The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-22 00:00:00

t; sal reading, If the Protestant youths did not receive
n -.ruction in the Bib's:, it must be the fault of the Pro-
testant clergy.—(Hear, hear.) The effect of passing the
motion would be to revive the embers of religious strife,
which were now dying out. Spmething had been said about
the excellence of the Kildare-Place Society system of educa-
tion. He happened to know that the most extraordinary
means had been used to induce parents to,aend their chil-
dren to what were called the Kildare-place Schools. Pa-
rents had received as a consideration 51. down, ss. a week,
anal a leg of mutton every Friday.—(Laughter.) If there
were one thing which had done more than another to improve
the state of Ireland it was the mixed system of education
introduded by Lord Stanley, founded as it was on the great
principle of Protestanism, the right of private judgment.
In connexion with that point he would ask the Hon. Member
for the University of Dublin, whether it was true that he
was a subscriber to, and director of, a hospital in Dublin
the managers of which refused to admit a Roman Catholic,
even if brought there in extremis, unless he would consent
to hear the Scriptures read?—(Hear, hear.) On the subject
of the national system of education most extraordinary state-
ments had been made at different periods. There were cer-
tain dignitaries of the Church who, to use the words of Mr.
Burke, never manifested any particular zeal for religion
except when they desired to wound the feelings of their
opponents. The Bishop of Cashel, for example, had stated at
the Rotunda at Liverpool—and he had repeated the state-
ment at the Hanover-square Rooms in April last—that at
the last special commission for Limerick, six men were con-
victed who had been educated in the national schools.
He had also stated that at the special commission at
Clonmel eleven were convicted who were young, the greater
proportion of whom, he said, were probably taught in the
national schools—(Hear, hear)—and singularly enough, he
added, that eighteen were convicte 1, eleven of whom were
educated under the national system. Considering the state-
ment with respect to Clonmel very extraordinary, he (Mr.
B. Osborne) had been at the trouble of making some inqui-
ries in the neighbourhood ; and he would now state the re-
sult. It appeared that in the gaol of Clonmel, no account
was kept of the schools in which the prisoners had been edu-
cated, and from the inquiries which he made, he had found
that so far from its being true that eleven of the prisoners
convicted had been educated in the national schools, only
one of them had ever been in a school, and that one
only for about ten days.—(Hear, hear.) The exemplary
Bishop who had made this statement had the presentation
to thirty-four very large livings in his diocese, while
the Crown had the patronage of only three, one
of the number being a mere curacy. Such being
the case, the Bishop had not promoted a single clergyman
who was friendly to the national system, though there were
many exemplary men in his diocese; yet he did not scruple
to complain that the Crown did not present the opponents of
that system to the livings in its gift. The Bishop had, in-
deed, appointed Mr. Dalton, the secretary of the Protestant
Association of Exeter Hall, who had never received a colle-
giate education, to a living which was founded for the en-
couragement of such education.—(Hear, hear.) That pre.-
late, however, did not stand alone. In the diocese of Fearns,
where there were forty-four livings in the presentation of the
bishop, not a single Mend to the national system of educa-
tion had been collated to a living. If, as was stated by the
Hon. Member for the University of Dublin, there was no
such thing as scriptural education in Ireland, it was the
fault of those who entertained the opinions of the Hon. Gen-
tleman and his colleague. He called upon the House not to
listen to the suggestion of the Hon. Member, or to sanc-
tion a course of proceeding which originated with a miserable
faction.
Mr. NAPIER traced the progress of education in Ireland
from the union to 1831, when the national system was esta-
bli-hed, at which period there were, he said, 30,000 Roman
Catholics attending the schools in which the Scriptures were
read, and which the Roman Catholic clergy were then stre-
nuously opposing. He contended that the system had been
founded on the principle of concession to the Roman Catho-
lic clergy, and of objection to the Protestant Church,
thus giving a preference which was not conformable to the
established religion of the State. So that by the introduction
of the National Board of Education, they raised up two sys-
tems and two sets of men antagonistically and conscientiously
opposed the one to the other. That being so, he must say
he considered it most unfair to refuse to those Protestant
clergy who were conscientiously opposed to the national
system. any aid out of the public funds. It was no answer
on the part of the Government to say :they would grant
that aid to those who assisted the national system, because
that would be asking the men to violate their consciences,
ann to act in opposition to their firm belief in the right of pri-
vate judgment as applied to the word of God. One of the
best remedial measures for Ireland was to extend the advan-
tages of education in that part of her Majesty's dominions;
and with that view he supported the proposition of his Hon.
Colleague.—(Hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said—Sir, if I do not enter at
length on the present occasion Into this question, the House
will readily conceive the reason why I decline to do so. This
is a system which, as the Hon. and Learned Gentleman has
truly stated, was established by Lord Stanley in 1832, and
it has since that time received the support of successive
Governments. Having been established by Lord Stanley,
it was continued by the Administration of Sir Robert Peel,
who refused to make any alteration in respect to this
grant, and it has gone on to the present time increasing
in the number of its schools and in the number
of its scholars. There were at first about 1,000 schools,
and 100,000 scholars; there are now about 4,000 schools,
and 400,000 scholars.—(Cheers.) It is, therefore, I think,
not to be considered, as some Honourable Gentlemen who
have spoken to-night would appear desirous of considering
it, as an entirely new question, now brought forward for
the first time by the Government; but it is a system which,
having been proposed by Lord Stanley, at first as an experi-
ment, has been found even more successful than could have
been expected, has extended itself very much in Ireland, and
has been of very great use in that country.—(Hear, hear,
and cheers.) It is in these circumstances, therefore, that I
say that we have very sufficient grounds for resisting any
modification or alteration of that system.—(Cheers.) The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Napier) stated that be-
fore the plan of Lord Stanley existed, the Kildare-place
Society was in operation, which proceeded upon the prin-
ciple of introducing the Bible as a school-book without notes
or comments. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman stated
truly that I am one of those who in this country approve of
such a system, and that I belong to a society which takes
that broad rule as its guide. I concur entirely in that prin-
ciple. I think in a Protestant country, where a great ma-
jority of the people are Protestants, it is of the greatest bene-
fit to be able to enact that the Bible should be used as a
school-book. But this system has been opposed by a ma-
jority of the clergymen of the Church of England, on the
ground that it is quite necessary to add the catechism and
liturgy of the Church ; and yet, however the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman and the Church Educational Society may approve
of it in Ireland, it is entirely opposed to the views of the
great majority of the Church of England. But this plan,
which is opposed by the majority of the clergymen, on ac-
oount of the exclusion of the catechism and liturgy, would,
if their wishes were acceded to, exclude the Protestant Dis-
senters of this country. This is the plan which lam in fa-
vour of in this country, but the adoption of which in Ire-
land would exclude the great proportion of Roman Catholics
in that country.—(Hear, hear.) lam in principle for that
plan which in practice is most successful—(Cheers)—for the
hest education which can be given to the greatest number.—
(Loud cheers.) Whatever system is moat likely to extend
education, that system I shall certainly adopt. If I find
that such a system cannot be adopted owing to the difle-
rences of religion, I do not think that a system which,
though less good in itself, may open its doors to numbers
who would be excluded from the benefits of education under
the other system, is the system we should adopt.—(Hear,
hear.) That is the principle on which we should act in
endeavouring to promote education in Ireland.—(Cheers.)
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman who has just spoken,
as well as the Honourable Gentleman who brought forward
this motion, have talked much of the violation of conscience
which is the consequence of the system that is introduced in
Ireland. Now let us consider what that system is. The
Roman Catholic clergymen say that, according to the rules
and discipline of the Church of Rome, they cannot approve
of the Bible being made a school-book. I need not enter
into the peculiar grounds which cause that decision, as every
one knows that they are closely connected with the rules
and discipline of that Church. But that being the case,
the principle on which Lord Stanley founded his plan
was this :—That where it should be desired by the patron
of the school to introduce the Bible, it should not be
competent for him to introduce it as a school-book dur-
ing the heirs in which school instruction was given to
the children of Roman Catholics. In one of the reports
presented to the House, it was expressly regulated that
during the hours of religious instruction no child should
be compelled to be present if it was objected to by its
parents. That is, in two words, the principle on which
those schools are conducted, and I beg to ask how that can
bats violation of conscience, where the children are offered
only the means of such religious instruction as their parents
approve, and that the Catholics are separated from the
Protestant children? The Honourable and Learned Gentle-
man says it is a violation of conscience to the clergymen of
the Established Church of England and to many Protestant
parents, that such latitude should be allowed. Is it not the
same violation of conscience which renders it obligatory on a
parent to send a child to receive religiOus instruction he dis-
approves, or else to deprive' it of instruction altogether?—
(Hear, hear, and cheers.) I may be permitted very shortly
to illustrate that doctrine. The Protestants of France,
under Louis XIV., said that it was a violation of
conscience to prohibit them from attending Divine worship
according to their own tenets, and from receiving religious
instruction according to their own proper belief. On
laying their complaints before the King, Louis XIV.
said that it was a violation of his conscience to permit any
one Protestant to reside or to hold property within the
boundaries of France, and he accordingly deprived them of
all their property and banished them into foreign countries
upon the ground that it was a violation to his con-
science.—(Cheers.) And ao the word violation of con-
science may be used thus or in a totally different sense.
The Romat Catholic says, "It is a violation of my con-
science to oblige my child to receive religious instruction of
which the Roman Catholic Church disapproves." That is a
very intelligent proposition ! But when the Protestant
clergyman, says,." It is a violation of my conscience to pro-
mote education, unless I can compel Roman Catholic
children to receive religious instruction according to the
forms of the Church of England," the word " violation" of
conscience becomes so vague and unimportant that I for one
cannot attach any meaning at all to it.—(Loud cheers.) It
is for this reason, therefore, I cannot allow that the Pro-
testants of the Established Church have a right to object
to that system.—(Hear, hear.) They certainly have a
right to say, that despairing of the schools upon a
t foundation, they will not promote the educa-
tion of any
children who may belong to another com-
munion. They may withdraw their support, and may
promote the success of other schools more favourable to
. mr,
their views. lam glad to see that so eminent a clergyman
as the Rev.
this subject.---(HeaWoodward has changed his opinion upon
thre,y will not
It is perfectly competent for
them to say that
object to it. What I dn oo t
object
td t
o theseis
should
can-
notomtschahr they
oppose a grant of public
money for the purpose of aiding and
assisting the cause of
leducation at these schools—which acts
effectually, most effectua
s(—Hueapon no other grounds than a
violation of conscience.—
must here take notice of one hr,er hear, and cheering.) I
other
and Learned Member (air. s,ra. point to which the lion.
that not only is the Bible excluder) referred. He stated
the scriptural extracts which were as a school-book, but that
r
gene-
rally acknowledged to be extremelyriade in 1832, and
in use. The reason of that is that so
olng useful, are no longer
used as a school-book, we used to heo chargedas they were
Protestant clergy with allowing the useor by the
th Bible
inutilatect.—(Hear, hear.) To relieve that objection,
tm
Commissioners decided that they would no longerenul- enforce
the use of the Scripture extracts. And now, thoughrc
these Scripture extracts were dismissed from use,
in compliance with the complaints of the clergymen belong-
ing to the Church of England, we are made amenable to the
charge of having deprived the children of both denomina-
tions of all religions instruction. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman has discussed the question very fairly, but he
hardly considered the consequences of the concession made
to the objections of the Right Rev. Prelate, and other cler-
gymen
who objected to the resolution. B
that we ought not to support a grant of public it
is
it is
unless
it include a portion for the use of the Church of England.
Now that is very plausible, particularly If it could be adopted