The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-02 00:00:00

termed an unpopular measure.—( Hear, hear.) But because
the new Poor-law 13i11 was in some respects and in some
places an unpopular measure, was he, therefore, to extend any
part of the unpopularity of that measure to the Bill which he
was they, submitting to their Lordships' consideration ? Was
he to load with any unnecessary unpopularity derived from
a connection with the Poor Law Bill, and which was pecu-
liar to the Poor Law Bill, and which did not naturally be-
long to this Education Bill—was he to load with any un-.
necessary unpopularity derived from such sources a measure
which to succeed must depend much upon the good feeling of
the people ? A general system of education, whether under
the Bill he then proposed or under any other Bill, could not
possibly be extended and improved, much less made universal
over the country, unless the affection and respect of, the peo-
ple were by all possible means conciliated. That being the
case, it would be one of the least prudent and least safe
courses that could be taken to load this new measure, and
through the medium of this measure to load education gene-
rally, with any one atom, however small, of the unpopularity
which at present, and only at present, attended the other
measure. In like manner, no doubt, certain controversies
would arise with respect to the administration of the new
systetn of education. Great heats and contentions would
doubtless at times arise as to the mode in which the provi-
sions of the Bill should, in certain cases, be carried into
effect. The Board might differ from the local authorities—
the local authorities might split amongst themselves—dis-
putes no doubt would oftentimes run high, and frequently,
perhaps, upon the very questions upon which there was the
least real ground for difference, and upon which it were
most desirable that there should be a perfect union of feeling
and conduct. Against such difficulties the Bill could not
provide, because they were difficulties that arose out of the
infirmity of human nature. But with such difficrilties to
contend against, was he further to load his Education Bill
with any of those matters of contention and of controvery
to the Poor-law Bill ?--or, on the other hand, was he
to load the Poor-law Bill with any of the difficul-
ties which were peculiar to the Education Bill, which
might arise out of the Education Bill, but which could not
by possibility arise out of the Administration of the Poor-
law Bill, unless some injudicious union of the two were
effected? It was his wish, and in the framing of the Bill it
had been his endeavour, to keep the two measures totally
and completely separate. He would not in any way unite
them. Foreseeing a sufficient amount of difficulty in the
administration of the one, he was most anxious not to intro-
duce into it any of the bitter strife of the other. He now
came to that part of the measure which related to the ex-
temion of the new system to those places in which there were
no municipal bodies. For this purpose, keeping still to the
voluntary principle, which ran through the whole of the
Bill, he proposed, that if any parish or township, not having
municipal institutions, chose to do so, it might obtain for
itself such a body as should give it the power of availing,
itself of the provisions of the Bill, and of putting those provi-
sions in force in the way he had already described by the
mutual assent of the local authority and the central Board.
For that purpose it was provided thai if any given number
(five or six for instance) of persons in the parish or township
made a requisition to the parish officer, the parish officer
should call a meeting of all persons who liked to attend such
a meeting. Who those persons were he would presently
state to their Lordships. The bulk of them, no doubt, would-
be the rate-payers and owners of property in the parish or
township. When these persons, together with those whom
he should by and by mention, had been summoned and assem-
bled at the meeting convened by the parish officer, this ques-
tion was to be propounded to them--" Did they choose to have
a school committee appointed ?" if the majority of them said
No, we do not want it—we have education enough," he( Lord
Brougham) did rot force it upon them ; he would leave them
as they were, waiting till the general progress of improvement
had extended to them, and made them desirous of availing
themselves of the utmost advantages that an improved system
eef education could afford them. If the majority of the meeting
did not agree to have a Committee, still it might be said
amongst them, " We are the friends of education, but still
we think there is enough here—we do not like anything like
the shape of Government interfering, even through the me-
dium of such a Board as this—we do not like rates—let us
remain as we are." Very well, they would remain as
they were ; the Bill would not apply to them ; they
might continue in the course which they deemed best, or
which was the most agrecable'to them. But if, on the other
hind, the majority said, " We want schools, or the schools
which now exist want steadier friends to support them—it is
not right that we should allow our education to rest upon such
precarious grounds—we want a better system of instruction
and more money for that purpose," then if they chose they
would appoint a school Committee, which school Committee
would be composed of rate payers, and the members of the
Committee so appointed would have the power of levying the
rate for school purposes upon the parish. Having thus pro-
vided for the manner in which the school Committee was to be
appointed, the Bill afterwards detailed the manner in which
the Committee was to act, and defined with much exactitude
the. limit to be imposed upon the authority of the Board on the
one hand, and of the Committee on the other. From the
statement he had just made, their Lordships would perceive
that what the council were with respect to education in cor-
porate towns, the school committee would be in places which
had no corporations; and further,-that by the institution of the
school Committees, the system, according to the principle lie
had already described, would, be made quite universal
throughout the whole of the country.' Then the ques-
tion arose how was the constituency to he formed which
was to chose the school Committee. He besought such
of their Lordships as honoured him with their attention
upon that important ques'ion not to be staggered with
the proposition for the qualification of voters which he was
about to explain ; because he began by stating that it was en-
tirely new, and therefore lie knew was not likely to find favour
in the eyes of some of those whom he addressed. It might
also be objected to by those who were against increasing the
weight of the people to their elective capacity. Furthermore,
be admitted that after it had been once adopted—and he was
sure candour would go no further than he was then going, for
he was raising against himself that which he felt to be the
most powerful argument that could be employed against his
proposition, and running the risk of alarming such of their
Lordships as were generally favourable to the Bill, on account
of the possible perversion to other uses of the principle he pro-
posed to introduce—a principle carrying with it all the startling
effects of perfect novelty, with a strong liability to be ex-
tended, nay, with a great temptation to be extended, to other
uses which many of their Lordships would think a perversion
and an abuse of it—he admitted that this part of the Bill was
• liable to all these objections ; but still, with the feelings that
lie entertained upon the subject, it was utterly impossible
that he could do otherwise than incorporate it in any mea-
sure upon the subject of education which it might be his lot
or his fortune to introduce to the Legislature. He must
add, having with the utmost candqur pointed Out the very for-
midable nature of the objections which he was quite sure would
be used against him, and having also adverted, although he
hoped only for the purpose of warning their Lordships against
their own feelings and their own prejudices (if he might take
leave to use such a term upon such a subject)—having with
that view stated the objections to his principle in their broad
dimensions, and painted his project, he really thought, in its
very worst colours—having so done, night he be permitted to
add, in fairness to himself and to his measure, that the princi-
ple to which he had thus adverted was not so combined with
the Bill as to be inseparable from it if there were found to be
an invincible repugnance to it, so that those who approved
generally of the rest df the measure, but objected to that one
point of it, would not be under the necessity of voting against
the whole Bill. That part of the Bill, if the objection to it
were invincible, might be lopped off and cast away without
injury to the remainder. If their Lordships were to tear out
that provision of the Bill with all the disgust, abhorrence, and
aversion that men could properly entertain towards any pro-
position, they might do so if they pleased—it did not necessa-
rily affect the rest of the measure. He hoped it had vigour to
survive the operation. His first hope was, that the operation
would not be performed ; it did not follow that death should
ensue. Did their lordships suppose that it was universal suffrage
that he proposed to introduce ? He thought that something
might be said for universal suffrage in an education Bill. The
qualification of those who were alone to levy the tax, required
that they should pay the tax themselves which they joined
in levying. He did not propose universal 'suffrage as re-
garded the election of the school Committee. Not at all.
The school Committee was to be composed of persons wile
paid as their neighbours paid, and who had no right to put
their hands into their neighbours' pockets without at the same
in proportiOn putting their hands into their own. So that
universel suffrage, if applicable to the education franchise,
that was to say to the franchise for the choice of a school
Committee, whose duties and labours were to be confined
solely and exclusively to the management of the school con-
cerns, was not liable to the same objection in this instance as
it would be if applied to the elections of Members of Parlia-
ment, because the party chosen had the qualification of being
a rate-payer himself. But, in truth, it was not universal
suffrage that he then proposed ; he proposed a qualifica-
tion, for the franchise—a qualification not only, he was
mum' afraid, infinitely restricted in comparison with Vail..
versal suffrage—not only a qualification, he was sorry t
add, that would exclude a vast portion of the industrious,o
honest, worthy fellow-citizens in every part of the country
—a qualification that would not only keep out from all
concern and all voice in the affairs of any one parish or town:.
ship a vast many thousands of their fellow-citizens, who, if
there were not certain qualifications required for performing
the duties of the office, which unhappily they had not yet at-
tained, would in every respect be most fitted to take part in the
proceedings of these Committees; but a qualification, a frani-
chise, so restricted that when he stated the nature of it the r
Lordships would at once perceive that it was peculiarly appro-
priate where the question was the choosing a Committee f r
superintending the affairs of a school. He proposed an ed u-
cation qualification. The Legislature had given a right to
choose Members of Parliament to persons who possessed a
101. franchise or a 403. freehold. It had also given a right
to choose town councillors to persons who were rated in any
way. Of course his (Lord Brongham's) object was, that all
those persons who were rated at any amount whatever should
in the first place enjoy the franchise of voting for the school
Committee; but then he went further. He held that there
could be no harm, but every kind of benefit possible, in ex-
tending it in the direction he was about to mention. They
wanted well-informed persons ; they wanted persons of
sober and industrious habits—men whom they could safely
trust—men who were not likely to be led away by their
ignorance, or to be debauched by bribery and corruption,
to which persons of dissipated habits, and who were not
respectable in their life and conversation, were liable. ,
He proposed, then, to take those men who had given a
proof that 67 wer,.. of 60bn I,lbitc that they aof
industrious lives ; that they were friends to education ;
that they had made efforts to educate themselves; and
men who to a certain extent had profitted by their suc-