The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-08 00:00:00

difficulty in repressing his feelings of indignation.
(Hear.) Although he believed the system would have
been more successful had it been supported as it ought
to have been, he denied that it had failed in the manner
described by the noble earl. The noble earl had very
cavalierly set aside the reports of the commissioners,
stating that he could place no trust or confidence in
them, they having been signed by the secretary, and not
by the commissioners. Now he (Lord Aberdeen) relied
with perfect confidence on those returns, believing that
the commissioners had. most anxiously discharged their
duty, and that the returns were perfectly accurate.
(Hear.) It appeared that from the commencement of
the system up to the end of 1851, the increase had been
constantly progressive, with the exception of the years
1847 and 1849, for reasons which were explained in the
report. In the last year the increase in the number of
schools was 157, and of scholars upwards of 9,000. The
whole number of schools at the end of 1851 was 4,811,
and the total number of pupils 529,000. (Hear, hear.)
The main object, he apprehended, in the establish-
ment of these schools had been non-interference
with the religious tenets of the children. It was a
system of joint secular education, but separate religious
instruction. That great object had been perfectly at-
tained, and he believed that since the very commence-
ment there had not been a single instance of proselytism
in any quarter. The noble earl appeared to object to the
omission of Scripture lessons of Scripture extracts. But
he believed that Scripture lessons were most strongly ob-
jected to by the noble earl and his friends. It was said
that it was a mutilation of the Word of Life—that free
access to the Scriptures was the fundamental principle of
Protestantism, and now the noble earl complained that
the extracts were no longer used. But they were not
proscribed. The use of them were encouraged in the
vested schools, and recommended there. The noble earl

wished for separate grants to each education society, and
to all schools without distinction. But was he prepared
to admit that the Roman Catholic population should re-
ceive their full portion of the public money for their
schools, or was he not ? If so, the noble earl spoke the
language of the most liberal of the Roman Catholic
party. They would most cordially support the noble
earl in his proposal, and he believed that some of the
most distinguished prelates warmly advocated that course.
Now,' what would be the effect of such a proposal ? A
grant could not be refused to the Roman Catholics in the
same proportion as to others, whatever that proportion
might be. Whether the proportion might be five to one,
or any other number, proportionate grants must be made ;
and if so, Parliament and the Government would recog-
nise that system of separation which, as he had already
said, must lead to that sectarian spirit which' was the
bane of Ireland. (Hear.) He did not profess to possess
an accurate knowledge of the details of the working of
the system. It might in some respects be susceptible
cf improvement, rules might be modified and made more
clear, and additional regulations might be introduced.
That possibly might be the case. But he did think
it would be the greatest misfortune for Ireland if this
system of education should be put an end to. (Hear.)
He believed the noble earl (the late Lord-Lieutenant)
had made inquiries into the working of the system, and
if he recollected rightly the noble earl then at the head
of the Government declared at the beginning of the ses-
sion that he had looked into the subject, and although
he might contemplate some alterations and improve•
ments, it was not his intention to make any suggestions
to Parliament on the subject. (Hear, hear.) He thought
such testimony as that ought to weigh with their lord-
ships. (Hear, hear.) He should be sorry to reject any
practical improvement in the regulations by which the
system was administered, but he trusted their lordships
would preserve the principle of the system (hear) ; and
he did hope, notwithstanding the opposition of a arge
portion of the clergy (which opposition he hoped and
believed was diminishing), that the system introduced
by the noble earl opposite would prove a blessing to Ire-
land, and that it would be attended with the happiest
results. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of EGLINTON thought the subject well
worthy of their lordships' consideration, involving as it
did the education of several hundred thousands of chil-
dren. (Hear, hear.)
The Earl of CLARENDON observed that his noble
friend, in saying that it was unjust and unfair to select
only those persons for preferment by the Crown who
were favourable to the national system of education, had
only repeated that which had been constantly said in
Ireland. It had even been stated in Dublin that clergy-
men were tortured, so to speak, into the declaration of
their opinions with respect to the national system ; and
he was glad that his noble friend had alluded to the sub-
ject, because it gave him an opportunity of meeting the
statement with a distinct and unqualified denial. (Hear,
hear.) He never, that he remembered, asked a clergy-
man his opinions on the subject in his life, because when
he had to discharge the most sacred duty of selecting a
fit person for Church preferment, he could assure their
lordships that he previously instituted every inquiry
within his power as to the piety, learning, habits, and an-
tecedents of the candidate ; and among those antecedents
must be reckoned the course which he had taken with re-
spect to the momentous question of education. Ho fairly
admitted that, cceteri.s paribus, he always gave preferment
to the clergyman who agreed with him in the views which
he entertained himself ;-and he should not have done his
duty if he had placed a man in a position to thwart him in
a policy which he conceived was advantageous to Ireland.
If their lordships, however, were to form their judgment
from what had been stated by his noble friend, they would
suppose that the whole Church patronage of Ireland was
vested in the Crown, whereas, the fact was, that where
there was one case in which a clergyman looked to the
Crown for prefernient, there were ten cases in which he
looked somewhere else. He was very glad to hear his
noble friend affirm that, though he went to Ireland preju-
diced against the system, yet, having exercised on that, as
on every other subject, his own excellent judgment and
clear understanding, he had come to the conclusion that it
was the best system that could be adopted in the country.
He believed most fully that the clergy of the Established
Church had foregone a great opportunity of doing good,
and had omitted to perform a part of their most sacred
duty by refusing to adopt the national system of education.
They would attend no school, nor give any religious in-
struction, unless the doctrines taught were entirely in ac-
cordance with their own religious belief. To his mind this

appeared a great mischief, because it would leave the poor
in ignorance and all the concomitants of vice. They might
as well refuse a morsel of bread to a starving man, or re-
fuse medical relief to a man attacked with the cholera, be-
cause he had not observed the same regimen. The late
Bishop of Meath said last year that the clergyman of the
parish was the minister by law established, and it was
therefore his duty to attend the school which was esta-
blished by law ; and that though he might not like the
law, yet, so long as it was the law, it was his duty to ad-
minister religious instruction to those who attended the
school. He had heard with regret, but not with surprise,
various other topics referred to by his noble friend, but he
would not detain their lordships by dwelling upon them.
He would only say that ho agreed with his noble friend in
hoping that their lordships would not now sanction any
change, or even hold out any hope of a change, which
would injure the great cause of education among the poorer
classes of the people of Ireland.
After observations by several noble lords,
The Earl of CLANCARTY replied.
The motion was then agreed to, and their lordships ad-
journed at twenty minutes to ten.

HOIJSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
(Continued from our Third Edition o-c last Evening.)
DETENTION OF PASSENGERS AT DOVER.
Mr. JAS. MACGREGOR begged to call the attention of
the honourable gentleman opposite, the Secretary of the
Treasury, to the delay that is at present experienced at
Dover by persons travelling between this country and
France. It happened that on various occasions
the per-
sonsable to reach Londo tth
were un
travelling to London
nfraom Peaerriusly
our they mightb the night mail e
pdr
eavte
nDt
eo
(v, e rf r
ot omhtar
av ev g
luggage examined, and r
have done were they
by the not detained
n notice on this subject,
which he had give i
the question of
first train. It was not his intention now to press
but he thought it would be well if the house were put in
otion of the presentover
u
possession of some data on which to form an opinion as to
m
the policy of introducing some dificaa
•
spstem of examining passengers' l gg g
e between D
and the metropolis. The number of passengers travelling
n and
London
last year between England and France was 172,600. Of that
number 22 272 made the journey between L
Paris by-night, leaving by the half-past seven train, and
• packet. He
accomplishing the distance in 12 hours•, 10,210 persons
came from Paris to London by the night
the Fr ench Custom-house afforded to travellers should be
woul suggest, in such a case, that the same facilities which
extended by our Custom=house officers.
Mr. WILSON—The question of which the honourable
gentleman gave notice had reference exclusively to the
night mail from Paris—departing from Paris at seven
o'clock, and arriving in London at eight o'clock in the
morning. It is but fair, in justice to the commissioners of
customs, to say, that it is their desire to afford the greatest
possible facility to passengers. One of the arrangements
that has been made by them in reference to this particular
question is, that their officers should remain up
night,
in order to examine the baggage at the station, prior to the
departure of the London mails. lam further bound to
say that it appears, on inquiry, that the arrival of the
boats, especially in winter, is uncertain, and that, on the
departure
of the mail trains, it frequently happens that
passengers are left behind, and more frequently that their
luggage is left behind. I have had a communication with
the commissioners of customs on the matter, and, after
consideration, they have made an arrangement to meet the
difficTilty. It is proposed that officers of the custom-house
shall be in attendance at London-bridge station in order to
meet the night train from Dover; but as it would fre-
quently happen that the boat would arrive in Dover long
before the departure of the train, and passengers might
complain that they had an hour to spend. in Dover need-
lessly, and were again detained in London, it was proposed,.
while facilities were afforded in London, that they should
not take away the facilities in Dover. If the passenger
arrives in time, his luggage will be examined in Dover, and
if the time does not suit, the examination will take place
in London. (Hear, hear.) I hope the officers in Dover
will receive instructions to telegraph on the departure of
the train, so that the authorities in London may be in-
formed whether the examination has taken place in Dover
or not, so that if it has taken place in Dover it will not be
necessary to detain them in London. To enable the autho-
rities to take the names of aliens, it will be necessary that
the ship list of passengers should be sent forward with the
baggage.