SeCteh,usrvehhicohr
England,(Cheers.) h e r w
hTi
chi
was Church
incorporatedwas in
with
was supported by the aristocracy, and was implanted in the
heart of the lower orders—a hich possessed valuable re-
venues—a splendid hierarchy, a prelacy distinguished by
its piety and its learning, and a lower order of clergy dis-
tinguished fer their energy ; and this Church, so based on
the people; SO supported by its aristocratic sustainment,
was in danger, and was to be annihilated, not by foreign
aggressions, not by conflicting interests, but by a miserable
band of shoeless, shirtless, poor Popish paupers—(Cheers
and laughter)—with no other missiles than the Douay
Testament, and who were to be gathered from the lanes
of Liverpool, the alle3 s of Salford, and the receptacles
of St. Gilesis_< Loud cheers.) Fear made Statesmen
cruel and Churchmen harsh—( Cheers) and even on men dis-
tinguished for' their humanity, it produced a deleterious
effect. lie would take as an example the Noble Lord the
Member for Dorsetshire. That Noble Lord was distin-
guished for hit humanity, he had exhibited a deep sympa-
thy for those unfortunate children who in the spring tide
of their lives, when all should breathe of hope, were im-
mured in those dismal fabrics which had been erected as
temples to the spirit ofgain.—( Cheers.) His concern for
the factory children, whose cause through evil report and
through good report he supported, did him honour; but when
he turned from the factory children to the Church, how was
he changed ? Had the Noble Lord ever penetrated into
those loathsome and subterranean receptacles in which the
barefooted Irish were crowded in that metropolis, or had
he ever ascended into those rooms in which these unfortu-
nate squalid children were crowded together ? It was
for these children that he applied for education. lie Was
not instructed in religious controversy.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) He read the Scriptures simply; and if any
one passage more affectrd him than another, it was
that passage in which the Divine Being said, " Suffer littlo
children to come unto me."—( Loud, and long continued
cheering.) He could not help thinking that if among
the group which had been led towards him, there should
happened to have been found the child of a Samaritan or of
a Sadducee—the God of humanity would not have rejected
the little schismatic.—(Long continued cheering.) He ,
Would beseech the House not to imitate the example of the

Disciples, who would have shut up from them the sources
of pure religion, but rather to follow the example cf the
Divine Founder of their religion, who had said, "Suffer
little children to come unto me, and forbid them nut, for
theirs is the kingdom of Heaven."—(The lion. Gentleman
sat down amid loud cheering from both sides of the House,
which lasted several minutes.)

Mr. GOULBURN could not hope to follow the Hon.
Gentleman who bad just sat down in his eloquent appeal.
with the last part of which he cordially concurred, and
because of that concurrence be dissented from the present
grant, which he thought was not calculated to bring little
children to a knowledge of their Lord. No one could cor-
rectly understand the views of Government.—( Hear,
hear.) Was the plan of April abandoned, or was
it not ? Did they mean, when the money was granted, to
apply it to the purposes of education, in conformity with
the present plan, or with the first Minute of the Privy
Council ? He would call the attention of the House for a
few moments to what the vote purported to he. It was
simply a grant of 30,0001. for the purposes of education—.
it was not worded as the vote of former years, and he
should be glad to have laid le fore the House the principles
on which it was proposed to distribute this grant. He
thought this afforded sufficient grounds for suspicion, and
as a Member of Parliament, it was his duty to suspect the
intentions of the Government. He believed that this re-
servation Was studied. They had been accused of a desire
to reject all votes for education—nothing could be
further from their wish —(llear, hear, and cheers. )
He must resist any vote that had not a definite object, but
he should be quite ready to support the vote agreed to last
session, and in several preceeing sessions. Here the
amount of the grant was nothing, but its principle
.was
everything, and the resistance now made to the proposed
grant, would not, he trusted, be understood as at all in-
dicating a feeling hostile to education, or as showing that
those at his side of the House, were acting inconsistently
with their conduct on former occasions, when year after
year a vote for the purposes of education was agreed to,
with the unanimous concurrence of the House. He knew
that the right of granting money belonged now exclu-
sively to this House. The other House had a right of
passing an ailirmative or negative voice upon that pro-
position, but of late years the Peers had' ab tndoned that
right, by permitting the introduction of a clause at the
' commencement of every
session, to the effect, that with-
• out waiting for the passing cf an Act, in all its stages,
the House of Commons should be permitted to issue
such sums of money as should be expedient er
useful for the public' service. But if this House
should persevere in such measures, they must not
be surprised if the House of Lords should refuse
the general provision at the beginning of another Session
as hitherto.—( Hear, hear.) He. was at some loss to
know, precisely, what was the meaning of the Hon. and.
Learned Gentleman who had last addressed them. Did
he mean that Roman Catholic children, and children of
other persuasions, should be educated in several religions,
avoiding any peculiarity of doctrine, btu permitting the
entrance of such specific tenets as slesuld be able to make
their entrance amidst the confusion of tenets ? If this
were the feeling of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman,
and he believed it wan he (Mr. ;Goulburn) could assure
him that no member of the Church of England
would show any willingness to enter the schools opened on
such a principle. If they attempted to teach a system of
religion .which should admit any or every version of the
Scriptures, they would exclude the members of the Church
of England as effectually from those schools as if they
should have adopted a Popish system only. • As for the
argunsent of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman about the
Board, if it were worth anything it was worth this, that
there was to be a Board of four laymen,lindifferent as to reli-
gion, lax in principles, and ready to concur in the introduc-
tion of some general system for the instruction of the pupils.
The lion. and Learned Gentleman said the Roman Cs-
tholic Church did not heed exposure to their attacks. He
wished to know in what country such a system existed ?
Was it in Austria, where they saw 400 families turned out
of their houses, because they dared to profess the Protes-
tant religion. Let him turn to Sardinia or go lower down
to the Papal States, and he would find the same system
pursued. He objected to those who were mem-
bers of the Established Church being 'exposed in the
greenness of youth and intellect to the temptation of an
education such as that which the present Government would
provide. The Right Hon. Gentleman was frequently in-
terrupted towards the close of his observations by loud
cries of " Divide," which rendered it extremely difficult to
catch the whole of any one sentence. He concluded by
stating his determination to Oppose the vote.
Lord J. RUSSELL had no desire to enter into the
general question before the [louse, but wished merely to an-
swer one or two questions put by the lion. and Learned
Member for Liverpool, upon ahich he felt himself
.bound
to eff.:r some explanation. The lion. and Learned Gen-
denier) had expressed a doubt as to whether the Minute of
April had been given up. lie wished to know whether,
in the event of the present vote being passed, they would
recur to that Minute. He must say, that if the lion. and
Learned Gentleman wished to know what the inten-
tions of the Government were, he would have done far
better to consult the Reports of the Committee of
the Privy Councilo-- than to have referred to some essay
of the Central Society of Education—((lsar, hear)
which be had seemed to consider a good authority on the
subject.—(Elear, hear.) In that Minute it was stated ex-
pressly to what purposes the vote was to be applied, and
he (Lord John Russell) would take the liberty of reading
a part of it to the House, ns to the mode of application.
It stated that a sum of 10,0001., which had been already
granted in the year 1835, should be given in equal por-
tions to the National and British and Foreign
Societies. That the remainder of the grants of
1837 and of 1838 which had been unappropriated
should be applied in aid of subscriptions for building
schools, and that grants might be made to poor and thinly
populated districts, where the local subscriptions were
found to be insufficient. The Committee did not think
themselves, by that Minute, excluded from giving grants
to schools not in connection with either of those Societies.
The great bulk was to be given in aid of these Societies,
but there was a small portion which might be otherwise
applied. It was not doing justice to the ComMittee
to say that they positively excluded all schools which
Were not in connection with the National or the British
The vote of last year with respect to England was- that
a sum not exeeedi ig 30,0001. be granted to her Majesty
to enable her to issue money for the erection of school
houses, and to provide for the inspection of schools already
established.--( Herr, hear.) Now he had no objec-
tion to add in aid of prlvate subscription for the
inspection of schools already established and which
might be established under this vote ; or, perhaps, without
any addition at all, the vote, in the words of last year,
which would answer the object they now had. —( Hear.)
If taking the vote in the words of last year would remove
the objections of the Honourable Gentlemen, ehe had
no objection to have those instead of the words in
which he had moved the vote last year.—( (leer, hear, and
laughter. )—lf the Hon. Gentleman thought those wcrds
were sufficiently definite he (Lord John) was ready to
yield to his ohjsction.—( Hear, hear.) One other ques•
tion asked was, he believed, with respect to the nature of
the inspection of the schools. He did not think the inspection
would at ail controul the religious instruction in the
schools ; but he certainly conceived that, with respect to
the National Society, if this vote passed, the Committee of
rrivy Council would immediately be in communication with
the Archbishop of Canterbury, and consult him as to the
rules which should regulate any sum to be granted
to the National Society._.( Hear, hear.) In conclusion
he must say, that throughout the whole coarse of the
four eights' debate lion. Gentlemen opposite had shown
that they were exceedingly averse to adverting to that
which was actually the plan proposed by the Government.
—( Cheers.)
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
The Committee divided, when the numbers were :
For the Vote
Against it
Majority
The announcement of the numbers was received-- with
loud cheers from the Opposition side of the Ilause.
The Bankrupts' (Ireland) -Bill passed through Com-
Mittee. _

The Exchequer of Pleas Bill was read a second time.
The Sucar Duties Bill passed through Committee.

The other 0. ders of the D ►y were then disposed of, and
.he House adjourned at half-past Twelve o'Clock.

THE REIGN OF •I'ERDINAND AND ISABELLA

OF SPAIN.—We are requested to state that Mr. Bentley,
of New Burlington. street, Publisher in Ordinary to her
Majesty, has this day published the second edition, revised,
of The History of the Reign of Ferdinand and Isabella,
the Catholic, of Spain," by W. Prescott, Esq., in
3 vols. Bvo., bound, embellished with portraits of Colum-
bus, from the original by Parmegiano, Cardinal Ximenes,
Gonsalvo de Cordova, and (now first added) Ferdinand
and Isabella. Mr. Bentley has also just published the
following now historicat works England under the
Reigns of Edward and Mary, with the Contemporary His-
tory of Europe, illustrated in a Series of Letters, never
before printed, by Patrick Fraser Tytler, Esq., author of
" The History of Scotland," &c., 2 vols Bvo.,with portraits
from original paintings. 2. Bishop Goodinan's History of
his own Times, comprising Memoirs of the Courts of
Elizabeth and James 1., edited by J. S. Brewer, M. A.,
2 vols. Bvo., with portraits. Agents—For Scotland,
Messrs. Bell and Bradfute, Edinburgh ; and Mr. Duncan
Campbell; Glasgow. For Ireland, Mr. John Cumming,
Dublin.

We may state, that we are credibly informed,
Dr. Muir, and Mr. [lope :ohnson, M. P., have both retired
from Dr. Chalmers's Committee.—Edinburgh Observer.
The late Borough meeting at Brecon is still a
subject of great annoyance to the Tory Journalists
neighbourhood ; a of this
shocked their nerves past all endurance. The Merthyr
Guardian, in his superabundant innocence, is loSt in paragraph in the London Sun has now
ad-
miration of the novel incident of a Mayor presiding at a
meeting convened by himself I while the Monmouth Beacon
affects to think that if the " good men and true" bad at.
tended the meeting, they would have brought with them an
accession of respectability! The cause of all this fruitless
expenditure of ire is very plain, and is sufficient
to account for the prodigious cxcitement. when memory
strays back to the happy times when Tory meetings were
held with all the fur tlimmed gowns, and the omp of official circumstance —the
Aldermen in their
Mace-
bearers in their ample cloaks, and. when the scenes of
those days of glory are contrasted with the spectacle of an
Address to Majesty hawked about front hole to corner
f
under the skirt of a coat, who can feel surprise at a tor-
rent of abuse of even thrice' the fury of that furnished to
order by our scolding contemporaries ? Silurian.
THE PRINCES.STREET Munv E
rt.—The mys-
tery with which the above horrible and melancholy occur.
rence is enshrouded, has not in the slightest degree been
dispelled by the result of the inquiries instituted by tFe
police since the conclusion of the inquest held on the body.
Every inquiry
any metropolis.portion
n f the
but
I
has been made respecting the inmates of
Mr. Westwood's residence, and also respecting the work.
men, but nothing tending to throw a shadow of suspicion
,
against any of them has been ascertained.. Strict in-
quiries have also been made at all the v,atchmakers, &e.
; andls o
ina
l l
largepawnbrokers,
te throughoutwnnost,oyrelltynotraeenf
the
s olen property has been discovered.

METROPOLITAN POLITICAL

SUMMARY.

The Globe of last evening thus alludes to the Tory op-
position to the Government plan of ducation :—"he
Tories, defeated in their efforts to tEhrove overboard? he
Government plan for improving and extending the education
of the people, mean to muster this evening in full array to
oppose in the Committee of Supply the grant necessary for
carrying it into effect. What they could not strangle they
would starve. The Liberals are aware of their design; and
will, we trust, be at their posts to frustrate it. Several who
-were ab ent on Thursday evening will thus have an oppor-
tunity of adding to the majority ; others, who might feel
justified in their resistance to the plan, will hesitate before
they sanction by their votes the vexatious and factious op-
position to the vote of supply requisite to carry into execu-
tion a plan which, afteriample discussion, the House has
already approved. We therefore expect not only that the
opposition will fail, but that it will fail signally. The
Tories, in their zeal against the plan of education prcposed
by the Government, have put forward claims in behalf of
the Church most unconstitutional and dangerous ; such as
heve, we will venture to say, been rarely employed since
the days of Sacheverell."
The Courier remarks, with reference to the proposed
discussion of to-night on the Education scheme :—" There
is no doubt that the whole body of the Liberal representa-
tires of the reeale will be at their posts to-night, to sup-
port Lord John Russell in the good work which he has ever
laboured to advance, with a sincerity and a zeal that
should procure him forgiveness for greater political
sins than any that he has yet had to answer for.
The support he will thus receive to-night, though we
cannot indulge a hope that it will achieve a triumph for
the cause of education, yet will be sufficient to
accomplish his object ; and small as the majority may be,
Lord John Russell and his colleagues wilt have the con-
sciousness than in persevering under circumstances so try-
ing and disadvantageous, they are discharging a solemn
duty to the nation—a duty which indeed derives additional
solemnity from the difficulties which arc factiously thrown
in the way of its discharge by the bigoted and despotic
opponents of all but Church of England-education."
The Standard is quite indignant, as will be seen by the
following extract, that Ministers should presume to per-
severe in their education scheme:—" The same Ministers
who abandoned their Jamaica Bill, and abandoned office,
' or pretended to abandon office, with it, because, as they
confessed, an actual Miniverial majority office could not
be offered as a testimony of the sense of Parliament—
these same Ministers threaten to persist in their educa-
tion scheme, although having no better gremnd than a
colourable and accidental Ministerial majority of five, a]-
though the scheme has been condemned by a rnsjority of
more than thirty of the representatives of England, which
division of the empire only it concerns, -and although the
people of England have remonstrated against it in nearly
taur thousand petitions, scarcely a petition having been pre
seated in its favour, except from a few strangers domesti-
cated in England."
The Times of this morning, in the course' of a leading
article suggested by last night's debate oe education in the
Commons, says :—" The new plan of the Ministers pro-
poses to al?ew various versions of Holy Writ, to subject all
the schools to the inspection, that is, to-the control of the
Board of Education, and in oiler material respects to en-
danger the principles of The Protestant Church ; and, of
consequence, it is strongly supported by the Roman Ca-
tholic body." Alluding to the division, our Contemporary
adds The division gave to the powerful Government
which now wields our -destinies a majority—not, indeed, as
en the last occasion, a force of jive, but simply a working
power of two; the Ministerialists being 275, and the friends
of the Church 273. The craft is burnt to the very water's
edge, yet still it continues to float !"
The Morning Chronicle thus accounts for the smallness
of the Ministerial majority last night in the Commons, on
the subject of education :—" From the early hour at which
the division took place, several Liberal Members were
tsken by surprise and shut out. The numbers were 275
and 273. The grant, except for this accidental circum-
stance, would have been carried by a greater majority than
that of Thursday night. Ministers having obtained the
vote, will, we have no doubt display the necessary firmness
in acting en it." Speaking, in another leading article,
about the Tory hostility to education our Contemporary
observes :—" The hostility which hai been manifested
by the Tory party to the education of the people is not
an irregular outbreak of party warfare, or an incidental
result of party policy, and as such to be forgotten on the
termination of the struggle; it goes deeper; it belongs
essentially to Tory principle; and it ought to produce the
eternal proscription of that party from the powers of Go-
verntnent in a community that claims to be free and civil-
ised. An absurdity so monstrous has seldom been avowed
as that which denounces the voluntary system in religion,
and advocates that same voluntary system in education.
We do not defend it in religion; but there is scarcely a
single argument against it that does not tell against its ap-
plication to educe:ion with tenfold force."
The Morning Herald twaddles away about last night's
division in the Commons on the education question, in this
factious, spiteful, old-woman style :—" Will Ministers
pretend to retain office after the division of last night?
How will their duty to the Queen' square with their
majority of two? Alas! poor Whigs! place and pay are
more seriously endangered than ever ! - The efficacy of
their compromises, and equivocations, and meannesses and
falsehoods is almost exhausted Their Popish majorities
arc becoming evaneseeet ! They entered office in 1835
with a working msjerity' of 54 ;—and they have
worked that , working majority' down to two I
This scheme of education has been pronounced by
Ministers a vital question.' Last night's majority ought.
at all events, to determine the ' vitality' of the Adminis-
tratioa. To what, besides, may the present miserable
fficials venture to trust ? They dare not grapple with
the ordinary business of the country. They dare not deal
with the affairs of Canada, er with the affairs of Jamaica,
or with the question of Irish Corporations, or with- the
question of Church-rates, or with the existing commercial
difficulties of the country I The slightest attempt to assert
any one of their declared principles wilt leave them in a
minority."
. .

The Morning Post, with a logical acumen and precision
worthy of a tenant of St. Luke's, endeavours to show
that, by advocating a liberal and enlightened system of
policy, Ministers arc paving the way for bigotry and into-
lerance ! . " When it is suggested to Lord J. Russell,"
says our argumentative Contemporary, " that by consi-
dering how rie may piny3c certain Dissenters, instead of
considering how he may carry into practical effect certain
duties which belong to the State, ho is producing confu-
sion and uncertainty, he answers by an exclamation that
he is at least not introducing bigotry and intolerance.
His Lordship is too hasty. We think he is leading the
way to the ascendancy of bigotry and the practice of in-
tolerance, by departing from fixed principles of freedom.
Ile policy of his Lordship's Government—or we should
rather say its wretched necessities—have induced him to
countenance the commencements of anarchy in the all-
important matter of religious instruction. It is not in
the nature of men, nor of society, especially with the ha-
bitudes of thought and feeling which subsist in a long-
civilised country, that such anarchy should continue."
The Morning Advertiser, referring to the subject of
the division last night in the Commons, on thp education
measure, remarks as follows :—" Of Liberal Members the
following were foolish enough to allow themselves to be
shut out from the division :—Mr. Sergeant Wilde, Mr.
Berkeley, and the Earl of Surrey, whose place in the
household may nut improperly be given to somebody more
attentive to his Parliamentary duties; and indeed it may
Le said cf all Liberals that at such times as these the
people have a right to expect a somewhat closer attendance
at the House. Their unminifulness is a good text for en-
couragement to their opponents; and is, therefore, the
more censurable, and deserving of such pains and penalties
as either the Government or the country can inflict upon
the parties for their remissness, which we trust will not be
spired upon this occasion."

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

TATTERSALL'S-(YESTERDAY.)

Goonwoon cur.
6 to 1 agst Mr. Holdsworth na. Deception—offered
6 to 1 agst Lord Westminster's Richard Roe—taken
9 to '2 agst Mr. Ferguson's Harkaway—taken
10 to 1 agst Mr. St. Paul's Galewood—taken
THE GOODWOOD STAKES.
10 to 1 agst Ruby—taken
14 to 1 agst- Marquis of Westminster's Lord Mayor—taken
16 to 1 agst Mr. IladJiffe's Wee Willie—taken
20 to I agst Lord Eglintoun's St. Andrew
20 to •1 agst Morella
20 to 1 agst Mr. A. Pearson na. Romania—taken
20 to 1 agst LOrd Jersey's Joannina—taken
20 to 1 agst Mr. Isaac's 1-am-not-aware '
. 22 to I agst F. Craven's 1-wish-you-may-get-it
22 to 1 agst Mr. J. Garrard's Cornborough
05 to 1 agst St. Martin
25 to 1 agst St. Bennett—taken
25 to 1 agst Mr. Stanhope's Caroline Elvina—taken
30 to 1 agst Mervan—taken
500 to 10 agst 111 r. Ilsnildsworth's Taunton
JULY STAKES.
6 to 1 agst St. Preux—taken
7 to 2 agst Hellespont—taken
9 to 1 agst Stamboul—taken
10 to 1 agst Liffy—offered
10 to l agst Crucifix—taken
THE ST. LEGER.
3 to 1 agst Mr. Ridedale's Bloomsbury
10 to 1 agst The Commodore—taken
14 to 1 agst Provost
15 to 1 agst Charles the Twelfth L—taken
20 to 1 agst Lord Mayer
The room was crowded, but very little doing on the St.
Leger, July Stakes, or the Cup.

THE LATE DERBY AND OARS.
The state of excitement in which the Bloomsbury affair has
kept the racing community for the last five or'six weeks, instead
of diminishing, has been increased in the course of thd last three
or four days by 'some rumours respecting the pedigree of
Deception, the winner of the Oaks and the second for the
Derby. To put the matter clearly, it- is proper to give the
Pedigree of Deception's dam, Lady Stumps, as it appears in
volume iv. cf the Stud Book. She is stated to be " bred by —,
in —; got by Tramp, darn by Cervantes, out of Fanny, by Sir
Peter." ( The breeder and year of foalingare not given.) Now,
on referring to Fanny (vol. ii.), it appears that she produced
two fillies by Cervantes, viz., in 1818 a ch. f. Ursula, and in
1821 a bay filly, which is without a name. The objection raised
is that lady Stumps was out of Ursula, and not out of the other
mare, to which her pedigree clearly has reference. This view
of it is supported by the statement of Mr. Tilburn, the aam--
tiOneer, of Doncaster, who declares that in 1828, besides ether
blood stock belonging to Lord Fitzwilliam, he sold a bay year-
ling filly, which he believes to be Lady Sturnps, by auction, to
a Mr. Wildon, for 20 guineas, and that in the adveitisement of
sale it was described as a " bay yearling filly, by Tramp, out
of Ursula, byCervantes, gratuhlam Fanny,"&c. Ursula's produce
will be found in the Stud Book, that given f0r1827 being a "bay
filly by Tramp," but no trace of the other Cervantes marl is
discoverable.

Such is the ease as set forth by those who assert the ineor-
rectucts of the pedigree, and the consequent disqualification ;
farther to support it they refer to the lith rule of the Jockey
Club, but as the friends of Deception rely on the very same
rule it will not be amiss to give it :.--" In all all nominations
and entrances, for stakes, subscriptions, and plate, of horses,
&e., which have have not started before the time of naming or
entering, the sire, dam, and grandam of the horse, &e.,
named or entered must be mentioned, it known, unless the dam
has a name which is to be found in the Stud Book or Racing