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

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 22.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.
Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition against
any alteration in the Navigation Laws.
EDUCATION.
The Bishop of LLANDAFF presented several peti-
tions in favour of the Government scheme of education.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM presented several petitions
against the Government scheme of education.
Similar petitions were presented by Lord VIVIAN and
the Marquis of LANSDOWNE.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented petitions
from the inhabitants of Wakefield, the churchwardens
and others of the parish of Stepney, and other places, in
favour of the Government scheme.
Lord
the same DENM AN presented two similar petitions on
subject.
POOR LAW (IRELAND).
Lord RODEN pres,nted a petition against a poor-law
for Ireland.

FEVER (IRELAND) BILL.
The Eirl of CLARENDON moved that their Lord.
ships should gi into Committee on this Bill. The pre-
sent Bid was one brought in for the purpose of making
some amendments in the Bill passed last session upon
this subjeet.
Lord MONTEAGLE considered that some difficulty
would be found in obtaining the necessary super.
vision under the provisions of this Bill, arising
from the great extent of the unions of Ireland,
some of them containing upwards of 500,000 acres,
and he thought that some amendments might be intro-
duced in the Bill to remedy this defect. Any amend-
ments that he might at a futltre stage of the Bill propose
to their Lordships should be framed in such a manner
as not to defeat or affect the principle of the Bill. Thil
Bill has been more or less obstructed by disputes among
the medical profession itself, and Parliament had allowed
its efforts to be neutralised by the party squabbles of
local medical boards. Ho thought that the time had
now arrived when such considerations should not ope-
rate, but the Government should come forward and
make such enactments as the emergency of the case re-
quired. _

The Marquis of WESTMEATH said, that consider-
ing the expense of the education of the medical profes-
sion in Ireland, and the facility that was afforded for
obtaining diplomas in- Scotland, and elsewhere, he
thought that there should be an amendment to protect
the members of the medical profession in Ireland, and
he would propose an amendment to that effect.
The Earl of CLANCARTY—His Noble Friend op-
posite had spoken of the disputes among the medical
profession in Ireland having impeded the efforts of the
Government on this subject. He must say, in justice to
the medical profession, that those distinguished mem-
bers of that profession, who had come before the House
last session, and to others who had sent petitions, sup-
porting the views of the Government, that they were
actuated by motives quite different to those attributed to
them.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE could assure the
House that it was the earnest wish of her Majesty's
Government to deal satisfactorily with the medical pro-
fession in Ireland; but they had to deal first with that
subject which concerned all parties.
After a few words from the Earl of CLARENDON and
Lord MONTEAGLE their Lordships went into Committee.
The Bill having gone through Committee, the Chair-
man reported accordingly, and the Bill was ordered to
be read a third time b-morrow (this day).
Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Aril 22.
NATIONAL ED UCATION.- 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. He 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 been brought before the Hoase--
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. Ile intended, by his
vote, to express his disapprobation of the Go-
vernment 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 nut approve of every part of the scheme—he
would be very much surprised if he did agree with it.
Ile himself, after anxious consideration, was of
opinion that there were so many and such serious
objections to the scheme that it would be better
to wait for some time, until they were able to propound
a better measure, fresd from these objections. This was
not:a 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 Neb!e Lord. but he did so conscien-
tionsly. He had endeaveur,d to state the grounds of
his opposition as brit fly and tempera:ely as possible.
Ile had the consolati in to support him that the eloquent
sr'eech of his Hight Hon. Friend Imilla,t,srp..etec.hi,lnf:id
scut merits cal the question. f: I-tistaA
ether speeches deli‘erett on that side, had convinetd
him that there was a great lack of education ; but they
lied not all proved to his sati,!a:•th,r. 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
pow.-r in the hands of the Church of England. Ile
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 151. 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. IVas the House prepared to grant this addi-
tional power? Now, be 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 git en 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 sui posing the same argu-
ments were to Le 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
of
aspects—in
say if none but those who held
transubstantion were to be allowed
eddoeretlritenfes?
those aspects in which
Well, but let them looltcheat bestahsep eEce h e
Hon, Gentleman
wished it to be viewed. The might
promotersitinits
the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay) said, if
there were four schools in a particular locality,
one connected with the Church of England, another
with the Free Church of Scotland, a third with
the Wesleyans, and a fourth with the Inde-
pendents, they would equally participate in the
grants, and asked if this would be injustice? But if four
schools were opened in a district which had only sufficient
children for one, they would have four bad schools in-
stead. Ra
ttlhoeearvi
nteheaadnubegarriteni
aogtnamab oseuiatte
nswuraecsh
to do oblei t sebahes better
present,
resultresenotft, onels,would
leavingugl
t
to
voluntary aid, instead of repudiating that principle and
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 bad
said that he was in favour of the Government 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 censieneet.
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 shot time it would be
exceedingly, widely, and extensively, accepted. That
would be a sound and comprehensive scheme, worthy of
the House to adopt and tight through. In the mean+
time, so great were the objections to this scheme, that
he considered it would be better fur them to let the
voluntary principle work its way—let them trust tt)
it for by accepting the, preseattemeariure they
would be sanctioning the very worst terrorthat they pos-
sibly could. Let them then weit for some auspicious
00111010, when they would Inn glut it tuatLichepie„

worthy of the Noble Lord, worthfytohe ftNheohnle amLoehrde bears,would
and he believed that thecartei r o
be yet the brightest illustraonofth to offeratname.
Sir JOHN PAKINGToN e
desired his thanks
to the Noble Lord (J. Russell) for his
his course upon
the present question, and to tender him support.
There was no part of the Hon. Baronet's speech thae he
dissented from so much as that portion which alleged
that the Government plan had been triumphantly re-
futed.
So far from agreeing in this opinion, he thought
that the case of the Government had been most clearly
said conclusively maintained. Why had the speeches of
the Hon. Members for Finsbury and Durham been so
feeble ? Why, but because that they had no system of
their own to propose—no scheme or plan on which to
proceed. He considered the opening speech of the No-
ble Lord at the head of the Government had anticipated
every objection, and completely made out the necessity
of the proposed grant. Fortified, as that speech
had been by the able speeches of the Right
Honourable Member for Edinburgh, and the Right
Hon. Baronet the Home Secretary, little remained for
him to say. He would only refer to one point. Itf was
that which proposed to leave out certain Dissenters from
that
participating in the grant. He could not agreewith
exclusion. As a member of the Church of
England,wished deal
and
440 as a member of the National Society, he
filth the subject before them in a charitable
stitatio in the
There were several most important -
country which would not be eligible forinl talshelegrsntHemight instance one of the
establish-
ments in the country, whichmost
theva valuable
of the
Churchmen and the Dissentersmet together, and
were educated, in the most
arisen on account of
difficulty whatever had ever arisen on account of
religion. The establish
ent to which he referred Ras
religion. The establis
. u
od Theer
King Edward's Grammar
read
ns;:xh toroalc ta ft ri3o mi r mt
ihnegrhuall:s.
which the school was managed.-The following was a
statement of the children of the different persuasions in
that school:—
Church of England 798
Independents
_ Wesleyans
Baptists
Socinians . .
Lady Huntingdon's .. 8
Jews 4
Roman Catholics 4
Swetlenborgians
Calvinists 1
Quakers .. 1
This large school was conducted in this harmonious
manner. He confessed that he wished most earnestly
that he could confine the schools in such a manner as to
give religious education to the children, in accordance
with the principles of the Church of England ; but,
whatever might be his own private opinion on the sub-
istet, he must allow some weight to the principles and
opinions of the other great sects and parties throughout
the country.—(Hoar, hear.) He thought the ar
guments of her Majesty's Government, in bringing
forward this measure, perfectly conclusive, and he
hoped that the attention of Government would be
shortly turned to the condition of the labourer, and to
the sanatory condition of the people of this country. H. e
must confess, however, that he was to some extent dis-
appointed, because her Majesty's Government had not
proceeded in a more comprehensive manner than they
had done upon these subjects.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME was anxious to say a few words upon this
subject, as he must say that from promises and pledges
Loen by the Noble Lord the Member for the city of
ndon to his constituency he did expect to have seen a
plan more comprehensive than that introduced upon the
present occasion. The Noble Lord stated in the com-
mencement of the present session that he was prepared
with a more extended plan of general education, and he
was quite surprised that at the present time, when a vote
of 700,0001. was taken for the army alone that
the paltry sum of 100,000 L only should be required
to carry out the plan of the Government with respect
to the education of the country. He thought that
the people of England were willing to bear
a much larger sum tier that purpose.—(Hear, hear.)
The Lion Member for Edinburgh (Hr. Macaulay) had
made a most eloquent, and a most forcible speech upon
the subject, and the arguments brought forward in that
speech were in his opinion perfectly unanswerable, and
be most cordially agreed with the Right Hon. Gentle-
man in considering the present state of education in
Scotland as resulting from the improved and general
system of education which prevailed in that country.—
(Hear, hear.) The system of establishing schools in
every parish of Scotland was a most desireable and effi-
cient one, and one which he should be most happy to see
carried out in this country. He quite agreed with the
conduct of the Prussian Government, in prosecuting the
education of the people, he believe with the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh, that it was the
duty of every Government to do its utmost to
promote the education of the people, and he regretted
to hear any lion. Member in that House say that it was
not the duty of the Government to endeavour to edu-
cate the people. He really thought that that was one of
the first, if nit the first, duties of the State. He could
not reconcile the statement of the lion. Member for
Derby, that the people iif Scotland could most of them
write a good letter, and yet he went on to say that the
people were little better than " barbarians." He would
dismiss the subject from his mind, and hurl back the
eharge thus made upon his country, by saying that the
statements of the Him. Member were perfectly incon-
intent and irreconeileahle. The Hon. Member then
proceeded to contrast the state of education in Pru-sia
and the United States, where a system of State edu
eation prevailed, with the state of education
in this country, where there did not exist
any general system of Government education.
The result of the analysis of crime in England fur the
last three years, showed that there was a decrease of 32
per cent, in the countries where the people were best
educated. Mr. Neeson, who made out these tables, made
it evident that wherever there was crime there also was
ignorance, and the complete absence of the means of
education. To show that Mr. Laing never intended to
say that education did no good, he would refer to the.ob-
servations he made in favour of the penny postage, of
which he was an anxious supporter. He agreed with
air. Laing that every measure ought to be sanctioned I
which even indirectly promoted education. He was told
by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government, and
the Noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests.
that they were beset with difficulties in this measure,
. and that they deplored they could cot carry out a more
extensive system of education. He maintained that it
was the right of every one to have education, and it was
not a matter of toleration. A Catholic or a Dis-
senter was as good a man as a member of the
Church of Egland, and lied as good a claim
to the advantage of State education. lie
did not assent to the character of moral courage which
was so generally given to the Noble Lord.—(Hear,
hear.) On this question the Noble Lord displayed the
greatest cowardice. He was afraid to take the course
-which his judgment approved, and sculked in the most
shameful manner from the adoption of the right course.
Be was going to answer the grounds on which Mr. Baines
proceeded in his epposition to the education scheme, but he
would not allude to them now. His own opinion was, that
the dissenters and the members of the Church of England
ought to be put into the same boat and sent across the
channel. Ile thought an effort should be made to unite
all classes, and he did not doubt, judging from the
evidence they had from Holland and from Ireland, that
this was practicable. lie thought if her Majesty's
Government agreed to appoint a Committee to enquire
-what each party wanted, that means could be
devised for this purpose. They adopted such
a pro Teding with regard to the navigation laws,
the pooelaws, and other questions, and he did
not doubt, but if this were done with regard to educa-
tion, a mode would be pointed out to reconcile all differ.
ences. When Holland was under subjection to France,
at the time of the French revolution, an attempt was
made by France to give education combined with reli-
gion to the people of Holland, and this attempt was met
by the ministers of the various creeds in a spirit of
good will. The consequence was ;that the clergymen
of the different persuasions and the schoolmaster—each
in their respective sphere--carried out the intentions
Irf the Government. The next case he had to bring
before them to show the practicability of combining a
religious and secular education, was the national system
of
.eduCation adopted in Ireland, and he would refer to I
the 9th report of the National Board, to show the per- I
feet success which had attended their efforts. He
attributed much of the crime which existed in this
. country to the religious differences which prevailed; and
those who fomented them could not lay their hands
• esa their hearts and say, at they were doing their duty
to God and mane and if crime could be repressed by
education, as he thought it might in a great degree, it
'would be cheaply purchased at 500,000/. a-year, instead
of 100,000/, or at almost any cost. Ile considered that
the state of things in this country required a greater
and more comprehensive measure than the one
proposed, and if the Committee sought were granted he
should be able to prove that a truly national system of
education might be earried out without any of the
s which appeared to be involved in the Government
n. He also considered that there ought to be a
its
inister of Instruction in this country, assisted by a
board of persons selected from the most competent in
111"' community, to whom the task of superintending the
edesuceatioft of the people should be intrusted. It was on
lien grounds that he'-.felt felt it his duty to vote for the
.sirdwillet:l4ofmtizisslionsFriend.
Government, beefwee
• said he should support the plan of the
'come when it was the h?
considered that the time had
incumbent duty of the State to
promote the education oT thee i:ieople by every means in
its power. If they wanteatt
of of this necessity, it
to
,I:irat of every 100 of the
-was to be found in the f
population, only from 30 could read, a werehat
1,000,000 or 800,000 ot the children of the poor re-
aceivisig no education at all, and were being brought up
so rapine, as it were, as a profession
• It armoured to
lint that a great evportion of the public feeling was in
favour of the plan. Looking at thedesnta:tmoieof
Church, of the different dissenting .sthe
there wag as large -a mass of public Itenlins'
In favour of it as was ever given in support of any other
public measwe which had of late years engaged the at-
ibentien of that House. The Hon. Gentleman the Mem-
ber for Montrose was the only one in that House who
had advocated a compulsory system of education ; but
be did not agree with him, as he considered that the
plan of aiding the voluntary efforts of benevolent indi-
viduals was the best that could be adopted, and that a
Compulsory system was foreign to the habits of the
people of this country.—(Hear, hear.) But where a
aeltool was required in a district, such as a colliery
clittrict, where there well no benevolent persons to
raid Ilit.by voluntary contributions, he thought that
the state should step forward and provide the necessary-
funds.—(Hew heard He was strongly opposed to a
siecelsyaitr - eacation, as he considered that reli-
t"
04%4%1'1in ant part of education ; yet he be-
ifeito ' nln re of good than evil ; and, there- I
*re,- le i,iodid )ict ' . i ' that mode of education to those
,:-, :iiiicliwc4o: i'. ..,, en who were in ferour 4:1 it,
i-, ;-L.:.--Ai4
(1,
, -... ee:.„-:iesis•-t "e,s".4tei'sr&_
k, -' \- ' '' 7 -e•eier-Piett. if::/-

•'

N.. a S.

leaving the religious portion of the education to the
clereymen of the different denominations, and to the
parents of the chil ;ren. He perfectly concurredin the
remarks of the Noble Lord, the Member for
Arundel,
(Lord Surrey), who spoke so much to his credit the other
night.—(Hear. hear.) As, he said, that although those
ground deny aid
seofaiding
in
of the Roman Catholic persuasion were not to participate
in the grant that he should not, on that
from the funds of the State for therpurpo
sects.—(Hear, hear.)
promoting education among other oth
ofp the community
disability.—(Hear, i.l. ty.—(Hear, hear.)
Yet he (Sir W. James) coul notehel thinking that the
exclusion of that portion
would be another Catholic
He thought the speech of the Hon. Member for Durham
was one more against the Church and the aristocracy
than anything else ; and he regretted to see a Gentle-
man,
niwho had attained such a position in the country,
come forward and give utterance to such preju •
diced sentiments as he had done.
Sir JOHN EASTHOPE said it was with the deepest
regret that he saw her Majesty's Government submit to
consult the expediency of the moment, which they had
done in the present measure. There were great objec-
tions to it, and there was one greater, and that was the
unfortunate compromise made between the Church of
England and the Wesleyans, by which the Catholics
were excluded.—(Hear, hear) He admired the speech
of the Noble Lord (the Earl of Arundel), and he hoped
that the Wesleyans would from it learn true sentiments
of Christian charity.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD said it was his
intention to vote for the Hon. Member's amendment, for
he did feel that the measure of the Government was a
violation of the rights of the people, and was a violation
of religious liberty, because it gave undue advantages to
one sect over. another. He was as anxious to support
education as any man in the House; but the exclusion
of the Catholics was most unworthy of the Govern-
ment. He did give great praise to the Earl of Arundel
for his speech, but it emanated rather from the goodness
of his heart than anything else; but he would say that
the people of England would respect the Catholic body
if they stood. upon their rights, for he did not
know on what principles any Catholic Member in that
House could vote for the proposition of the Government.
The Methodist bodies in the town of Rochdale-were not
parties to any compromise which might have been en-
tered upon. They had commissioned him to present
many addresses, which embodied the truest principles of
religious liberty. On the subject of the Maynooth
grant, he was one of those who oppoeed that grant, on
the ground that it was hostile to civil ,and religious
rights, and he now opposed this grant on the ground that
the civil and religious rights of the Catholics themselves
were interfered with. He did not wish that the Church
to which he belonged should exercise any undue influ-
ence over the religious or civil rights of any sect which
differed from it. For these various' reasons, he would
give his vote in favour of the amendment.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH entirely agreed in the
opinion of the Hon. Memb..r who had last spoken, and
with the Hon. Member for Montrose, that a system of
national secular education. divested of every interference
in religious opinion, would be far preferable to the
measure proposed. With regard to the measure itself,
the first question was, should the Government interfere
at all in the education of the people ?—secondly, to
what extent it should do so ?—and, thirdly, as to the
nature of the education to be given by them 7 There
were many opinions upon this subject outside, in favour
of the non-interference of the Government under any
circumstances ; but he would ask whether it was not the
duty of every Government to promote the interests of
the public and of the Government by educating the
people? The Government should teach the people the
difference between right and wrong, as that alone would
make them willingly obedient to the laws ; and,:there-
fore, the education of the people was a matter of
primary importance to the State. He thought that
the State should educate the people. With regard to
crime, they were at that moment at their wits' end to
prevent its increase. He was chairman of a Committee
which had to deliberate with reference to this subject,
and they could devise no means to prevent its increase.
Although good gaols and good gaolers might in some
degree check the progress of crime, yet lie thought that
good schools and good schoolmasters would check it
still more. No person objected to large expenditure on
the part of the State in matters of less importance than
the education of the people, and there should, therefore,
no objection be offered in any expenditure for that edu
cation. He would ask those who were the opponents of
State interference, if there were not hundreds of thou-
sands of people in this country too poor to educate their
children ? How then were they to be educated, except
by private charity, under which such an efficient system
of superintendence as could be exercised under a na-
tional regulation would be impossible. Many of these
educational charities, especially those supported
by voluntary contributions, were deficient in
funds, depending upon accidental donations for
their resources, to increase which they w- re
obliged to have recourse to the most unfortunate,
and he might almost say degrading solicitations. If he
were a member of the humbler class he should feel it
more consonant with his feelings to have his children
educated at the expf nse of the state than by private
charity. lie should rather claim the education of his
children from the State as a right, and to which he was
entitled for the benefit of the community, than receive it
from the uncertain bounty of his fellows citizens, from
whom he should take it as a boon and as a favour.—
(Hear, hear.) The next question was as to what extent,
and in what manner the State should interfere in edu-
cation? In his opinion the State should interfere so
far as that, no children should from want of means re-
main ignorant of so much of the elements of an educa-
tion as would tend to E.ave them from crime.—(Hear.)
This system should be carried out without reference
to creed or belief. There had been three methods pro•
posed in which this interference on the part of the State
should have been made, of which he considered that the
only practicable one was the proposal diet the State
should contribute to the support of the alreedy existing
schools of each sect. The dissenters of a certain class
had, to some extent, thrown an obstacle in the way of
the last measure which he had mentioned, as they had
a consciencious objection to receiving any grant from the
State. In our eastern dominions the people were some-
times in danger of perishing by starvation, from the
failure of the rice crop, and the Government attempted
to remedy the deficiency by supplies of animal food, to
which the people had an insuperable objection, founded
on their religion. lie thought that what fo'sd
was to the body, education was to the mind.
the last objection to which he would refer, was a very
grave one. It was the proposition to leave out the Ro-
man Catholic altogether. He had been much astonished
at this arraegs meet, and up to this week he believed no
one out of the Government knew that such an exclusion
would be proposed. He regretted the interpretation
which had been given to the minutes of 1839. This in.
terpretarion had not, however, been given to it till 1847.
Since 1839 till then, no such interpretation had taken
place. The Noble Lord said, thst as soon as Roman
Catholics applied for the grant their application would
be taken into consideration, but that, as yet, no such ap-
plication had been made. This was, however, incorrect.
In February last a Mr. Langdon applied to the Council
in respect to the educational grant, and Dr. Kay Shut-
tleworth replied to him, that their Lordships would, if
a definite application was made to them in respect to the
Roman Catholics, they would give it their most careful
consideration. That this was the interpretation of the
minutes would seem to he the-case. from the proceedings
of the Wesleyan Committee of Education, in March
anti April 1844, according to certain letters
and documents of theirs, published in last week's
Watchman. To the letters there addressed to the Coun-
cil of Education they replied that they would be disposed
to give every consideration to any objections the Wes-
leyans might have to offer to the mode recommen led by
the fhrtner. A conference ensued, in which• the Council
made such explanations about the Scriptures being either
read daily entire, or extracts from them, in the schools,
such as to remove the objections of the Wesleyans.
This would have included the Catholics, as nothing was
then sail about the authorised verson being alone used.
(The Hen. Member then quoted the resolutions of a
public meeting, held a few days ago, the Earl of Shrews-
bury in the chair, complaining of the exclusion to which
the Government proposed to subject then in this grant.)
After the speeches made by the Noble Lord the Member
'or the West Riding of Yorkshire (Lord Morpeth), and
.he Right lion. Baronet the Member lhr Devonport (Sir
G. Gr,y), he felt encouraged to give notice that he
would move. in some stage of the present question, a re-
solution declaring that in any future grant the Roman
Catholics should be admitted to participate in it on the
same footitee as other religious seats.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord MAHON supported the proposition of the Go-
vernment. When they considered the enormous amount
of ignorance which prevailed, he could not see what other
course they could take than supporting this grant. By re-
ferring to the various reports submitted to this House,
they would find the enormous amount of ignorance which
prevailed and the necessity which existed for the change
It was impossible that they could have things as•
they were, and a change was, therefore, necessary.
If this plan of the Hon. Member for Dumfries were im-
practicable, as he thought it was, then there remained
only some such measure as that of her Majesty's
Government. He thought, for instance, that the propo-
sition of providing retiring pensions and situations,
under certain circumstances, under Government, would
require to be abandoned. Still, as a whole, he would
undoubtedly support the Government, believing their
scheme to have been brought forward in an earnest and
truthful spirit. When he looked to the present artificial
state of society, he could not think that they were alto-
gether faultless who opposed even this limited measure
of education ; he thought that they should, before
punishing crime, give the people the means of knowing
good from evil.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he was always
very unwilling unnecessarily to occupy the time and
attention of the House, but as he concluded that the
Hon. Member for Finsbury intended to press his motion
to a division, he could not reconcile it to his sense of
duty to give a silent vote on that occasion. The motion
public money
made by the Noble Lord at the head of the Government
as an amenamiennta
was that they should resolve themselves into a Commit-
tee of Supply for the purpose of voting 100,000/. of the
tihnlattiiaryS.eleeNtneweirnt
ibily.otfheediuicoant.imon;mhTernfeormFoitaisohnurmyovvveads
mittee be appointed for the jeurpese of
subject, that au inquirynwcias altogether superfluous. The
agrfacts were notorimosleins
of that there was a great inade-
nciYttedefonthaell hands. This mutecodattiioFthinen, he presumed,
England was
a (as
censurehad obneehnerhminaj %) •for the purpose of
conveying
est
pressions of dissent from differentYpartnefnirnent—(ex-
and although he was not preparedtoiay thait" Itouse)-7
limn Committed in this matter, yet it would,clZsi:Tl not
the the diffimiltie; which surriiun,fed the questioNnbel ienrihrs
opinion unjust in the extreme to mark.with severity
anything that m ght have -b-en done amiss: He was
well aware of the extreme diffiehlty that attended this
question, and he felt bound.to say, therefore,. that they
should rasher endeavour W.:Notify their olOsions, Chart

:.:. ~.

ensure what they might discover to he wrong. It was
in this spirit that l e should direct his attention- to the
matter under discussion ; and on the threshold of this
subject the abstract question presented itself, as to
whether it was, or was not, the duty of the State to in-
terfere with the education of the people. He could not
hesitate, in discussing this abstract question, at coming to
the conclusion that it was not only one among the highest
duties of the State, but among the noblest, if not indeed
the most noble, functions of the Government, to do
everything to extend and diffuse knowleds,e, to elevate
the moral, and cultivate the religions feeling of the
peop?e committed to its care, and looking at this as a
Christian assembly, he could not hesitate to state that
the: noblest• and purest system of education for the
people was that system of morals which had received
the Divine sanction, and which held out to mankind on
the one hand a future state of eternal reward, or on the
other a state of eternal punishment. But this view of
the subject would lead him into considerations which at
present he did not intend to enter upon. To pass them
from that subject, and to turn from the abstract to the
practical question, if it were to be admitted for the pur-
poses of the debate, that in the abstract it was
the duty of the State to promote the education of
the people, the real question as a practical
one would be, how could that duty he best performed?
Now, as was the case with all matters of policy, the
practical question must be considered in reference to the
varied circumstances in the different pat is of the United
Kingdom. The question had been transferred to Scot-
land by the most able and eloquent Gentleman who re-
presented the metropolis of that country, and in refer-
ence to Scotland, it should be remembered that at an
early period of its history the happy circumstances oc-
curred of the one religion being embraced by the entire
people, and the education of the country was delegated
to the Church. There was here no difficulty, as, when
the Presbyterian religion was first introduced in the reign
of James 1., and again in the reign of William lIL, edu-
cation was altogether confided to the national
Church, formed part of its social and prac-
tical system, and received the sanction of the
Scottish Parliament first, and afterwards of the Parlia-
ment of the United Kingdom. The education of the
people progressed in strict alliance with the Church as
by law established until the late disruption, which he
to that day deplored. Religious feelings and secular edu-
cation went hand in hand, and very many circumstances
combined to elevate the people of that portion of the
island in history, and enabled the country, notwith-
standing its natural disadvantages and its poverty, to
rise to a level with the highest and most civilised nations
in the world.—(blear, hear.) In Ireland, again, the
circumstances were exactly different. There the reli-
gion of the State was the religion of a small minority ;
dissent from that religion was the distinguishing fea-
ture of the great majority in that country.
Their religion was not recognised by the State,
bat Parliament had granted, year by year, considerable
sums of private money, not in alliance with the Church,
indeed, but still by this system Dissenters were admitted
to partake of benefits in which Churchmen also parti-
cipated. It was, therefore, consistent both with the
practice and policy of the case that the views of the Go-
vernment should vary with the varied circumstances of
the United Kingdom. And now let them turn to Eng-
land. Here from an early period, unhappily to the latest
period, to that very hour, the greatest differences had
arisen on the subject of religion, and every class of the
community had been bitterly divided on the subject of
their religious faith. In that difference of opinion on
religious matters had consisted the real difficulty
of legislating on the subject of education. The
State had encountered violent and uncalled-for
interference both from the members of the Church and
the supporters of different religious persuasions. Now he
felt bound to say that in his own person he had some
experience with reference to the attempts of Ministers
of the Crown to interfere on this subject,—(Hear, hear,
and laughter,)—and he had never been enabled to do as
much for education as his zeal would have led him to do.
But he had done this at all events; he had navigated the
channel, he had sounded all the depths, and he had
marked the rocks and the shoals which were to be
avoided by future Governments.—(llear, hear.) If he
had done no more, he had at least done this ; he had
shown the Government that succeeded, that which they
ought to avoid if they wished to bring forward a measure
calculated to extend the education of the people. He
thought then, that it was indispensably necessary that
the course which had been hitherto pursued
should not be persevered in, namely, that an
annual vote should be taken, and that from time
to time rules and regulations should be determined
upon in the deliberations of that House. New, he did
not think it altogether superfluous to point out hew
occasional assistance ought to be administered with
caution, by the State for the education of the people.
Under the Government of Lord Grey, a small sum %as
asked for the aid of building school-houses. That
small sum was, he believed, 20,000/, or 30,0001., to be
disposed of under the inspection of the Government;
but by other, and after regulations, the distribution of
that sum was placed at the disposal of the Committee
of Privy Council. Of course, under the circumstances,
to which he had adverted, the difference of opinion in
matters of religion rendered it exceedingly difficult to
give any aid for the purposes of religious and secular
education; and, therefore, it was limited to the mere
external fabric of the schools. Grants were subse•
quently made to two institutions, the one the National
Society, immediately connected with the Established
Church, and the other, the British and Foreign Society,
which had the confidence of a large portion of the Dis-
senting bodies. Until a recent period, in the year 1839,
no resistance was given, except for the single pur-
pose of building schools, and a further restriction
was observed that the schools to be built must be con-
nected with one or other of those societies. The first
relaxation of that rule took place when Lord Melbourne
was at the head of the Government, but the order` of
Council of 1839 :Jill maintained, as an indispensable con-
dition that these schools should be connected with one
or other of these two societies. The rule was also
maintained that the assistance of Government should
only be given for the building of the fabric, except in
special cases; these special cases were to be connected
with one or other of these two societies. He was not
aware that the Government of Lord Melbourne ever en.
tertained any more than two or three of these special
eases, and they took care that in these cases the
requirements should be rigorously executed. He
thought that the first time assistence was given,
to the amount of 50004, for 1842, to two normal
schools in connexion with the two societies,
In the year 1843 an annual vote of 1,0001. per annum to
the National School, and 750/, to the British and Fo.
reign Schools, was substituted in lieu of occasional
grants, and arnual contributions were also given in aid
of the Normal Schools of Scotland. After this depar-
ture from the original rules, applications were pressed
upon the Committee for annual contributions in aid of
maintenance of the members connected with those
Schools. When these ewes were to be considered, he
felt it his duty to state to the House, that these cases
would be sure to be interrupted, and they would be in-
volved in such a discos-ion as they were now engaged
in ; and they would find it necessary altogether to
desist from allowing these grants. If it could be
shown that the means of education were deficient,
and that Parliament determined to give grants to one
denomination, then he showed that on the same prin-
ciple they were bound to extend that provision to all
persuasions.—(blear, hear.) A time had now, however,
come when they felt it necessary that some assistance
should be afforded to the Dissenting bodies in the cause
of education, and he was greatly rej:deed that they
should, at last, be allowed to receive that assistance
which they so well merited by their exertions. But he
was bound to say that if they admitted the principle,
that assistance should be given to the Dissenting body,
the Roman Catholics should also be allowed to parti-
cipvte in the benefit. The only ground of
exclusion which was alleged, was, that they
did not use the authorised version of the
Scriptures ; but what was the authorised ver.ion of the
Roman Catholics It was the bible from which Bossett
and Fent lon drew the texts from which they preached,
and from which Pascal drew his immortal thoughts.
Would it be told them that this version was to be the
sole barrier against the admission of Roman Cath lies
to the benefits which the State had provided ? Surely
Protestant zeal would not go so far as that. The Hon.
Member for Southwark had referred to Mr. Landell,
he (Sir T. Graham) had long had the honour j
of an intimate acquaintance with that gentle-
man, and he assured the House that his

every word "night be depended on implicitly:
He was of opinion that an effort should bo made by
the I;overntnent in order to ascertain whether terms could
not be agreed on by which the Roman Catholics might
be enabled to come in for some share of the benefits of
Government assistance.—(Hear, hear.) He was bound
to say that he could see something like expediency in
not doing so on the present occasion, but he did not see
any justice in doing so. (Cheers.) The present
vote was not a vote of 100,000/. only, it was in addition
to the sum authorised to be expended under the-new
minutes. By this vote, which might cause an outlay--
which he for one did not grudge—of not less than
I,ooo,oool.—some persons had set it down at 2,000,0001.
—now, lout ,of all this sum the Catholics would
not receive one shilling, and the whole subject
was to be put off to an indefinite period, when the con-
sideration of the question would be brought forward by
itself, and, he must say, invidiously.—(Cheers.) He
thought that the proper time to do justice to his Roman
Catholic fellow subjects was the present moment.
He should not vote on the present occasion with the
Hon. Member for Finsbury, because he thought that-the
course taken by Government was justifiable and prudent
with this single exception, however, that they ought to
have allowed the Roman Catholics to participate in the
vote.—(Hear, hoar.) He thought it was infinitely better
to proceed by order in Council in the present state of
feeling in this country, than to attempt by Act of Parlia-
ment to establish any uniform system which would not
be in accoulaY,ce with the general wishes of the p• ople.
The good, however, that might arise from the course pur-
sued by the Government, he would not purchase at the

exptise of what he thought was due to his Roman Ca-
tholic fellow subjects.—(: fear, hear.) He must, there•
fore repeat that he entirely approved of the Government
measure, with the single exception he had named, and
he really thought it would be averse to all religious li-
berty and religious toleration if his Roman Catholic fel-
low subjecta were to be excluded from participating in
this plan.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—Sir, I own after three
nights' debate, I rise very considerably relieved of any
apprehension I might have entertained with respect to
the course the discussion might have taken. The great
objection stated to the front of this measure

w, that the Sts:te ought not to interfere with
theas education of the people, and the various
petitions presented to this House on the subject, or at
least the greater part of them were declared to be against
that princi-
while the 500 delegates assembled from
various Nrcd of the country declared that experience
has convinced themthat a rule ought to be laid down
that 02., Btooshoujci apt ulterior. witu the ecluo4tion of