The Sun.
London, England, 1851-05-23 00:00:00

Ita„,.stieta. should be given, hut how it should be given? The
ton they were now considering was, a?, to theell:;i-
bility
of the plan proposed by the Hon. Member for Oil-
-4111'i: He had three objections to that lion. Member's
11(711c—first, he had doubts about the expediency. of
'4,•ng education free. Prawical men were of opinion
such a system was not adapted to the wants ot the
d entry, or wss likely to tend to produce feelings of in-
rPendence among the lower orders. They thought the
Zr'Prnitent sloitern was better adapted for the purpose,
refully if the parents of the poorer, but not the poorst
es were invited to make small contributions towards
expenses of education. Fur his own part he would
,ttk atilY see such aid extended to the ragged schools as
m' make the education there free of expense; but
hwas of opinion that neither the necessities nor the
14ta Of the lower orders were sufficient to warrant the
alo •
Phoe of a general system of free education. 'I he
iixt objetion to the next feature of the Hon. Member's
was, c
that be doubted the propriety of calling for
Vber aid towards educating the people by means of
t:t,her rates. He considered if aid were to be given, it
gnt to be given in a more equitable form, and the ex-
;le ought to be diffused over all those who were
h to bear it. The objectionable form was by
:143 from the Consolidated Fund, according to the
tit!ttto at present adopted. 'With reference to the
thleci feature of the scheme, that secular education only
ei°ltfld be given, he was altogether opposed to the prin-
it° of such a proposition. He did not see that such a
to erne would give satisfaction in any quarter. He did
:otitileiti:k it would give the Church of England, or any
articular sect, general satisfaction. The Roman Ca-
they all knew, would receive no satisfaction from
ItolYetem of that kind. The mass of the people belonging
w the Church of England or the body of Dissenters
Iteuld not be generally satisfied with such a system.
tee
Dissenters continued to send their children to
Church of England schools, for they knew that the
;.'lt mass of these schools were not teachers of doc-
diintles of a theological character likely to create preju-
t, but only gave instruction in the Scriptures. He
%I
iittul not possibly think how such a system of education
that proposed by the Hon. Member was adapted to
C ,11re the end it professed to have in view. It was,
tvever, said the system was proposed for the purpose
,f 4
doing justice to the poor, and discharging a debt
diet to them. But if it was the aim of all who sought
o
elevate the poor to implant in their minds the great
Pat principles of humanity and religion, as the surest
keyentive of crime, how ceuld that aim be attained by
e Proposed system ? If education were confined to
tetilar subjects—if carried out without religious instruc-
t,l°4--he very much doubted whether the tendency of
,
illth a system was to diminish vice and crime. He
Sethi
whether the system would be either bens-
l'eitl to the individual or the community. But
tt was said by Honourable Gentlemen opposite, " What
"e propose is that children shall be educated in the
ithoo
1, and receive religious instruction elsewhere." But
Leh
that system be carried out, and let all be done that
1,, advocates wanted, what would be the result? How
long were the children to remain at school? If inquiry
made, it would be found that parents would not
heave their children at school beyond the age of 13. All
e education these children received, which was to go-
,m'
iern the whole course of their future life was given be-
ore they were 13 years of age. How then could the
Ifroposed resolution be carried out ?—where could these
"ildren get their religious education frem? Were these
teildren to be without instruction in the great moral
I)eincipiles, and in the duty of worshipping God ? If the
Principles in the resolution were carried out, the chil-
!roil would receive no instruction in the schools in their
L'ret duty, that of worshipping the Creator. To such a
498tera he was decidedly opposed. The only argument
tf any„weight urged in its favour was, that there was a
Ilecessity for it. He did not believe the necessity
ousted. He believed the Government plan could be
married out so as to produce general education, provided
two
things were furnished, a great deal more money,
-4,1 more time. What was wanted in the first instance
here good teachers. Much had been done by Go-
Zernment to remedy this want. Several institutions
4 been opened for tha purpose of providing, good
"cache; s. The institution at Highgate, which furnished
eit hty teachers, had worked well, as also had the
tYstera of pupil teachers. lie believed, therefore, that
the pre sent system, with some addition to it for pro-
!ling free education for the very poor, was well cal-
culated., in time, to afford a prospect of carrying out
tie aim of a general system of education for the people.
'`-le mast oppose, on principle, the present proposition;
4t the same time he, and the House, were obliged to
e Ron. Member for Oldham for bringing forward
u'e subject, as even its discussion must be productive of
flood.

hire ADDERLEY must vote with reluctance OR the
Pestion against those with whom he usually voted—
Ler he-felt he could not conscientiously vote against the
reepositions of the Hon. Member for Oldham.—(Hear,,
at) There was an old proverb—Take care of the
Pence s and the pounds would take care of themselves—
le moral of which was susceptible of a wide applica-
tion, If the House took care of the elementary questions,
they would find that the great complicated questions
would take care of themselves. He regretted to differ
',,r()te the opinions expressed by the Hon. and Learned
ventlenian, Mr. Walpole, who, in expressing his dislike
to free education, dealt with only a part of the case as
if it were the whole.—(Hear.) The Hon. Member for
Lancashire said he felt anxiety on the question, but would
only consent to support the prep )sitious before the House
le the event of no better scheme being put forward. The
question then was, what chance was there of a better
system 'acing carried out, and what would happen to the
eonotry in the meantime?—(Hear.) All were agreed
that reriious and secular instruction ought to bo coma
',sued, and that one should be based on the other. They
were also agreed that the two could not be carried out
without the help of a national rate. But it also appeared
that while secular education could not be carried out ex-
cept by a national rate, religious education could not be
carried out by a national rate. So, therefore, as one-
half wa s impossible, the Hon. and Learned Member set
111 s face against the whole. Ho would, however, show
the House that while one part could be carried out by a
national rate, the other part could be carried out by a
nluntat y aid. The proposition of the Hon. Member for
yldham could not be controverted, that the present sys-
tem of e ducation was deficient in this material respect—
that it ftsiliel to point out to the poor how they were to
Prld their own subsistence. Now, as crime proceeded
eequently from want of employment, education would
4411 to prevent crime. If, for instance, the poor knew
eegrapny, that would enable them to understand the
advantages of colonial emigration, and, as in America,
our colonies would soon have their back settlements.
The
Hon. Member referred to the standard of educa-
tion as being of an improving character. He thought
the
standard of education was vastly too high; it was
that the prizes of the Privy Council went to a higher
Class th an was expedient or proper. The money,
therefore,
that was spent by the Privy Council was
lavished on a class for which it was never intended, and
Who ought not to receive a farthing of it. The gigantic
Plan of tbse Privy Council could not be carried out, and
debts had been incurred which could not be liquidated.
There was, therefore, no hope to be derived from that
11:tarter. But while they were discussing the question,
ap efficeent national education was going on which was
only accessible to two classes—the prisoner and the
Pauper.—(Hear.) The education given to prisoners
Was ela borate and perfect—in Parkhurst Bridewell, and
ether pr icons for the reformation of juvenile offenders
the eduoation was good. In the workhouses also, the
edueatio a there was vastly superior to that given by the
Poorer classes to their children. Here was a national
system o f religious and secular education at the expense
of the country, and the only question was, whether that
!Ylite as a hould be extended to the poor outside the work-
house .s and prisons. It might be said that this system
mixed rap religious instruction with education; but would
they consent to open the doors of such places to the
honest p oor outside. He confessed he was dissatisfied at
teeing he poor debarred from the advantages in those
Places. He approved of a national rate for general
educatio t a and he thought it was highly creditable to
the cour tty of Lancaster that it should have been the
first to come forward with a petition to Parliament to
tax then t for purposes of national education. He had
the auth .ority of a distinguished traveller for stating,
that no o ne could visit America without seeing the great
superiorit y of the Americans over this country in point
of educat. 'On. Ile had heard only two serious objections
to the pre" ositions; first, that, if adopted, they would
supersede the present schools. But that objection was
of no force, for if the present schools were inefficient, it
would be a i advantuge to supersede them. The second
objection se as, that it was impossible to separate secular
and religious instruction, That was a mere play upon
words. We acted upon the principle every day of our
lives in the education of our children. We showed that
the two could be separated without mischief. The ad-
vantage a of the Honourable Gentlemans proposition
would b plain and obvious. The necessities of the case
were als obvious; and he therefore approved of a plan
which w ours compel the people to take an interest in
their ow a schools.
The S OLICITOR-GENERAL thought no subject
could be more important than that of how they could
best educ tte that young and numerous class now in want
of educati en. Still he must say that he had never heard
in the saas so debate so many errors and fallacies as there
were to Iso found in the speeches of the Hon. Member
who pro' )osed this motion, and in the speeches of those
who follo wed him.—(Hear.) The real effect of themea-
sure prop ssed would be to shut up the religious schools
h
in the cout itry, and compel those who now supported t em
to contrih site to schools that they abhorred.—(elear.)
It was ass timed by those who supported the proposition
of the Hot sourable Member, that nothing had been done
hitherto on the subject of education. This was not the
fact. For '27 years before the Government grant for
education the Church of England had 550,000 children
in its schoo] s; and in the nine years that had succeeded
the Government grant they had added to the 550,000
children- no less than 400,000. Previous to the Govern-
ment grs int the annual subscriptions were 3,000/,, and
since the Government grant their annual subscriptions
had ittcre ased to 20,0001. As a proof that the people of
Engle nd teere not unanimous in favour of what was
called me re) " secular" education, he referred to what
had c cc!zrred in Manchester, where, after a long
diecussio u the word " secular" was omitted from
the man to of a society established for promot-
ing edu cation. In Manchester, also. a committee
had I%ee n formed, consisting of all classes of
politich s, from the highest Tory to the lowest Badice/,
and of wen isters of every creed, until lately, when it was
abandon el by the Roman Catholic priests, although not
by the B (anon Catholic laity—and that committee pro-
posed to avail itself of all the schools already in existence
to contril )ute to the maiutenance of schools approved of
by the G svernment lospt ctor of Education. Now, he
stilted. if two schools were established, giving secular
education in each, and in each, too, the religious educa-
tion fitted,. for the children in that :.chool, would not that
be a. perf rat system of education?-- (Hear, Lear.) The
whole matter, as put forward by the Hon. Member fur