The Sun.
London, England, 1870-03-12 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL EDUCATION UNION
AND MR. GLADSTONE.

This afternoon a deputation from the National Educa-
tion Union waited on the Premier, at his official residence,
Downing-street, to represent to him their views on the
Government Education Bill. Their opinions were ex-
pressed in the following resolutions which had been
alopted by the Central Executive Committee :--" (1).
The bill of the Government deserves support, inasmuch as
it aims at supplying the needs of elementary education
without prohibiting religious instruction, without super-
seding parental responsibility, and without extinguishing
the schools which owe their existence to the costly and
persevering labours of the best friends of the education of
the people. (2). It is defective in not adopting that indirect
made of-compulsion which consists inreqineing education as a
condition of the hired employment of children; vhich has
been successfully applied through the Factory Ads, and
has been more recently adopted in the Workshops Regula-
tion Act. 3. Compulsory attendance at suitable schools
may be rightly enforced on vagrant children, and on those
whose parents are receiving parochial relief, or are unable
to pay the school fees." The deputation was very nume-
rously attended, and amonst those present were :
The Right Hon. Lord Harrow'by, Lord Howard of Glos-
sop, Right Hon.- Lord Shaftesbury, Right Hon. W. F.
Cowper-Temple, M.P. (South Hants) ; Lord Robert Mon-
tagu, M.P. (Huntingdonshire) Mr. Charles Buxton,
M.P. (East Surrey) ; Lord Augustus Hervey, M.P.
(West Suffolk) : Mr. Edward Baines, M.P. (Leeds) ;
Colonel Akroyd, M.P. (Halifax) ; Mr. F. C. Smith, M.P.
(North Notts) ; Mr. T. W. Mellor, M.P. (Ashton-under-
Lyne) ; Mr. C. S. Read, M.P. (South Norfolk);
Mr. W. Cunliffe Brooks, M.P. (East Cheshire) ; Hon. A.
Egerton, M.P. (South-East Lancashire) ; Hon. Captain
Egerton, R.N., M.P. (North Derbyshire) ; Mr. James
Sidebottom, M.P. (Staleybridge) ; Sir H. Selwin Ibbet-
son, M.P. (West Essex) •, Mr. Henry Barnett, M.P.
(Woodstock) ; Mr. It. B. Wingfield Baker, UP. (South
Essex) ; Mr. It. P. Amphlett, M.P. (East Worms-
torshire) ; Mr. W. J. Legh. M.P. (East Cheshire);
Mr. It. Assheton, M.P., Clitheroe ; Mr. W. Gray, M.P.
(Bolton) • Mr. H. C. Wise, M.P. (South Warwickshire)
Mr. Hit Birley, M.P. (Manchester) ; Mr. Henry Cecil
Raikes, I. P. (Chester) ; Colonel Marcus Beresford, M.P.
(Southwark) ; Mr. J. Hick, M.P. (Bolton) ; Mr. F. S.
Corrance, MP. (East Suffolk) ; Mr. T. Collins, M.P.
(Boston) ; Bon. Wilbraham Egerton., M.P. (Mid-Cheshire);
Mr. W. H. Smith, M.P. (Westminster); Lord Landon,
M.P. (Liverpool); Mr. A J. Beresford-Hope, M.P. (Cam-
bridge Univereity) ; Mr. J. W. Pease, M.P, (South
Durham) ; Mr. J. S. Hardy, M.P. (Rye) ; Mr. J. Floyer,
M.P. (Dorsetsbire) ; Mr. Robert Dimsdale, M.P. (Hert-
ford) ; Mr. C. Wren Hoskyns, M,P. (Hereford) ; Mr. E.
' Cawley, M.P. (Salford) • Mr. 3. S. Henry, M.P. (South-
East Lancashire) ; Lord G. Cavendish, M.P. (North Der-
byshire) ; Mr. 3G. Talbot, M.P. (West Kent) ; Viscount
Enfield, M.P. (Middlesex) ; Mr. William Finnie, M.P.
(North Ayrshire) ; Mr. Albert Pell, M.P. (South Leices-
tershire) ; Right Hon. Russell Gurney, M.P.; Mr. Alex-
ander S. will, M.P.; Mr. W. M, Hodgson, M.P. ; Mr. S.
R. Graves, M,P. • Mr. W. Tapping, M.P.; Major Allen,
M.P.; Mr. E. B.'Eastwick, M.P. ; Lord Garlies, M.P. ;
Mr. N. Greville, M.P. ; Mr. W. M. Torrens M.P. ; Mr.
J. Round, M.P. ; Mr. T. Chambers, M.P. ; Mr. E.
Hermon, Lord George Hamilton, M.P., and others.
Ministers of all denominations were present, besides
laymen not M.P.'s.
Mr. GLADSTONE was accompanied by Lord de Grey,
President of the Privy. Council, and Mr. W. E. Forster,
the Vice-President.

Mr. COWPER TEMPLE, M.P., introduced the deputation,
which, he said, was attended by seventy-four members of
the two Houses of Parliament. They agreed generally
with the object of the Union, although they reserved
power to differ in detail. The National Education Union
was very wide-spread throughout the country.
It had branches in a hundred towns, including
all the most important, It had recognised agents
in 300 rural districts. It had had its resolutions confirmed
in various parts of the country, and it had the support of
a great number of persons who had taken an active
and well-known interest in educational affairs.
The Union did not belong, as the right hon. gen-
tleman would see, to any political party in the State. Its
object was not to enforce ,the views of any religious com-
munity or creed, but they sought to represent the
ratepayers, who were desirous for the extension of educa-
tion without any unnecessary interference with the free-
dom of religious teaching. They held that it was not the
province of the State to determine what religious education
ought to be given in schools, and certainly not to prohibit
it. (Hear, hear.) But they thought that the State
ought to respect the congeientious convictions
of the manages and teachers, and in return
to request that they should also respect the religious
opinions of the parents of the children. Every facility
ought to be given to enable parents to withdraw their
children from any lessons of which they did not approve.
They were accordingly anxious that nothing should be
done to render education unpopular. They desired to
assure the Government that the principles which they had
embodied in their bill were principles which had the
snpport of a very large portion of the country. They
trusted that the Government would not be deterred by
opposition to these general principles. He could assure
the Government that they could count on a very large
amount of support if they carried these principles into
effect.

The Rev. Dr. BARRY, Principal of King's College, Len-
don, hoped that the Government would not allow the pro-
visions of the bill which had been laid before Parliament to
be tampered with. The conscience clause as it stood
afforded full religious liberty to all sides. It was well to
recollect that not a penny of the money raised would go
to the support of religious education. They. would find,
the Government would adhere to the provisions of the
bill which had been so honestly and ably sketched, and he
could assure the right hon. gentleman that the Union
would place its strength at the disposal of the Govern-
ment.

The Rev. EIISTACE CONDER, Congregational minister of
Leeds, said that amongst Nonconformists, Independents,
Baptists, as well, probably as amongst the Metho-
dists throughout the country, there was a feeling
of alarm and anxiety lest the reform which all
felt to be needed should be the means of rekindling the
religious strife which recent legislation had tended to
put' an end to. In order that parents might not
be placed in an unfair or unpleasant position, which might
possibly be the case in some districts, he thought the
managers of the schools should ask the parents whether
they " consented " to the religious education.
Mr. E. Baines, M.P., Colonel Akroyd, M.P., Lord
Harrowby, and Mr. A. Pell, M.P., also spoke in terms of
general support of the bill, and particularly of that clause
which provided for the religious education.
Mr. GLADSTONE replied to the representations of the
deputation in a very few remarks. He said that the ques-
tion of how far education was a legitimate burden on the
rates must be treated by them as separate from the ques-
tion out of what property ought the property to be supplied—
he meant the money which constituted the legitimate source
of local expenditure. With regard to the Bill he was very
much obliged to them for the views which they had been
pleased to express, and which he took to be simply repre-
sented in the words which had been used by Lord
Harrowby, "that religion was not to be compulsorily,
separated from education." (Hear, hear.) That he pre-
sumed to be the main principle. (" Yes.") With regard
to the mode of applying those principles, they must,
of course, involve much difficulty in detail. It
would probably be prejudicial and injurious to make any
premature disclosure. The Government would give the
matter their best consideration. When they discussed
the bill in committee they would be able to grapple
with these difficulties. He hoped the result
would be one in which they could all to a
great extent concur, and that t then the measure
would give general satisfaction.

Mr. COWPER-TEMPLE, M.P., having thanked the right
von. gentleman for granting the interview, the deptito,tion
retired.

The New York Tribune remarks :—" Here are
pleasing little statistics ! The cost of hanging Pike,
the Hampton Falls (New Hampshire) murderer,
was $450. The gallows cost $250; the Sheriff's
fee was $lOO (and not a bit too much) ; and the
incidental expenses were $ll5. But the point to
be noticed particularly is that it was with great
difficulty that the Sheriff found carpenters to build
the gallows, workmen exhibiting no little repug-
nance to engaging in its construction. Really
these honest New Hampshire carpenters must have
neglected the study of Jewish history, or they would
have known that there is nothing more delightfully
beautiful than the fine old doctrine of an eye for an
eye and A tooth for a tooth,"