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

the people, or rather, I believe that the State ought not
to educate the people. Well, Sir, what do I find when
this measure comes under consideration ? When I in-
vited the attention of the House simply to discuss Me
subject, I find the Hon. Gentleman who moved the
amendment, who was considered to be the Congrega-
tionalists, the Baptists, the Dissenters, and Anabaptists,
has not in any part of his speech declared in favour of
this principle, nor has he in any part of his speech de-
fended the grounds urged against the state's educating
the people. I really thought that before he
spoke I was to suffer under the same sort of
indictment which the clerk of Chatham undergoes
when he is brought before Jack Cade:—" Here is a
fellow whom we have found who can read and write."
Oh, the monster, we found him settingcopies to a boy.
Oh, the villain."—tHear,
hear.) I really thought some
such charge as that would have been made against us,
but after three nights' debate, with the exception of the
Hon. Member for Durham, every Hon. Member who
has addressed the House has spoken in favour of educa-
tion by the State. The resolution sets forth that it is
contrary to the duty of Parliament to provide State
education—that this measure is calculated to increase
the powers of the Crown—that it would undermine
the constitutional functions of Parliament, and interfere
with the religious rights of large masses of the people.
Looking at the first part of that resolution, I can form
no other opinion than it was intended to constitute a
censure upon us who have introduced this measure. Yet
some of those who mean to vote for the resolution, say
they do so only, not because they wished to throw any
blame upon the Government, but because they were
anxious for inquiry. The Hon. Member for Durham
has, however, declared himself strongly against the in-
terference of the House with the education of the people,
and he declar« d at the end of his speech, in rather
curi-
ons words, that certain consequences might follow
the adoption of this resolution, to the House. That
is the Hore:urisble Gentleman's opinion,
be argued it, as
indeed he always does, with great force and pwer ; but
I. must protest against one psrt of hia speech. The
Hon. Gentleman said that with regard to the Church

schools we admitted an inspector, who was a clergyman,
who inquired into the religious sects and the religious
instruction of the pupils; that he had heard we intended
to make the same inquiries with regard to Dissenting
schools ; but he was convinced no Government dared
interfere in that manner with Dissenting schools. Now
what has there been in our conduct to induce him to
make the imputation against us ? Have I not always
taken my part along with others in bringing to an end
the religious disabilities which fall upon different sects.
The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts we pro-
posed and succeeded in carrying against the Govern-
ment, and we did the same when in Government with
regard to many Acts which conferred heavy disabilities
upon Dissenters. I think certain sects were obliged to have
their marriage solemnised in the Established Church,
but they objected to the terms used in the Church ser-
vice, which was a hardship upon their consciences, and
was carried through both Houses of Parliament, a mea-
sure by which they were freed from such obligations,
and they were allowed to conduct their marriages
according to the obligations which they could conscien-
tiously undertake. What right, then, has the Hon..
Member for Durham to impute to us a wish to interfere
with their religious feelings ?—(Hear, hear.) There
was, however, another ground of opposition which was
taken with respect to this measure—taken here, and
taken also at the meetings held in the country. It was
said at these meetings that the Government are pre-
pared to go so far that all distinction between truth and
falsehood would be lost, and it was in point of fact repre-
ser.ted that their principles were latitudinarian. Sir.
that objection was taken to this measure, and it was evi-
dent at the time that there was preparing a very great
opposition to this measure on the part of the Dissenters,
because it was understood that it would not
embrace Roman Catholic schools. In their re-
solutions these opponents stated that they con-
sidered it a great hardship and a great injustice,
that Roman Catholic schools could now come within
the terms of the present minutes. This was a strong
opposition coming from parties who opposed the May-
nooth grant. I find amongst those who voted against
that measure the name of the Hon. Member for Dur-
ham, and I cannot understand how the Hon. Gentleman
can complain of an omission now which a short time ago
he would have considered a grievous error.—(Hear,
hear.) But, Sir, I come now to the statement of the
Hon. Baronet the Member for Suffolk. The Right
Hon. Baronet who last spoke entered into some further
explanation of our conduct with regard to this matter.
The Hon. Baronet the Member for Suffolk has gone
much into detail upon this subject, but he omitted
several important passages when he read from the
correspondence which took place with the Secretary of
the Wesleyans. I must state that that correspondence
nas unsought by the Government, but was brought
about by Lord Ashley. (The Noble Lord then pro-
ceeded to read a passage from the correspondence, in
which it was stated that the Council intended to take
into consideration a minute for making grants to Roman
Catholic schools, which would be brought forward in
Parliament after the public had had sufficient time to
examine its bearings.) Now, I say, continued the Noble
Lord, that passage entirely frees us from the charge that
we have been endeavouring to deceive the Wesleyans, by
inducing them to believe that we had no idea of making
grants to Roman Catholic schools. I think this passage
entirely puts an end to the charge of the Hon. Member
opposite, that for the sake of pleasing the Wesleyans the
Roman Catholic body was to be overthrown. Now.
Sir, the observations of the Right Hon. Baronet who last
addressed the House makes it necessary for me to recall,
for some minutes. to the recollection of the House the
occurrence of 15:39. We proposed et the commencement
of that year that there should be a model school, and
with regard to Roman Catholic schools it was provided
by the minute of the committee of conned that the Decay
version of the Bible ini.:ht be introduced for their use.
That part of the proposition excited great apprehension
and alarm, and a strong opposition was got up through-
out the country against it. Feeling that a very general
resistance would be made to the Fran, it was the opinion
of the Government that the only course left them was
the one pursued att_rwards by the Right Hon. Baronet
opposite., namely, to withdraw the measure, seeing and
feeling, as they did, that it was not likely to meet
the approbation of the population of this country.
Other minutes were then proposed, to which great ob-
jections were also made ; and the principal of these
objections was, that the Government had not entirely
given up the notion of, at some time or other, reviving
those former minutes authorising the use of the Douay
version in the schools, and, so far as I can remember,
there was no person more strong in his opposition than
the Right lieu. Baronet the Member for Dorsetshire (Sir
J. Graham). Upon that occasion the measure was car-
ried by a majority of only two. The large minority
upon that occasion, it was supposed, did in a great de-
gree, represent the opinion of the country. A large
portion of them were possessed of a dread of seeing the
Roman Catholic schools established under such cosditions.
The impression upon my mind was, that however ami-
able it might be to extend aid to the Roman Catholic
schools, that for some years to come we should have
to make cur choice between aiding all the other schools

belonging to the church and to protestant dissenters,
and not aiding the Roman Catholic schools, or of giving
up all hope of assisting education altogether.—(Hear.)
My conclusion, and the conclusion of those with whom I
acted, was that the better way was to go on giving what
aid we could, by the adoption of which course great
benefits might be produced, although we could not
, say that we were satisfied with the terms with respect to
the Raman Catholics.—(Laughter.) That which excluded
the Roman Catholic schools was. that they were to de-
rive aid in connexion with the schools of the National
Society, or those of the British and Foreign School
Society. It was that regulation which shut out the Ro-
man Catholics in the years 1839, 1840, and 1841, during
which time the Whigs were in office ; and it also shut
theta out from the years 1841 to 1846, in which period
the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) was a member
of the Government. If, then, the Right Hon. Baronet
was of the same opinions then as he is now, that would
have been the time to have impressed his opinions upon
the minds of his colleagues.—(Cheers.) I think, sir,
that the Right Honourable Baronet had the ca-
meo which. we thought a valid one the ex-
cuse which we had in the years 1839, 1840, and 1841
—that the opinion of the country was so strong upon
those points that the whole aid to education would be
endangered by bringing in the subject of the Roman
Catholic schools. lam happy to hear the night Hon.
Baronet say, with respect to the authorised version, that
the Vulgate used by Pascal and Fenelon was good
enough to be recommended by the Committee of Council.
I do-not know exactly w hat version was used by Pascal
and Fenelon, but the Right Hon. Baronet must be aware
that iu E,,glish schools the Vulgate would be of little
service.—(Laughter.) Was it desirable that the Govern-
ment should how add that element of conflict to that
which they had already had to endure ? Had the
Government revived the pr.-position of 1839 in favour
of the Roman Catholic schools we should have
been unable to carry the vote w bieh wpeiteno:f
propose.—(Hear, hear.) a
_that, in s
the great liberality shown the debate.—(Hear, hear.)
A remarkable instance of the unwillingness of the
House to give further aid to the Roman Catholics
took place but a few days ago. A Bill was introduced
by my Friend the Member for Kinsale (Mr.
Watson) relieving the Roman Catholics from the
penalties to which it appears to me so obvious that they
should not be subjected to, that I do not know any Hon.
Member can make a decent argument against the
• measure.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Tamworth (Sir 11. Peel) and the Noble
Lord the Member for Lynn (Lord G. Bentinck) and the
whole of the Members of the Government, voted in
favour of going into Committee
on the Bill,
and notwithstanding this the second reading of the
Bill was only carried by a majority of 3, and upon the
next stage of the Bill it was defeat( d by a majority of
38. If the Government professed that the rule made in
1819 should not be altered in 1846, if we have not time
to deliberate upon future minutes to be made, it is not
to be said that we have, especially upon this occasion,
excluded the Roman Catholics from this grant. My
opinion is that we should have failed if we had attempted
it now; but it is possible that we may be able to frame
minutes, by the terms of which, when Parliament is next
asked to grant, and to those schools, Roman Catholics
may be included with others, and where there is a poor
population, may also have the benefit of this grant,—
(Hear, hear.) The Government has not con-
cealed their opinions upon the subject, we say
we will not force Parliament to come to an immediate
decision upon the subject, but we do take a favourable
view of the education of the Roman Catholic children.
I do not agree with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir J.
Graham), unit there is a reason why the Catholics
should be included in the present vote. I think it far
more likely to succeed if they were included in the
next vote, or in another vote upon the subject. And I
think the House and the country will agree with the
terms upon which such grants will be made. I did not,
Sir, expect that this would have been made a subject of
the present 'debate; I thought that the rule which had