The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-29 00:00:00

THE WAR DEPARTMENT.

Viscount BARRINGTON asked the Secretary of State for
War if there was any truth in the report which had been
circulated that, by a recent order in Council, changes
had taken place in the relations between his Royal
Highness the Field Marshal Commanding in Chief and
the War Department.
Mr. CARDWELL answered that an order in Council,
defining the duties of the Commander in Chief, had
received the sanction of her Majesty, and had been laid
before Parliament. The intention of that order was to
define in the clearest terms, and by the highest authority,
the position of that officer, and he believed that it would
be found that the terms were in entire conformity with
the declarations which he had always made in the House
upon the subject, and in making these declarations he
had always had the entire concurrence of His Royal
Highness.
ALLEGED FRAUD ON THE ADMIRALTY.
Sir JAMES ELPHINSTONE asked the Secretary to the
Admiralty if there was any truth in the report now cur-
rent, that a sum of money, stated to amount to £2,000,
had been paid as compensation under a late Act to a per-
son who had been previously discharged from the service
for misconduct ; and if so, whether he would state the
date and cause of said clerk's dismissal, and the date and
amount of payment of the commutation referred to.
Mr. W. E. BAXTER regretted to say that, in conse-
quence of a mistake, a person who had been discharged
from the service in October 1861, by the Duke of Somer-
set, received, on the 13th of June, 1870, the sum of no

less than £2,233 9s. as commutation of a supposed pen-
sion. The Treasury and the Admiralty had instituted a
thorough investigation into the circumstances and facts
connected with this extraordinary case.
THE EDUCATION BILL.
The Elementary Education Bill was again the first of
the orders of the day, and immediately after questioning
time, the House went into committee on the measure,
resuming the discussion on clause 7. The attendance of
hon. members was at the beginning of the discussion very
small, and the treasury bench was only occupied by Mr.
Cardwell, Mr. Forster; the Vice President of the Council,
and Mr. Glyn. Mr. Gladstone made his
appearance about half-past two, just as Lord
Robert Montagu was endeavouring to persuade
the committee to adopt an amendment which
stood in his name, that the Revised Code should be put
in the schedule of the bill. There was, however, a
formidable little knot of the irreconcileables below the
gangway. The member for Huntingdonshire contended
that they were asked to pass a clause without know-
ing what the new code next April might be, although
it was certain that the new code might utterly alter the
character of the bill. He thought the committee were
being hoodwinked and asked to legislate in the dark. His
object was to give security to the promoters of voluntary
schools. The noble lord stated that an acquiescence to
his proposal would prevent agitation, and he alluded to
divisions in the Liberal party. As the noble lord resumed
Mr. Vernon Harcourt rose, but he had to give way to
Mr. Gladstone, who, with a mixture of sarcasm and
humour, said the humanity of the noble lord to the
Liberal party deserved immediate acknowledg-
ment. He compassionated the schismatic state
in which he found the Liberal party. " But,
added the Premier, " probable his lordship derived his
inspiration from what had occurred in another place a few
nights ago, and had obtained a lively sense of schism in a
party." The Premier was loudly applauded on making this
" palpable hit." Mr. Gladstone went on to state that
the demand of the noble lord would, if acceded
to, be fatal to the bill on account of the ob-
stacle of time and other impediments. His lordship
asked them to give certainty with regard to the aid to be
given to voluntary schools equal to the certainty which
the bill gave in regard to the rate supported schools. It
was simply impossible, remarked the Premier, by any
process except one, and that was not only to set out in
the bill the whole conditions upon which it was to
be administered, but to likewise provide that
the sum and disbursements necessary for the purpose of
affording the aid should be charged upon the Consolidated
Fund, and surely his lordship did not intend that should be
the case. In the course of the debate Lord Henley, whilst
he hoped that the amendment would not be pressed to a
division, expressed an opinion that they ought to have
had something definite in relation to the subject laid
down. Mr. Fisher opposed the proposition. His first
objection was that it was an inconvenience
to have any code in any Education Bill,
and it could not be supposed that they had yet
obtained the best means of promoting and stimulating
education. He said it was impossible to extemporise a
code for the session which should prove a permanent re-
vised code.—The leader of the Opposition hoped his noble
friend would hesitate to press his amendment. Unlike
those who had preceded him on his side of the committee,
the right hon. gentleman did not think that
on the whole they could receive a more satis-
factory assurance from the Government than they
had already received. "It must necessarily," he ex-
claimed, " I think be in the nature of the Bill before
us a moral assurance." This generous admission was
properly appreciated, and the Liberals were pretty loud
in ther expressions of satisfaction at the course which he
had adopted. Of course, after such a statement from his
leader, Lord R. Montagu intimated that he would
not persevere in pressing his amendment which
was negatived in the usual way. Dr. Brewer
moved an amendment that the master or mistress of every
rate-supported school should keep a register of every
admission or dismissal, and that the register should in-
dicate the degree and proficiency attained by the scholar.
Contrary to custom, the hon. member for Colchester made
a very short speech. Probably the experience he has
latterly gained has awakened him to a sense of the
folly of occupying the attention of the House for an inordi-
nate time on uninteresting subjects. The proposition was
opposed by Mr. Forster and withdrawn.

Mr. VERNON HARCOURT moved an amendment raising
the principle, which he asked the committe to affirm, that
in every public elementary school in this country the
parents of the children should have some voice in the
management of that school. He wished to avoid, he said-
that most odious contrast between the supremacy
given to influence and wealth, and the com-
parative powerlessness of poverty. He said that
by the bill they were going to sell the birthright
of the parent in the education of the child " for a miser-
able mess of voluntary pottage." The hon. member pro-
duced considerable merriment by this expression, although
the Treasury bench was grave enough, and evidently
unable to see either the force or the fun of it.

Mr. FORSTER opposed the amendment, remarking that
the hon. member was mistaken in supposing that the
parents were unrepresented or had no voice in the manage-
ment. Almost all the school deeds which the Education
Department required to see before giving a building grant,
pre-supposed an election of managers, which was generally
brought so low as to make it quite possible for the
parents to have a share in the management.
Colonel BARTTELOT complained of the course adopted
by members below the gangway, especially referring
to the hon. members for Birmingham and Oxford. He
accused them of "producing cases which were never likely
to occur, and which with very rare exceptions, never did
occur." He did not hesitate to say that the religious diffi-
culty would never have been heard of had it not been
put into the mouths of people. He thought it was
simply mischievous to persuade the poor people that
they had a right to have a share in the management
of the schools.

Mr. COWPER TEMPLE disagreed with the hon. mem-
ber for West Sussex as to the latter observation.
He could not, however, vote for the amendment,
although he agreed generally with the object in view.
Mr. WINTERBOTHAM thought the Vice-President did
not fairly apprehend the purport of the amendment. It
was simply that those who were to use and to pay for the
schools should have some share in the management. It
might be true that the parents might not be fit to sit on
the school board, but they were fit to elect it. At any
rate, added the hon. member for Stroud, they
were fit to choose members for that House.
Mr. A. Herbert thought the country would be
of opinion that it was monstrous that the parents
who contributed so much to the school should have no
voice m the management, and that those who contributed
so little should have the entire control.—Lord R. Montagu
asked the member for Oxford if he knew who the parents
were. They consisted, he said, of labourers, game
watchers, and those who could not read and write ;
and if the school were to be well con-
ducted. they would require a more intelligent
Board. Sir Robert Anstruther contended that the
terms of the amendment had been persistently misrepre-
sented, and whilst he gave credit to the noble lord who
had just sat down for his zeal in the cause of education,
he thought it would be much better to give those poor
"hedgers and ditchers" an interest in the welfare of their
children.

At five o'clock Mr. GLADSTONE in a full committee re-
plied to the speeches in favour of the pro-
position. He said that one sixth of the amount
required for the support of the schools by the managers
was the proportion to which it might be possible for them
by fortunate circumstances and wise management to reduce
their pecuniary liabilities. But they were the persons to
undertake every liability, who were to provide the building,
and who were responsible for all mischances. One-sixth,
in fact, was the minimum of that which was demanded
from them according to the views of the Government, and
of the bill, but that one-sixth might extend
indefinitely. They were dealing, as they were told, with
voluntary schools. and he wanted to know whether the
whole idea of voluntary schools could be so handled as to
admit of the compulsory application of Parliamentary
machinery devised by the Executive Government, under
the authority of Parliament, for regulating their
government. The hon. member for Oxford
ought to try to attempt to attain his object by a care-
fully constructed and developed bill. The proposition in-
volved the construction for each school in the country
of a complete representative electoral system.—Mr. Har-
court, in, eplying, remarked that some of the observations
made on the other side of the committee were very dan-
gerous. He' alluded to the alleged unfitness of the
parents, and inquired " are they not of our flesh and
blood too ?" The inquiry was received with some applause
from those of his own way of thinking. The committee

divided, and the amendment was lost by 329 votes to 81,
and the clause was agreed to.
Some discussion followed on a further amendment, pro-
posed by Mr. Harcourt, that they should not take into
consideration any school other than a public elemenary
school which should not conform in all, respects to the
regulations provided in respect of public elementary
schools.—Mr. G. Hardy said it was the most extraor-
dinary proposition he had ever beard in his life. They
might have a perfectly efficient school, and yet it was not
to be taken into consideration. The ratepayers would be
compelled to build a rate-aided school to knock it down.—
Sir Ronndell Palmer suggested that even when they had
done that, the children would not attend the new school.
—The Vice-President thought it would be hardly reason-
able to force a rate upon a "supplied district," and to
force a school upon parents who were already satisfied.
The amendment was withdrawn. The question as to
what was considered sufficient accommodation was raised
by the member for Brighton. He thought it might
happen that with " permissive compulsion" they
might have an enormous amount of accom-
modation which would not be required.—Mr.
Forster thought Mr. Fawcett could hardly have been
unaware of the fact that the inspector would have to con-
sider what children did attend, and how many might
attend school.—The Vice-President of the Council
remarked that compulsion was necessary to obtain a suf-
ficient school accommodation for all the children of the
country; and one of the chief reasons, he said, why they
adopted " permissive compulsion " was, it would prevent
a district saying it was unfair to rate them for children
who did not attend. The eighth clause, after some further
discussion, was adopted. In Clause 9 Mr. Harcourt
moved the omission of the words from the tenth
line relative to the power of the ratepayers to appeal to
the Education Department should they feel aggrieved
against a declaration of deficiency of school accommoda-
tion, and to ask for a public inquiry.—The amendment
was objected to and ultimately withdrawn.—The Chair-
man reported progress, and the House resumed.. The
subject of the year of grace will be discussed when the
consideration of the bill is resumed. At ten minutes to
seven the sitting was suspended.
PARISHIONERS' RIGHTS.

The House reassembled at nine o'clock, but when the
Speaker took the chair there were not more than twenty
members present.—Viscount Sandon moved for leave
to
bring in a bill for the constitution of parochial councils
in all parishes in England and Wales, and to define and
enlarge the powers of parishioners with respect to the
conduct of Divine worship in their parish churches.
With regard to the parishes, he proposed to include all
legally constituted districts with the cure of souls.
A. certain number of parishioners should be elected
annually as sidesmen at the same time, for the same period
and by the same constituency as the churchwardens. He
proposed that these officers should be elected in the
same way as the people's churchwardens in the following
proportion : three for all parishes below 2,000, six for all
parishes below 6,000, and nine for all other larger.parishes.
These sidesmen, with two churchwardens and the incum-
bent, he proposed to form into a council. He proposed
that the council should be obliged to meet twice a year,
and it should have the power within the limits authorised
by the law of making or allowing changes in the accus-
tomed manner and time of conducting the service and
ministrations of the church, &c.
The noble lord r had but an indifferent audience, and
when Mr. Cowper-Temple seconded the motion, the
solemn and pulpit-like tone in which he addressed the
House had but one effect, and that was to make the
members doze. The Premier, the Secretary of State,
and the First Commissioner of Works had
their eyes shut, although their ears might have
been open, whilst Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen evidently
had the greatest diffioulty in keeping up an appearance of
attentiveness. The succeeding speakers did but add to
the soporific influence, and it was only at the conclusion
of the speech of Mr. Beresford-Hope, who did not favour
the proposed bill, that something like animation was
visihle. Dr. Ball, the member for the Dublin
University, succeeded in arousing the house to
something like lively attention. When Mr.
Gladstone got up at eleven o'clock not a slug-
gish member was observable. The First Lord
of the Treasury said it would not be possible for anyone
or any Administration to frame at once a measure of that
kind which would be likely to pass. It was certain that
legislation must be in consequence of gradual action and
long deliberation in the public mind. On the part of the
Government he should not oppose the motion.—Leave
was then given to bring in the bill.