The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-12 00:00:00

MEETING OF THE HOUSE TO-MORROW.

After a short discussion on the practice of the house, the
proposed meeting of the house at 12 on Tuesday, and the
count out on Monday, the motion for the meeting
to-morrow at 12 to take the Salmon Fisheries Bill was

left intact on the paper, though Mr. Butt, in order to create
a discussion on the practice of the house, had moved that
the order be diEcharged, a motion which he subsequently
withdrew.

ENDOWED CHARITIES.
Mr. G. DUFF then rose to call attention to the abuses
existing in many endowed charities, with especial reference
to the bearing upon the amount of the Note for elementary
education. The hon. member divided the charities into six
classes, and dwelt upon the vices which had crept into the
management of them. His object in calling attention to
the abuses of those charities was not with a view to their
taxation, but their reformation. Taking the report of Mr.
Cumin for their guide, and making allowance for the in-
crease since 1818, the amount of income possessed by these
particular charities could not be far short of £1,500,000. He
fully believed that if the income of the several endowed
schools was judiciously administered it would be amply suffi-
cient for the purposes of education without requiring any
vote from Parliament. It was not for him to go into the de-
tails of the measure suitable for remedying the vices which
existed in thsse charities; but he thought one great step
towards it would be gained by reconstituting the Committee
of Council on Education, and making it a committee of edu-
cation and charities.
EDUCATIONAL REPORTS.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER. desired to ask the Vice-President
of the Committee upon what conditions he intended to allow
the publication of the reports of the inspectors of schools. It
appeared, according to the minute which had been recently
issued by the department, that no report was to be published
which contained matter of which the heads of the depart-
ment disapproved. If a report contained any controversial
matter it was to be sent back to the inspector, who was thus
made his own censor, in order that such matter might be
eliminated, and then, if the inspector was unwilling to make
the amendment, the report was not published. Now, it
seemed to him that that regulation prevented the inspectors
from fulfilling their very first duties—that of informing the
House of Commons, in the most complete manner, as to the
progress of the educational system, as only one side of
the question was thus made public. (Hear, hear.) The
report of Mr. Watkins, one of the oldest of the inspectors,
was not published last year, merely because it contained
something which the right hon. gentleman did not like.
The question was one not between the inspectors and the
office, but between the office and the House of Commons.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. LOWE was afraid he could not give a very satisfac
tory answer to the hon. member. The minute to which
the hon. member made reference declared that the reports
of inspectors ought to be confined to the state of schools,
and to practical suggestions, and it was accompanied by a
statement that if a report did not conform to that injunction
that it would be sent back to the inspector to have it amended.
Well, that in reality was no minute, but simply a conclusion
drawn from an examination of a great number of previous
minutes. He at once admitted that he did not think it was
proper to make public reports containing animadversions,
on the part of subordinates, as to the policy of the heads
of a department, and that it was the duty of a depart-
ment, if it was anxious to fulfil its functions, to prevent
its subordinates from entering into controversies with
those who were directly responsible to Parliament for
the conduct of its business. As to the question raised by
the hon. member for Elgin (Mr. ti. Duff), he did not think
that the proposal of the hon. member ought to be
adopted. He saw no necessity for disturbing the existing
arrangements with respect to the Charity Commission. He
had no hesitation in saying that a more excellent tribunal
did not exist, and that the commissioners were working im-
mense improvements. No case had been made out against
them, and he must say that he considered the department
with which he was connected utterly unfitted for the
exercise of judicial functions. However, he thought
it would be very desirable to allow the commissioners
to intervene in the affairs of a charity, although they
were not called upon to do so by the inhabitants of
the district, as the law now required. Then, again,
in the case of the charities over £5O he thought the com-
missioners ought to be allowed to interfere without their
being appealed to by a majority of the trustees; and that
the power of the majority of the trustees to dismiss
a schoolmaster should be extended to the masters
of grammar schools. Hitherto the Commissioners of Edu-
cation in making grants did so without any respect to the
existing endowmemts, but a minute had been recently issued
by which endowments were made in all cases to come in aid
of the grant.
Mr. WALTER admired the courage more than the dig•
cretion of the right hon. gentleman in justifying the minute
with respect to the reports of inspectors. It seemed to him
that the publication of the reports in their present shape was
only calculated to mislead members, and he therefore hoped
the house would express itself in the strongest terms against
all tampering with the reports for the future. (Hear.)
Mr. ADDERLEY confessed that long before he held the
office of Vice •President of the Committee of Education he
was of opinion that the inspectors very much departed from
their proper sphere in introducing irrevalent topics into
their reports. He therefore when in office attempted to cor-
rect that abuse by laying down a rule that reports should
be drawn up under five heads, and although he subsequently
abandoned it, he adhered to the right of striking out from
the reports ell matter wholly irrelevant. It was material
perhaps that men of the highest mental calibre—such as the
inspectors were—could not avoid the temptation of entering
into controversial disquisitions. But it was undoubtedly the
duty of the heads of the department to prevent the conse-
quences of such an abuse being made public.
Lord R. CECIL said 'tlua complaint was that vice-presi-
dents of the Committee of Education should constitute
themselves—cr the officers under them—censors, for the
pur pose of striking out of a report anything that might
happen to be disagreeable to the Minister of the day. The
right hon. gentleman had talked of loyalty in office, but
there was one thing more important than loyalty in office,
and that was loyalty to the House of Commons ; and it
seemed to him that the recent arrangement was nothing
better than a conspiracy to keep the truth from the House
of Commons.
Mr, CHILDERS should regret very much if a return
were made to the inordinate length of the old reports. He
must say that, so far as the convenience of members was
concerned, the returns of the last few years were in a greatly
more convenient shape. He had the highest respect for
Mr. Watkins, but he could not help observing that, in re-
gard to the length of his reports, that gentleman was a spe-
cial offender. At the same time he hoped that all succinct
recommendations of the inspectors would not be excluded
from the reports.
Mr. FERRAND denounced the Charity Commission as
a gross Whig job, and said he believed it was the notorious
political bias of that commission which caused most of the
evils complained of. He believed every member of the board
and every important functionary of that body were Whigs.
How could their proceedings be satisfactory to the country
while the board was so constituted ?
Mr. HENNESS Y supported the views of the hon. mem-
ber who brought forward the question, and mentioned as
a curious circumstance that whenever an article upon the
subject of education appeared in the Quarterly or any other
of the bulky periodicals of that character, it was sure to be
reprinted in the report of the inspectors. It was also re-
markable that the same articles were continually reproduced
ad nauseam.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said that by the present practice
information was only furnished upon one side of the ques-
tion. They had better have no information at all than that
1 the vim-president should have power to give only such por-
tions of the reports as advccated his own opinions.
THE DEBATE ON THE IRISH CHURCH. _

The O'DON 0 GLITJE wished to know when the aijourned
debate on this question would be taken. He thought upon
a subject of such importance it was the duty of the Go-
vernment to appoint a day.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said he would bring the question for-
ward as soon as the forms of the house would permit; but
he thought it would only be courteous to Irish members if
the Government were to name a day for its discussion.
Lord PALMERSTON could not agree that it was their
duty to find days for the discussion of questions brought for-
ward by private members. The Government had but two
days of the week, and private members must arrange
amongst themselves for the disposal of the other three.*
After some brief remarks from Mr. Hadfield, Mr. Blake,
Sir M. Farquhar, Major O'Reilly, Mr. Cogan, Mr. Monsell,
chieefifl yfor complaining
the
discussion that the Government afforded no taet-
tiThe house went into committee of supply.
li
of the question.
SUPPLY.

Upon the vote of £28,914 for lighthouses abroad (which
was under discussion when the house was counted out on
Monday night),
Mr, CHILDERS, for the reasons he gave on the pre-