The Sun.
London, England, 1856-11-20 00:00:00

LONDON, THUESDAY EVENING- NOVEMBER 10, 1856.

Sllti JUAN PAKINGTON ON NATIONAL

EDUCATION.

On Wednesday evening the Right Hon. Sir J. S. Pak-
ington, Bart., M.P., delivered an address on national edu-
cation to the members of the Manchester Atheneum, in
compliance with an invitation from the directors of that
institution. Sir E. Armitage presided on the occasion, and
there were present Mr. J. S. Peking ton, Mr. Watts, Mayor
of Manchester ; Sir J. Potter, Mr. Bazley, Mr. J. A.
Turner, Sir J. Bardsley, the Rev. W. Gaskell, and
Mr. Fairbairn, C.E.
Sir J. PAKINGTON was received with loud and continued
applause. After a few preliminary remarks, he said he had
come there as a sincere supporter of a cause which trusted
not to the eloquence ;of its advocates, but to the power
of its truths and the magnitude of its interests. (Ap-
plause.) He did not come to charm with the beauties
of poetical language or of historical illustration ; he
' came to appeal—and simple phrases would best snit
his purpose—to the hearts, feelings, judgments, and
common sense of his bearers, and to ask, How can we best
promote that object which concerns, more closely almost
than any other, the character, the happiness, the real wel-
fare of the labouring man ? (Hear.) He came to ask them
to enable every citizen of England to cultivate those powers
of reason and of intellect which constitute God's best and
most precious gift to the human race, and for our use of
which we ought to be grateful here as we should be held
responsible hereafter. (Hear, hear.) He doubted whether
it was at all generally known how immense was the nume-
rical proportion of our fellow-countrymen who were inte-
rested in the question of national education-_that out of a
population of 18 millions in England and Wales, there
were only about 480,000 who derived, from any source, a
yearly income of 1004. or more. Taking the number at
half a million, and allowing five persons to a family, there
would remain 15 millions and a half of men, women, and
children who were dependent upon incomes of less than
1001. a-year ; and he doubted not that all present would
agree that every non whose means were less than 1001.
a-year must look to a cheap and good education for his
children as among, not the secondary, bat the primary, ne-
cessaries of life. (Applause.) The question was not, then,
limited merely to labouring men. The tradesman and the
farmer, as a rule, in matters ;of education, paid dearly for
a bad article; and if every existing school in England was
what it ought to be, instead of being exactly the reverse,
there ought to be in every town and village schools in
which the children of the small tradesman or farmer, in
common with the children of the labourer, might receive
the blessings of elementary instruction. (Applause.) It was
so in other countries; why should it not be so in England ?
To turn from the magnitude of the question to its position
and prospects, it stood at this moment in a critical situation,
and it needed the support of public opinion. During the
last two years the question had been • the subject of re-
peated and protracted debates in Parliament. Mr. Milner
Gib Yon and himself were two of those who had submitted
measures to the House of Commons, his own being one which
embodied what he thought might possibly be adopted here-
after, at all events, as one mode of settling the question.
His bill led to considerable discussion, but to no decision.
Lord John Russell during the last session proposed a se-
ries of resolutions essentially the same in principle as his
(Sir J. Pakington's) bill. In the debates an important
issue had been clearly raised between those who think that
we do imperatively require extended means of education
and those who think that we do not. It had been con-
tended by statesmen of eminence in the House of Com-
mons, by writers of great and known ability, and more
especially in two pamphlets that had deservedly attracted
great attention—those of Mr. E. Baines, of Leeds, and
Mr. Unwin, the head of the Homerton College—that no
change was necessary in our means of extension ; that we
were going on perfectly well and ought to be satisfied ;
and that to resort to any means of extension, in the way of
supplying deficiencies from any public fund, would be too
expensive, and that the country could not afford it. Those
arguments prevailed ; and Lord John Russell's resolutions
were rejected by a very large majority. Ho (Sir J. Paking-
ton) had stated last session his apprehension that this de-
cision would cause great alarm among the friends of po-
pular education. He had seen nothing which so strongly
justified this fear as an address issued to his constituents
by Mi. Laing, a very able and very moderate member of
the House of Commons. Mr. Laing said :
" Publis opinion and the Hode of Commons, by an im-
mense majority, decided not so muck against any particu-
lar resolution, faulty as manyof them were, as against the
principle of attempting, under existing Circumstances; to
supersede local and private efforts by any grand, uniform,
and centralised system of national education. For the
next 10 or 12 years the question is practically decided,
that if we want education, we must educate ourselves, and
not trust to the State to do it for us."

He protested against the idea—(hear, hear, and applause)—
that an almost unintelligible division in anexpiring House
of Commons should settle this great question, affecting the
vital interests of the people, for even 20 months—(applause)
—if public opinion demanded itsrevival. (Loud'applause.)
He could only explain this language by Mr. Laing's by the
fact that it was written by a Scotchman to Scotchmen—
(laughter)—for he could well understand how any Scotch-
man might regard with contempt the state of public edu-
cation in England, where we were constantly struggling in
vain to obtain a system of national education similar in its
principles to that which Sootland had enjoyed, to the great
advantage of her national character, for the last 200 years.
He must, while altogether denying the conclusion to which
Mr. Laing came, admit that such language was held by
men beyond all question of great ability, high character,
and most honourable motives. Finding that such was the
case, he had, as was his duty, gravely considered all the
grounds for his own opinion and for the opinion of those
who differed from him, so far as he could learn them
from their speaking or writing ; and the only conclusion
to which he could come was that the views put forth by the
gentlemen to whom he had alluded were erroneous, mis-
taken, and unsound. The question for the country was
on which side the truth lay ; for this question must be
decided by the truth. There was no ambiguity or possi-
bility of mistake iu the issue as raised. Sir Jas. Graham,
in a very able speech in the house, and one which prodiced
a great effect, said on Lord John Russell's resolutions—
"My first objection to this proposal is that it is unne-
cessary. I contend in the strongest manner that there is
no country in Europe in which the progress of education
within the last 25 years has been so rapid and so satisfac-
tory as it has in England."
Mr. Baines, a very high authority, said—

" Objection 6.—The measure is perfectly unnecessary.
We possess, on official evidence, the groat fact of the rapid
and steady progress of education during the whole of the
present century."

Mr. Unwin was not quite so dogmatical ; but, with many
men of ability who took part in the controversy, he held
the same in substance. They all felt that something like
proof was needed from them ; but their proof might, with-
out exaggeration, be said to be contained, mainly at Jeast,
in the single fact that in 1851 there were 1 in 8 2-3ds of tke
population attending school, which undoubtedly showed a
great increase upon the proportion shown when an estimate
was previously taken, about 20 years before. On the other
hand, he believed ho was right in saying that in all their
voluminous speeches and pamphlets there would not be
found any reference whatever to the quality of the schools
which existed. (Hear.) Their boasted 8 2-3ds was a pro-
portion inferior to that of other countries—it was insuffi-
cient and unsatisfactory ; but he denied altogether that
the question was absolutely, or even mainly, one of num-
bers. (Hear.) Numbers became comparatively unimpor-
tant if the schools to which they went were not worth
having. The question, he would ask was this—From the
Tweed to the Land's-end are the schools of England what
they ought to be ? (Hear, hear, and no, no.) Where they
were good—and no doubt there were many good—there
was no security for their permanent continuance as such.
(Hear.) And what prospect was there, if the present
sHearystem, continued, of their progressive improvement ?
() Some of the gentlemen to whom he had referred,
not content with saying that plans proposed were bad,
had proposed plans of their own. Mr. Unwin had
done SO. And while speaking frankly and sincerely of these
gentlemen and their views, he wished it to be distinctly
understood that he appreciated fully their abilities and sin-
cerity. Mr. Unwin thus stated his plan --
" I maintain that national education ought to be the
work of the people themselves, since the training of child-
ethanatn()ttliente,rguleectpUroprodseevolledogualciaa
ren is essentially the duty of parents—a responsibility they
in the community, Without guilt or classes,
sectli, selves
Or injury to m
'welling their fellow-citizens shouldpi e if,
their offspring or,
on the one hand, parents education would bedefeatedorpartites
on the other, should succeed in com-
and Christian benevolence in rellial)d
be compelled
~or
th em to
ee dl
nu9c.aanmes
of instruction—that the functio
elevate, by all popular means
enforce on
ing on this subject to assist sui'tab ° tone
of
parents the duty enlightened pattriotiss
to
of
educating
this.quesioni o
th ating their children,. t_
selves for the profession of teali' lepersons in fitting them-
y sacred
pai.enotbsligaotieo
dnl.::
ate
Who denied that it was the dut
needy in their efforts to discha-Ling,
ili;;,.:nti. iluttiae);
sautledhas'tunhappily
? p iSd°
l'as' , anti
ltahre reallythink-
selves k -
ett lhoi Lni
irilcithchai
altdte tdaTico?
Did 'tar. Unwin
questionn]. d (Hear,be of
f settledt'ah ni
this
not Mr. Wnwin know that at present, in practice w
not expect the poor man to bear the
e xpense ociue did
c
his own children? (Hear.) A table in one off e
the laatino-
st re•
ports of the Committee of Council on Education showed
that, out of 590,000 children attending inspected schools
75 per cent, did not pay more than 2d. per week for their,
education. (Hear.) There were 35 percent, paying only Id.,
40 per cent. paying 2d., and the remaining 25 per cent.
paying 3d., 4d., or perhaps more. The cost of anything
like good education in this country was at least
sd. or 6d.
a week, and therefore it was demonstrated that at
present
we did not expect the great majority of the working classes
to pay more than one-sixth or one,third at the most, o f

what it cost to educate their children. The idea of parents
educating their children, though good in the abstract, was
not now acted upon. (Applause.) *Mr. Baines said—
"lt surely is obvious to common sense that to compel
parishes to establish and sustain schools is not only to take
away all the merit and the honour of spontaneous action,
and thuspro tanto to destroy (by superseding) the patriot-
ism, benevolence, and public spirit which have done such
great things for education ; but it is to violate liberty it-
self."
He (Sir John Pakington) could not accept such a sentence
as a practical solution of a great question. (rear, hear,
and applause.) What was there in it that would not be
equally applicable to our Poor Law, for the physical re-
lief of the, poor, or to our criminal law, for the punish-
ment of offenders ? (Hear, hear.) He could understand
(with respect be it said) a gentleman who was the known
and very able advocate of certain views putting forth
such ideas. and making the best fight he could; but
for himself he (Sir Sohn Pakington) should have taken
Mr. Baines's pamphlet very much like other partisan
pamphlets which were considered perfectly unanswerable
by those who agreed with them, and were laughed
at and put into the fire by those who differed from them.
(Hear, hear, and laughter.) Yet these views had been
held up in the House of Commons as irresistible; and,
therefore, those who thought them untenable, and perfectly
incompetent to meet public necessities, were bound upon
public occasions to take a degree of notice of them which,
perhaps, otherwise they would not think necessary. (Hear,
hear.) Ho would now turn to some of the facts to which he
referred when he said that the cause must be judged and
decided by the public according to its truths. With a few
exceptions, the inspected schools wera about the best ive
had ; and yet only N per .eTt. were, according
to the inspectors, satisfactory. This was a great fact.
How did Mr. Baines and their opponents get rid of it ?
and how could they be surprised and wonder that with
this state of things, the results were. bad? Turning to
practical results, how did Manchester stand ? Three years
ago—and in the progress of a great question three years
were but as three days—in the evidence given before the
Committee of the House of Commons upon the Manchester
and Telford Education Bill, in support of which Church.
men, Roman Catholics, Wesleyans, and members of other
denominations worked harmoniously, anxiously hoping to
get rid of the stain which rests upon this country—Dr.
M'Kerrow gave evidence that there were in Manchester
30,000 children between the ages of 3 and 11 who were
neither at school nor at work, and thishebelieved (speaking
from memory), was nearly half of the whole number of
children at school age. Mr. haines, Sir J. Graham, and other
authorities stated that our progregs was satisfactory, and we
were getting on very well. How was Manchester getting on?
Not a bit. (Laughter.) From a table submitted to the same
committee it appeared that in 1834 1 in 10 of the popu-
lation were at school, and in 1851 the proportion had
descended to lin 11i. The progress was in the wrong di-
rection. He did not accept as an excuse the rapid increase
of population. Was it right, decent, or consistent with
our character, wealth, and generosity that we should have
such a mass of degradation around us ? In London, accord.
ing to Mr. Tuffnell, inspector, and Mr. Aubin, the head
of the great school at Annerloy, 73 per cent. of the child-
ren of the working population, at 10 years of age, were
absolutely uneducated and ignorant of everything. In
Bath, where more assistance was derived from Govern-
ment than in any other portion of that part of England,
last year's attendance at the schools had fallen off no less
than 400 children, showing clearly that something was
wrong—that we wanted a better system, or a better some-
thing else. Two days ago he received a begging letter from
Chatham, asking him to subscribe to schools there, there
being none, and he sent an indignant refusal. It was mon-
strous that in a garrison town where the Government had
great arsenals, they could not establish a school without
going and begging of Worcestershire country gentlemen.
(Laughter.) It was time to put an end to such a system
as this. (Applause.) The Dean of Hereford, in a pub-
fished letter on the state of education in Hereford,
says—

" It is much to be regretted that so large a proportion of
the children around us, at ages when their labour is be-
coming of a marketable value, should be so entirely un-
educated; and it may be unhesitatingly asserted that thiee-
fourths of those of the labouring classes in this town, and a
greater proportion in the neighbouring parishes, have no
knowledge whatever at such age, either Scriptural or secu-
lar, which can be termed education for the industrial
classes, even in the sense of those who take the lowest
standard by which to measure them."

Could they have anything stronger than that? He was
sorry that the reports of her Majesty's inspectors of schools
were-not better known than theuvereubeing only published
in the little-read form of blue-boakee—Tte Rev. F. Wat-
kins stated with reference to the county of York that pri-
vate means for bettering the elementary education of the
working classes had been freely used, and had produced
little effect ; the sums subscribed were diminishing rather
than increasing ; and the results of inspection brought to
light very little, if any, improvement. The Rev. Mr.
Norris, who visited Shropshire and the district, said that
in making his annual returns, and noticing the satisfactory
signs of improvement, he could not but remember how in-
complete was the picture presented by the reports. The
bright spots, he said, were few ; breadths of darkness and
masses of neglected population intervened ; town parishes
that had long outgrown the strength of their overworked
and underpaid curates ; monster villages that had sprung
up around the newly-opened mines or works of some hard-
headed, hard-hearted contractor; and the estate, it might
be, of some large landed proprietor, who did not wish to
see the people educated, and who would much rather have
each fold his one talent in a napkin against the great day
of account ! " For such places," said Mr. Norris, " I
see at present no hope." In the debate in the last session
he (Sir John Pakington) adduced some very strong state-
ments as to the condition of the dioceses.of Bath and
Wells, which led to a correspondence with the Rev. Mr.
Vaughan, the diocesan inspector in that bishopric. That
gentleman wrote that he considered the great mistake of all
educational societies was that they hid the real state of the
case; in his report to the bishop he had represented the
state of the diocese in its true colours; and, although it
thus appeared to be far behind the rest of England, he did
not believe such was the case. " I trust," wrote Mr.
Vaughan, " education is advancing among us, though very,
very slowly." Mr. Baines had said it was advancing very,
very rapidly ; but who was .the best judge as respected the
county of Somerset—Mr.Vaughan,who lived in the county,
or Mr. Baines, who resided at Leeds ? As to Herefordshire,
who was best qualified to decide—the dean, who saw what
was going on, or Mr. Unwin, whose time was occupied with
his own college ? A practical illustration of the working
of the present system came under his (Sir J. Pakington's)
notice recently. He was staying with a friend, a gentle-
man of fortune, and the proprietor of a parish of 6,000
acres, with a population of 400, in Shropshire. His friend
was patron of the living, and one of his friend's sons was
the incumbent. The school there was everything that a
friend of education could wish. But in the adjoining parish
how different was the state of things ! Its area was 12,000
acres ; it contained 1,100 inhabitants; there was no resi-
dent proprietor, the clergyman was an absentee, changes
of curates were frequent, the only school that had ever ex-
isted in the parish was discontinued, and the 1,100 inhabi-
tants had not the means of educating a single child. This
was enough to prove the unsoundness of the present state
of things. There could be no confidence in the continu-
ance of a good school when it depended upon the life or
character of the proprietor of the estate, or upon the cler-
gyman's remaining in the same cure. The labours of the
clergy of all denominations, in the matter of education,
merited all praise ; but they were over-tasked, and quite
unequal to the duties which in this respect were imposed
upon them. And he believed it to be true, although it
might seem anomalous, that the very zeal of the clergy was
one cause of the low quality of the schools; inasmuch as
an immense number depended upon the clergy, who, from
want of means, were unable to make them good, and there-
fore they were maintained at their present low and unsa-
tisfactory level. He would not now repeat the dreadful
facts as to the educational state of our criminals, but he
must call attention to that branch of the subject of educa-
tion which related to destitute and vagrant children—the
seed from which annually a great harvest of crime was
gathered. A fortnight since he was walking in the Cathe-
dral-close at Worcester with some friends, when they met
a vagrant-child 10 years old. In answer to inquiries he
said he had neither father nor mother ; that he had. come
from Market Drayton, and got his living by begging.
What, humanly speaking, must be the future of that child?
Vice, crime, punishment, stifferiug—he thirst not go fur-
ther. This child was the type of a class that filled the
gaols, kept the courts of justice in action, and drew men of
opinion
In Manchester
on that there were
business from their merchandise to try these miserable
agllnoeet 11( r .
ml
victims—victims
Wasr o g
eri ntthhias v majoritycaelaitssa
aas
hs of cases of England's ne-
o
largep
4,000 children for whom such an institution as the Juve-
nile Refuge was required. The Rev. P. O'Leary (chaplain
of the Manchester City Gaol) had stated, in a report which
was recently published, that of 2,114 individuals commit-
ted in the course of the year 1,310 could not read at all.
Dr. Guthrie, of Edinburgh, stated before a Committee of
the House of Commons that there were between 2,000 and
3,000 children in Edinburgh who were in a condition
which required the provision of a ragged school in order
to save them from crime. The same was the ease in Bris-
tol and in London ; in fact, these children were swarming
wherever we went. The question then arose, would this
state of things be corrected by the voluntary system ?
Turning again to Dr. Guthrie's evidence, he found the fol-
lowing statement :
" There are two suggestions which I will bring before the
corn mittee :—The first is that we cannot succeed by voluntary
effort, as far as we have tried it—our funds are not in-
creasing ; they have not diminished material y; but when
the blush and novelty of the thing is over we rather fear
they may diminish a little ; but supposing they remain as
they are, we have not succeeded in raising them year by
year as we would wish to do. The amount of money which
we can command by means of voluntary effort is far short
of what is needed by the necessities of Edinburgh. We
have now in the different Edinburgh schools about 600
children. lam satisfied that there are still remaining in
Edinburgh, who would require to be admitted into such
schools, between 1,500 and 2,000 children."
Within the last few days he had received the last report of
the Model Secular School in Manchester, tvbich he hoped to
egference to one
day. What-
ever
deny that it
(eh,
ivasevtriendteihtffieve
rpeerfnievcaei lt
feature
eeooff opiniontvh visitinghg
school,
,etxnh
exist
otf onwleliocteis listo
ul/:
it had produced the beat results, But what did he find in
and that
had been founded with the most laudable purpose,

' the report? A similar statement to that he had read from
Edinburgh, or that they could not get on for want of money,
that they were paralysed, that their action was impeded,
. and that the voluntary contributions not meet the cost.
This was what be heard on all, sides, and yet whenever
for
putting proposed a measure in the House of Commons
putting an end to this state of things, which was a public
evil; at the public cost, it was urged that it 'was too expen-
sive to adopt such a measure. Now (continued Sir J. Pak-
ington), I can well understand and make great allowances
for the differences of opinion which arise legitdmately andfairly in consequence of those peculiar difficulties which in
England do attend the solution of this question ; but when
while this argument is.
.
I am told that wealthy England cannot afford the expense,
Ido feel indignant at such an answer. (Hear, hear.) And
what is the state of public affairs
raised ? We are now paying an income-tax of 6 2-3ds
per cent. ; in 1815 we paid 10 per cent., and, perhaps,
you r. :ay not know that the income•tax in 1855 produced
more money than in 1815 by about 100,0'01. ; the 10 per
cant. yielded 13,610,0001., and last year the amount was
13,718,00 Q/ I will turn to another criterion, to that ele-
ment of national wealth derived from the trade and manu-
facture of England, a subject which is familiar to you. 1
._find that the declared value of our exports in 1815 was
51,898,0001., while in 1853 it was 95,669,0001.—very nearly
double the former sum. (Hear, hear.) Then how stand
our rates in the two periods ? The rate for the relief of
the poor in 1845, after all this vast increase of wealth and
every element of national prosperity, was 200,0001. less
than it was in 1815. (Hear, hear.) How, then, aro we to
be told that when the temporal and eternal welfare of our
fellow-countrymen is at stake it is too expensive and
costly tb have any national education? You will suffer
we, I am sure, to show you how. this question of expense
is treated in two other countries ; and I believe you will
thank me for calling your attention to the noble language
—to which, as an Englishman, let me do justice—which I
am about to read to you, froth the official report presented
in 1855 by the Board of Education of New York. Imagine
for the moment that it is Manchester which is referred to :
"This vast increase in the population of our city will.
bring with it a corresponding multitude of youth who are
to be trained for (usefulness in society. This cannot be
done for nothing. The education which costs nothing is
worth nothing. Education has a scale of prices, like every
other marketable commodity. The best minds must be
had.to engage in the work, and feel that in this depart-
ment of labour they are achieving tasks worthy of their
country and of the age. It will not do to have the sun to
stand still upon our valleys and hills and broad prairies,
while we fight battles with Philistines or Anakun who
would destroy our institutions. The world moves, and the
battle thickens, and we must be at our posts and fall or
conquer in our day. . . Thousands of the school age
will be added to our juvenile population every year. In a
few years the addition to this class of our people will not
be less than 10,000 annually. Their wants must be pro-
vided for. Physically they want bread, and it will be
found ; clothing, and it will bo at hand. They will want
knowledge, and it must be given to them."
In another pap, on the same subject of money, I find
this :

" Ample provision has been made for the education and
instruction of every child of suitable age, in institutions
admirably adapted to the purposes they were designed to
subserve ; and, although the annual expenditure for this
object verges on and will soon exceed a million of dollars,
over and above the State appropriation, the public senti-
ment cheerfully sanctions and sustains every extension of
the system which promises to include within its elevating
and ennobling influence an increased number of hitherto
destitute and ignorant children, or to furnish increased
facilities for the mental and moral culture of those already
subjected to its discipline and control."
When shall we hear language equally earnest, zealous,
and patriotic from a Minister of Public Instruction in
London ? (" Hear, hear," and applause.) The only re-
maining authority to which I wish to turn for a moment
is one which I regard with peculiar interest. I hold in
ray hand a report upon popular education among our
own fellow-subjects and fellow-countrymen in Upper
Canada :

"Each city, town, township, and village has its own
municipal council ; while each city, town, village, and
school section has equally its own independent school orga-
nisation, each possessed of extensive corporate powers.
One is supreme in civic affairs, while the other is not leas
so in all matters pertaining to the schools. The one ac-
cepts, on behalf of the whole people the legislative school
grant, and imposes an assessment equivalent to the amount
granted, while the other imposes any additional assess-
ment required, and controls the entire expenditure of
the school moneys, establishes libraries, and promotes
the general interests of the schools. In Upper Canada we
have 42 counties, 5 cities, 22 towns, 16 villages, and 400
townships, or about 500 municipalities. iWe have also the
same number of city, town, and village school corporations,
together with 3,3 .0 school corporations in the rural school
sections, and 70 grammar school boards. The schools aro
inspected at least twice a-year by local superintendents,
appointed by the county councils, or, in the cities, towns,
and villages, by the boards of trustees. The inspectors of
grammar schools are appointed by a central provincial
authority."
I find this plan in Canada is in substance precisely the
same as I ventured to submit for England last year—
namely, grants by the central Legislature in aid of local
funds, and boards for local management. What is the
result in Canada? The population in 1854 was 1,000,000 ;
the number of children at school was 201,000,—more than
onein fives- Whenl have referred, as I have on former
occasions, to the state of education in Switzerland, Prussia,
and other countries of Europe, I have been told, " Oh,
you are asking to Germanise our system in England. It is
all very well in Germany, but won't do here." I never
heard why. But I beg you to observe that I have not now
referred to Prussia, or Switzerland, or France, or Holland,
or many other countries which I might have mentioned. I
have given you one glorious passage from New York, but
the countries to whichi have mainly referred are Scotland
and Upper Canada. Now, I wish to ask you and the pub-
lic—it is a question that must be answered—why is a sys-
tem which is good and beneficial for the Queen's subjects in
Scotland and Upper Canada to be held as bad and inapplic-
able for the Queen's subjects in England? (Hear, hear.)
This question remains to be answered, and until some
satisfactory answer is given to it the British public ought
not to be satisfied with the present condition of education.
(Rear, hear.) Gentlemen, in compliance with your request,
have thus stated to you my opinion, and I have given you
the reasons for that opinion. I have stated to you that I
continue of the same opinion which I have repeatedly ex-
pressed, that the state of education in England is insuffi-
cient, unsatisfactory, and unworthy of this country. I
utterly reject the idea, although I respect the men who say
so, that our progress is what it ought to be, and that our
condition is such as that we ought to be contented. My
views of the remedies which this state of things requires are
before the public; and my opinion with respect to those
remedies has undergone no change. But this, I beg to say,
emphatically and distinctly, that I am free, and that I will
keep myself free, to support any plan to ameliorate this
state of things of which my judgment and my conscience
may approve. There are, I believe, three changes which
are indispensable to a better state of things. The first is
that, in some way or other, what is called the half-time
system should be adopted, so as to be in use for all classes
in this country, and not to be limited, as it now is, to fac-
tories or establishments of one kind. 2d. We must have,
and we ought to have, a better, more complete, and more
perfect organisation. 3d. We must have a larger and more
certain supply of money. With regard to organisation, her
Majesty's Government have taken a most important step,
and I trust the day is now at hand when we shall have a
responsible Minister in the House of Commons to answer
for the state of education. I think it due in fairness and
justice oe my part to say that I feel grateful, and I think
the country ought to feel grateful, to her Majesty's Minis-
ters for the manner in which this most important step has
been conceded. But that is not enough ;we ought to have
some organisation for local superintendence and local con-
trol. One objection raised against us in the House of Com-
mons is that we aro seeking a centralising system. On the
contrary, I object to the present system as being too much
centralised. Everything is done by a comparatively irre-
sponsible committee. I have myself had the honour of sit-
ting upon it, and know how it works,and I want it changed.
We ought to have local control—local organisation; and 1
don't believe wo can possibly expect to have the education
of the countrywhat it ought to be unless that central autho-
rity, modified how it may be, is aided by the local bodies
of the people to take an interest in the subject. With re-
gard to the increase of money, I confess I see no course
but that, as I said before, a great public object, in
which every one of us is deeply interested, ought fairly
to be promoted by public funds ; and therefore my
opinion is that the most fair, just, and equitable
mode of supplying existing deficiencies is by means of
a rate. (Hear, hoer.) In the debates it had been put most
prominently forward that a rate for education would be
open to all the difficulties and objections which are applied
to a Church rate. In my humble judgment, of all the bug-
bears by which this great question of education has been
impeded and checked this is one of the most unfounded ;
and I believe, on the contrary, that no other rate would bo
paid by the people atlarge, so cheerfully, so willingly, and
with so much satisfaction; and for this very plain and
simple reason—that there is no rate from which the rate-
payer would derive so visible and such immediate personal
benefit to himself. (Applause.) But I have never recom-
mended what Mr. Laing calls a grand uniform centralised
system ; on the contrary, my opinion is that, looking. to
the present position of this question in England, unifor-
mity is not attainable, nor is it even desirable, Whatever
we now do, we cannot, as wise men, lose sight of the ex-
isting state of things, nor of the efforts which have been
made ; and I believe the wisest and most prudent plan in
any changes we may now make would be, not to supersede,
but to assist, complete, and to supplement the existing
state of things ; and, further, that ought to be clone with
the utmost possible regard to existing feelings and facts. I
should be open to misconstruction if I concluded these ob-
servations without referring to what we hear so much about
—namely, what is called the religious difficulty. Whatever
the extent of that difficulty may be, I wish in the strongest
terms to express my deep conviction that that difficulty is
not insuperable. (Hear, hear.) I believe that the true,
moderate, and wise view of that part of the question is to
consider, as I do consider, that there may be t w o main points
oconnectedfirst
rws
ti tihs
nw
lhoioc
kh
iwn
ge
tcoa ntnhoe t
e,
dannoda
tmi
ouns to
fn o
the
, lose
youth sight o
f
England, every child ought to be duly and properly in-
structed in thisfirst and greatest branch ofknowledge. The
secoad is, in giving this instruction, we must so arrange it
as to adhere most strictly and most rigidly to theprinciple
of perfect toleration, so that no violence shall be done tojthe
religiousbelief of any denomination of Christians. Provided
these two conditions are strictly and securely guarded, I con-
fess that I am myself disposed to adopt whatever system I
thought would be the most generally acceptable and the
most likely to procure general public support. (Loud
applause.) No doubt there are difficulties in this and in
other parts of the subject. But can you mention to me
tta
inooynmathat questionw
Catholicsas of
rf greato
wfa
sr
o mp
fullu
db ffioi cf
nidunil tf
difficulty,
eu? sl tt
y,Theibt whinuetyourmita
nwo
ap
sar et
emancipation
nl eeoc
f;-
Parliamentary reform was full of difficulties, but it was
done ; that question in which you took so much interest,
the adoption of free trade and the repeal of the corn laws
was full of difficulty, and that was done; the reformation
of our laws for the relief of the poor was a matter of ex- I
trsune difficulty, and it baffled Parliament for years, but
it was done ; and so must this be done. But don't expect I
this can be done by the individual efforts of independent
yearmem blenr se
voefr Pparrelsiva
mm
ea
dn
to hWopheetn I
hatiia.
iro
ttwd
ouuc el
dd
pmays
sb iilnl
tloas
at
law. All I aimed at and expected to achieve war the pug-