The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-23 00:00:00

IMPORT DUTIES.

Mr. HUME wished to know whether it was the in-
tention of the Government to introduce any Bill this
session to repeal certain anomalies in the import-
laws, which inflicted great injury upon the trade of the
country, and the community at large ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said, in reply to the general
question of the Hon. Member, he had to state that it
was not the intention of the Government to introduce
such a Bill.

Mr. HUME said, then, as the Government had not
made up their minds on the matter he should on Mon-
day specify the laws to which he referred, and repeat
the question.
NATIONAL EDUCATION.—ADJOURNED
DEBATE.

On the order of the day being read for resuming the
adjourned debate,
Sir W. CLAY rose and said, it was his intention to
support the motion of his Honourable Friend the
member for Finsbury; but he could not do so with-
out stating the reasons which had induced him
to come to that determination. lie wished
to guard himself from any misconception as to his views,
as one of the inconveniences of the mode by which this
great question had baen brought before the House—
namely, by a resolution for the proposed grant rather
than by a Bill—was, that it could not be so easily
separated into its various divisions and discussed in
detail; therefore Honourable Gentlemen were more
liable to misconstruction. He intended, by his
vote, to express his disapprobation of the Go..
vernruent plan; but by that vote he did not mean to
declare his opinion that the State ought not to extend
education among the people ; still less did he intend to
give a vote of censure on the Government. If it had
been intended to convey a vote of censure, he should not
have voted for it. He thought, however, that the
Noble Lord ought not to have yielded to the
pressure which had been made. The Noble Lord said
he did not approve of every part of the scheme—he
would be very much surprised if he did agree with it.
He himself, after anxious consideration, was of
opinion that there were so many and such serious
objecticns to the scheme that it would be better
to wait for some time, until they were able to propound
a better measure, freed from these objections. This was
nota mere grant for one hundred thousand pounds;
they were about to lay the foundations of a wide
and comprehensive scheme, and they were, therefore,
bound to establish a sound principle. His objections to
the measure were insuperable. It was with regret he
differed from the Noble Lord, but he did so conscicn-
tionsly. He had endeavoured to state the grounds of
his opposition as briefly and temperately as possible.
He had the consolation to support him that the eloquent
speech of his Right Hon. Friend had not at all touched
the real merits of the question. That speech, and the
other speeches delivered on that side, had convinced
him that there was a ereat lack of education ; but they
had not all proved to his satisla,ction that this measure
would meet the evil. He believed that this Bill would
in a very great degree tend to place a great amount of
power in the hands of the Church of England. He
thought the Church was rich enough to support its
own schools, instead of coming to the House for assist-
ance. Were the present measure passed, then the
Church would be able easily to fulfil its conditions re-
specting the schools, and by obtaining the proposed
grants their power would be immensely increased.
Not less than from 80,000 to 100,000 persons would be
brought into the pay of the State, each person receiving
on an average from 15/. to 201. yearly. To the appoint-
ment of these parties as eligible to receive the pro-
posed grant; the clergymen of the Church were
parties. Was the House prepared to grant this addi-
tional power? Now, he would ask, did history show
that such an arrangement could be made with advan-
tage? No wonder the Church was so much in favour
of the scheme, and the clergy attended at all the meet-
ings got up in favour of the plan.—(Hear, hear.)
He had no doubt that, in one sense, this scheme would
prove beneficial, for it would give the clergy a very im-
portant influence over nine-tenths of their parishioners.
He thought, however, that, the power given to the mem-
bers of the Church would be injurious to their
manly independence and freedom of thought, be-
sides introducing amongst them an occupation foreign to
those duties for which they were originally intended.
It was quite impossible for the Roman Catholics to avail
themselves of the benefits of the scheme, for it was
coupled with such conditions as entirely precluded the
attendance of their children at the schools, and this,
in his opinion, was a fatal objection to the
scheme. Nor had the speech of his Right Ho-
nourable Friend the Member for Edinburgh tended in
the slightest degree to increase his approval of it, and if
the brilliant ability of his Right Hon. Friend was in-
sufficient to throw around•it anything like justification,
whence was it to be obtained? The favouritism of the
Right Honourable Member was threefold. In the first
place, he asserted that the members of the Church of
England constituted the great majority of the popula-
tion, supposing a village to contain a thousand inhabi-
tants—and nine hundred of them were members
of the Church, they were obliged to leave
the hundred. Secondly, the Dissenters, he con-
tended, would be no worse off than they were
before ; and, finally, that the Dissenters would
obtain the advantage, in common with all other
parties in the country, of the increased security
for property which the improved education would in-
duce. Such was the best excuse which his
Right Hon. Friend had been enabled to make,
but what would be said supposing the same argu-
ments were to be adopted with regard to the poor-
law which they were about to pass for Ireland. What
would be said, supposing it was to be alleged that the
minority was to receive no benefit from that law ? In -
that country the Church of England happened to
be in the minority, and what would its members
say if none but those who held the doctrines
of transubstantion were to be allowed relief' ?
Well, but let them look at it in its best aspects—in
those aspects in which the promoters of the scheme
ce
wished it to be viewed. The Right_
_Hon,_ Gentlemat!
M
the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay) said, if
there were
of particular
England,
anothery
alt
with the Free
one connected with
of Scotland, a third with
thee in the
ur
we sleyans, and a
gb
ualfourthbe injustice?
jpuwasirttithei
participate
?pat But if four
schools the Jude-
peudents, ectefdou wr
itshchtohoels
wouldiwould
e
Chinurcha
grants, and asked this
schools were opened in a district which had only sufficient
children for one, they would have four bad schools in-
stead of one good school. Rather than bring about such a
lingvporelusnentat,ryeaavid,
inistteaasd
ohfi
rt he
pe rutdoi a
ti
inn
ga
result it would be better to leave education as it was at
thgaretatprminecasipulereantod
retaining its worst characteristics. He denied that the
question was surrounded with difficulties, and that
this was a step in the right direction—(Hear, hear)—
as he considered that it was a step in the opposite direc-
tion, as it would promote sectarian differences, instead of
a general and national system of education, and would
lead to an unequal distribution of the grant. He had
said that he was in favour of the avernment promoting
the education of the people ; but in a country where
private opinion prevailed to so great an extent as it did
in this, he considered that the religious education of the
child should be left to the parents. Public opinion had
materially altered since 1839, and therefore the adoption
of such a scheme as that proposed in 1839
might be adopted without difficulty, and without
materially interfering with the rights of consience.
He would have left things as they were ; he would have
left it optional with the localities whether they would
accept the grant or not. In a short time it would be
exceedingly, widely, and extensively, accepted. That
would be a sound and comprehensive scheme, worthy of
the House to adopt and fight through. In the mean-
time, so great were the objections to this scheme, that
he considered it would be better for them to let the
voluntary principle work its way—let them trust to
it for by accepting the present measure they
would be sanctioning the very worst error that they: pos-
sibly could. Let them then wait for some suspicions
moment, when they would have a great national scheme,