The Sun.
London, England, 1851-01-24 00:00:00

MR. COBDEN on NATIONAL EDUCATION.

MANCHESTER, JAN. 23.—Last evening the Na-
tional Public School Association, recently founded
here on the basis of the late Lancashire Public School
Association, held its annual meeting, and Mr. Cobden,
M.P., and Mr. Milner Gibson, having accepted invi-
tations to be present, there was a very large attendance
of members and friends of both sexes. Mr. Alexan-
der Henry, M.P., the president, took the chair, and
opened the proceedings and after some preliminary
and routine business dr. Cobden was called upon to
move the first resolution.
Mr. COBDEN presented himself amid loud and pro-
longed cheers. He said the resolution was—
" That the present aspect of the educational question
gives high testimony to the value of the efforts of this
association, and promises a complete and speedy
triumph."
The lion. Gentleman, after observing that the aspect
of the room, from its crowded state, afforded great
encouragement to the friends of education, continued
—But I do not disguise from myself, and 1 am sure
you will not conceal from your minds, that we are
indebted in some degree for this meeting to a recent
movement which has taken place in your city by
gentlemen who have hitherto not taken a prominent
part in the cause of national education. Now, I join
most unfeignedly in the expressions of congratula-
tion used by the gentlemen who have just addressed
you, on the fact that these parties have come for-
ward to avow to some extent their adhesion to
the principles of this association.—(Hear, hear.)
They have given the sanction of their approval to the
main features of this association. As has been well
observed, they have adopted the principle of local
rating, and I may further say they have, by one of
the provisions of the scheme they have published to
the world, given their adhesion to our principle of se-
cular education, inasmuch as they leave to the parents
of children the power of demanding for their children
exemption from that doctrinal teaching hitherto held
as indispensable.—(Applause.) I must confess I have
always been so imbued with the difficulties of this
question, that if a proposal had been made calculated
to give an improved education to the people, coupled
with conditions ten times as objectionable as those ,
which we have lately had propounded to us, Ido
not think I could have found it in my heart
to offer any strong opposition to it. I have really
passed that time that I could offer opposition to any
scheme whatever, come from whatever party it may,
which proposes to give to the masses better education
than they at present receive.—(Hear, hear.) I will
say more. I have not taken up any general se-
cular system from any original love of a system of
education which either separates itself from religien,
or which sets up any peculiar or novel model of a
system of education that shall be different from any-
thing that has been proposed in this country. I
confess that, for fifteen years nearly, my efforts in
education, and hopes of success in a system of
national education had always been associated with
the idea of coupling education in ;this country, with
the various religious communities which exist; but I
have found, after trying it, as I think, in nearly every
possible shape, such insuperable difficulties, in conse-
quence
of religious discords in this country, that I
have taken refuge in this, which has been called a '
remote haven of refuge for educationalists of all the
secular systems, in sheer despair of finding any other
system of education. I should, therefore, be a hypo-
crite if I said I was repugnant to a system of educa-
tion coupled with religious instruction.—(Hear,
hear.) But there is no one can have a stronger con-
viction of the utter uselessness of attempting to unite
the religious bodies of this country in any system of
education. Indeed, I can hardly bring myself to give
serious consideration to the plan brought forward by
some gentlemen in this borough, no doubt with the
very best intentions, and before they have been en-
gaged in it a year I believe they will perceive the
hopelessness of the task. For what do they propose
to do ? It it precisely what Parliament, the Govern-
ment, and the Council of Education have been at-
tempting to do for a great number of years. It is to
give a system of education to the country which shall,
comprise religious instruction, and which shall call upon
the people of the country to subscribe, by means of
taxation, by rates, fur the general religious as well
as secular instruction of the country. There is no
novelty in the scheme ; it is merely a proposal to
tranfer to Manchester, as a theatre, the contest which
has before been going on in the House of Commons
and the Government. It is, in fact, a proposal
whereby everybody shall be called upon to pay for
the religious teachers of everybody else.—(" Hear,"
and a laugh.) Now, that has precisely been objected
to by a great portion of this community, and is what
has prevented the present system, administered
through orders in Council, from having been success-
ful. Certainly, there is this novelty—that for the
first time a body of churchmen have themselves come
forward and reccommended that all religious denomi-
nations shall be allowed to receive the public money
for the teaching of their own catechisms and creeds.
So far we have no difference with the quarter from
which the proposal comes; but this does not alter the
cuaracter of the opposition of those who have opposed
the Minutes of Council and the grants of Government
and Parliament and national education. It is exactly
the same thing, whether every Nonconformist, and all
the religious voluntaries of the country, shall receive
the public money and pay the public money for the pur-
pose of religious teaching through a local rate, or whe-
ther they shall ask for the money which has, through the
Minutes in Council, been voted by Parliament. There
is no difference in the two proposals, except that one
is to be done by means of local rates in Manchester,
and the other out of the national taxes. How are we
thus, then, to escape the difficulties in the religious
question which we have hitherto had to encounter ?
if the members of the dissenting bodies have been
sincere in their opposition hitherto to a national sys-
tem as administered through the Minutes of Council,
there is not the slightest hope of that proposal which
has now emanated from the Churchmen of Man-
chester being accepted by the Dissenters of this
country. But after all, perhaps, we are dealing with
the plan of an individual rather than the manifesto of
a party. lam not sure that any party in this city,
any religious body as a body, or committee as a com-
mittee, have endorsed the proposal now submitted to
us. Nor do I think the gentlemen who have so
far given in their adhesion to it have considered
the ultimate bearing and scope of the proposal
put forward. It is based upon the principle of
voting the public money for the teaching of the
religious creeds of every religious denomination ; for
if it does not recognise that principle it is an
unjust proposal—(Hear and applause.) Now, I
doubt if the gentlemen who have so far advocated this
new system as to attend in person to hear it mooted,
have fully considered the ultimate scope of what must
be the result if it is to be carried out with anything
like fairness; for it amounts to this—that you shall
pay from the public rates of this city the money for
educating children in church schools, where, inde
pendent of the secular instruction which they shall
receive, they shall be taught the Church Catechism ;
and also to the Independents, Baptists, Unitarians,
Wesleyans, the same system shall be applied, by
which, besides the secular instruction which shall be
enforced, they shall be allowed to teach their various
creeds or catechisms. But there is a large body in
Manchester and Salford—a large body lying in the
very lowest stratum, as you may say, in society,
whose education must be embraced in any way, or
that plan must be worse than a pretence, for it must
be fraught with downright injustice and negligence
to the most necessitous portion of the community.
I speak of the Roman Catholic population, which was
described in Dr. Kaye's pamphlet, written some 14
years ago (he is now Sir Kaye Shuttleworth) ; that
part of the population of Manchester and Salford which
he has described, comprising 60,000 or 80,000 Irish, all
Roman Catholics, who have imported into this city al
great deal of that barbarism which has unfortunately
characterised the country whence they came. Any '
system which does not embrace that portion of the
population cannot be tolerated for a moment as a
system.—(Loud cheers.) I say, therefore, that the
proposal of the Church party must mean that money
shell be paid out of the public rates to provide school-
ing for the whole of those Roman Catholic children ;
and besides the secular instruction they shall receive
they shall be taught their own catechisms and be per-
mitted to observe their own religious ceremonies pre-
cisely in the same way that the Church of England
or dissenting schools are allowed to do. Have these
gentlemen made up their minds that they will pay
rates for the purpose of the religious training of the
Roman Catholic children ? I say I should be a hypo-
crite if I expressed very great repugnance myself to
that which shall give these poor children an education
even coupled with that sort of instruction which, I am
sure, to many here present, would be very repugnant;
but have they made up their minds that the whole of
the Roman Catholic children of Manchester shall be
taught their religion at the expense of the ratepayers
of Manchester ?—(Hear, hear.) When they talk of
enforcing the reading of the Bible, have they made
up their minds what version shall be used ?—(Cheers.)
lies it been settled, and do they mean, that the
Douay version of the Bible should be used in these
schools? Because, if they do not mean that, when
they make the Bible the condition of receiving any
schooling, then it is at once shutting the door most
effectually to the instruction of the Roman Catholic
children in this town. Do not let any one suppose
for a moment that I am interpreting these objections
as my own objections—they are what I have had to
encounter for the last fifteen years. So long ego as
1836, I remember when Mr. Wyse, himself a Ca-
tholic, and Mr. Simpson, of Edinburgh, came here to
enlighten us and agitate us on the subject of educa-
tion. I rerneenher as long ago as that having in my
counting-house ministers of religion of every denomi-
nation in Manchester, endeavouring to bring them to
some sort of agreement on a system of schooling; and,
I believe the insuperable difficulties I then encoun-
tered are increased uow. And these very gentle-
nsen whot probably with the beat intentions, have

lirought forward this plan, will find before they have
taken one-twentieth part of the trouble with it
which some gentlemen in this room have given
to the education question, they have attempted an
impossibility, and will be compelled to turn asi▪ de
from what they have attempted to do and join our
ranks—that is, if we do nothing, as I hope we shall
not, which shall repel them. Our difficulties are pre-
cisely those that have bad to be encountered in
Holland and America. Both have gone through
the same ordeal. When the pilgrim fathers landed
in New England, there no doubt the education given
embraced religious teaching. Everybody was taught
the same catechism, but as the number of sects in-
creased it was found that these religious questions
became a great bone of contention. The Americans
have had to go through precisely the same ordeal
that we are going through in this country, and it has
ended precisely as it will end in this country. The
fundamental principle is laid down in the Massa-
chusetts statute for erecting common schools, which
says, "that no book shall be admitted into the schools,
and nothing shall be taught in them, which favours
the particular doctrine of any peculiar Christian sect."
—(Hear, hear.) In Holland they have come to the
same conclusion. There they have adopted a secular
system, because they have found it impracticable to
unite the religious bodies in any system of combined
religious instruction.—(Hear, hear.) Now, I think
if ever there was a time when it was desirable more
than another to try end separate religious education
from secular instruction it is the present time. And
I will tell you why. We have arrived at that period
when all the world is agreed that secular education
is a good thing for society. All were agreed that it
is a good thing that English boys and girls should be
taught to read and write and spell, and as much
grammar and geography as they can possibly imbibe.
There is no difference of opinion about putting the
elements of knowledge into the minds of every
child in this land, if it can be done. But while
we are united on that point can any one who
moves in society for a moment conceal from himself
that we have also arrived at a time when we have
probably more religious discord impending over us
than at any other period of our history ?—(Cheers.)
When I speak of religious discord, I don't mean
merely the dissensions between the Roman Catholics
and Protestants ; I will not allude to them except so
far as they lead to schisms and controversies in the
internal state of other religious bodies. But I think
there is, no doubt, at this moment looming in the dis-
tance, and not in the very remote distance either, a
schism in the Church of England itself.—(Hear.)
You have two parties in that Church, the one perhaps
stronger than the other in numbers, but the other far
more strong in intellect and logic, which are going to
divide the Church. Then I see the Wesleyan body
also torn asunder by a schism which the most sanguine
can hardly hope to see healed. Ido not think several
other religious bodies are perfectly tranquil in their
internal organization. Now, while we have the
prospect of these great internal dissensions in reli▪
gi-
ous bodies, and while we are all agreed that secular
education is a desirable thing, would it be desirable,
if it could be effected, if it were practicable—which
I believe it is not—that our national system of
education should be one united and bound up with
the religious organizations, and by which the
schisms which prevail in the churches must neces-
sarily be transferred witb increased virulence to
the schools ?—(Cheers.) For bear in mind that
what you see now pervading in the churches in
Scotland, where you have au irreconcilable dispute
with regard to the appointment of masters to the
parochial schools of Scotland—a dispute between the
old Kirk and the Free Church—recollect, if what I
say be correct, when you have an impending schism
in the Anglican Church, you will have precisely the
same difficulty in the appointment of masters. In
one parish the High Church party will predominate,
and will dwell upon the necessity of the master ob-
serving all the old forms of our Church and enforcing
all the old ritual and observances prescribed by the
Liturgy and Canons ; and, on the other band, you
will have the Low Church party dwelling upon the
more vital essence of religion, and encouraging the dis-
continuance of those forms which the other party re-
gard as of greater importance. And depend upon it,
that while these discords pervade the Church you will
have them in the schools also ; you will have to
fight the battle again and again to reconcile the
various religious bodies, and in the end you will find
yourselves obliged to return to the secular system
which has been adopted in the United States and
in Holland.—(Cheers.) While I have been visit-
ing Leeds and Huddersfield, I have repeatedly sought
interviews with the liberal Dissenters, and have
endeavoured. to have an unrestricted discussion
with them on this question, rather than in the public
arena, where they might be committed to opinions
which I hope when they have seen our plans they will
be prepared at least to modify.—(Hear.) Now I have
found that one of the objections to our plan has been
' that alluded to by Mr. Schwabe, when he spoke of
the vast number of schools already in existence, and
the objection that we were supposed to propose to
I supersede all the existing schools, and render the
schooleromna valueless. N ow, it is my firm belief
that if a system such as we proposed were adopted,
we should have no difficulty whatever in getting an
Act of Parliament to levy a local rate in Manchester.
-- (Hear, hear.) Ido not conceal from myself that
if we establish free schools in every parish you will
ultimately close all existing eleemosynary schools in
which you now call upon children to pay 2d. or 3d.
a week. If they did not, they would not be worthy
the name of national schools. But such being the
case, I take it they would be purchased or rented as
Mr. Schwabe has described, they might be rented
on the week day and left on the Sundays in the
hands of the different religious congregations for the
purpose of religious teaching.—(Cheers.) Another
objection I have had to encounter among our Dis-
senting friends is, that they have been inclined to
imagine that the teaching children a little of reading,
writing, grammar, and geography, is inimical to re-
ligion. Now, I have found a most curious refutation
of this doctrine wherever I have been, in the practice
of the very party who have objected to us. I re-
member,
.at Birmingham, I found a proprietary
school, builtt by a joint-stock association, by men of
every reli▪
gious denomination—l heard, in fact, of a
clergyman sending his son to it. Well, in that school
there is no religion taught, and yet I found the very
parties who objected to us were sending their sons to
schools where secular education is avowedly separated
from reli▪
gious teaching.—(Cheers.) Again, I was
present at a meeting in Yorkshire where one
gentleman stoutly maintained that it was utterly,
impossible to separate religious from secular teach-
ing; it was in Huddersfield. Well, another gentle-
man said to him, " How can you possibly maintain that
doctrine when you know you have sent your own son to
our Huddersfield College, where you know that we
could not go on for a day unless we all consented to
separate religion from secular instruction ?"
(Cheers.) Again, the schools at the Huddersfield
Yorkshire
hateeabg.
rbest Mechanics'
s)nt t
le
lom InstitutionUnionsheinabo have
fee
Mechanics'
and our. other mechanics' institutions are founded on
that principle, and what I have said of the Hudders-
fieldthe
those
oo of
which our friend Mr. Baines is himself the president.
haveafuogu
augury
radyff
oeorvfde
erodyuwri
nhfeart
tehueriiern
01 nwyn
suc-
cess, and the best possible refutation of their own
—(Hear,pract travelsic etht
principles.—(Cheers and laughter.) However, lam
glad we have got from our Church friends in Man-
chester a corroboration of the doctrine with which we
started—that the present system of schooling is very
defective. Now, the great fallacy of school statistics
has been that we have taken schoolhouses for school-
ing and bricks and mortar for good masters.—
(Cheers and laughter.) I have no doubt there have
been vast efforts to build schools, and that it is a
very easy thing
.to galvanise an effort in a con-
gregation to raise a school. And nothing is
so common in men's minds as to think that
when they have raised a school they have done a great
thing for education. But I want to know what bricks
and mortar do for education ? The gentlemen con-
nected with the Church schools system tell us that
these schools in a great number of cases stand idle,
and children don t come to them. Now, in connexion
with this point I have heard it mentioned wherever I
have been that " You have plenty of schools, but the
people don't attend them ; and until you adopt some
principle of compulsion and adopt a coercive princi-
ple it is of no use bu,i,lding schools, for the children
will not eetend them. Now, I have told them that
we do not go so far as that yet. If you have good
schools and schoolmasters I. am firmly persuaded you
will fill your schools; but if then you shoulfind that
people will bring up their children in idleness and
ignorance, I do not know that it would be such an
infringement upon the liberty of the subject if you
did adopt some plan, first of all, perhaps, to seduce or
bribe parents to send their children to school, or, if that
would not; do, to try a little compulsion. Mr. Cobden
proceeded to say that some of the Dissenters years
ago objected that they could
not take money raised
by taxes for teaching religion in schools ; and now,
when it was proposed to accommodate them by sepa-
rating the religious from the secular, we were told
by them that it was contrary to their religious convic-
tions to separate them.—(Cheers.) He must say he
thought such a course, if persevered in, would go very
far to alienate the feelings of the great mass of the
community ; and as there was :ri certain districts
reason to fear that a great number of the working
classes were not in communi▪ ty with either Dissent
or Church, he feared it would very much alienate
them frona those who took an impracticable course
—a course which should prevent the diffusion of
education among the working classes, by setting up
obstacles which it would be impossible for rational
men to remove. If these gentlemen had a due ap-
preciation of the value of secular knowledge, he
put it to them, did they not value it in their
own case and that of thei▪ r families ? Ho wished
to know if such parties did or did not believe that