The Sun.
London, England, 1860-08-15 00:00:00

the system from which they hoped so much good to flow
had failed, and Mr. Bellaire and Mr. Cassell had also ex-
pressed their disapprobation of it. It appeared that the
main efforts of the system had been directed to perfect the
pupil teachers, while the children were neglected and

turned out of the schools uneducated. It had been shown

that the children left the schools at an early age, and if they
could not get them to remain in the schools after 10 years
of age, it was quite clear they must suit their school sys-
tem in a more satisfactory manner to the poorer children.
The right hon. baronet (Sir Jobn Pakington) showed that
there were a class of children in ragged schools who were

describodAs utterly inadmissible to the national schools.
Surely, then, they ought to do something to aid those chil-

dren in the way of education. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. LOWE had listened with great gratification to the
arguments of the right hon. gentleman who had just sat
down; but the right hon. gentleman should understand
that the system of which he spoke was no system at all ;

and he confessed he did not see the relation of the right
hon. gentleman's statistics. The system was not esta-
blished by the Privy Council. The system acted upon by
the Privy Council, whether good or evil, was this—they

did not give money to found schools, but they gave it to aid
parties in establishing them. He would now refer to the
remarks which the right hen. baronet the member for
Droitwich, and say he could not but admire the high tone
and feeling in which the hon. baronet had expressed him-
self. But if the house followed the advice of the right hon.
gentleman, he begged to say that they would relieve. any
future party in tho situation which he (Mr. Lowe) had the
honour to occupy from the invidious position of appearing
to decline giving money to aid schools in the manner in
which the right honourable baronet wished. There would,
in fact, be no end of applications for grants from all quar-
ters. There were three diferent schools : the first was the
certified reformatory school, to which children were sent
after conviction ; the second was the certified industrial
school, to which children were sent by the magistrates after
having committed an act of vagrancy; and the third was
the elementary school, whore the children of honest parents
received education. But these (with which the Privy
Council had nothing to do) did not exhaust the schools.
There were the schools which were the subject of that even-
ing's discussion—the ragged schools. The ragged schools
were schools established by humane persons for, as de-
scribed, the "education of children who had no home, and
who attended, not by legal compulsion, but who were
vagrant rather than criminal." He thought that was a very
good definition of those schools. Now with regard to the
support of those schools, he begged to say there seemed to
be considerable error, inasmuch as 48 of the class received
relief from the Privy Council to an amount upwards of
£5,000. There was an opinion that the ragged schools could
only receive relief for elementary teaching; but the fact was
they could receive money for a certified master and for
pupil teachers, and they could also receive money for assis-
tant teachers, if the promoters of them complied with the
form upon which assistant teachers could be had. There-
fore they were not excluded by the Privy Council, as
alleged ; and they also could have gi ants on the same con-
ditions, if they complied with them, that other schools had.
There were, then, in the first place, the " capitation grant,"
which was a grant in which the children made a particular
amount'of payment. Some schools received ne payment for
children, yet they had the capitation vont. In the second
place, they were snowed to have, in addition to a certified
teacher, an inferior teacher, who was prid, although he
would not be paid in any elementary school; and in the
third place, the elementary schools did not receive any of
the annual grant for books, pupil teachers, or other matters,
unless they had a certified teacher. Some of those schools
were however without a certified teacher. Elementary
schools were not allowed to have grants from the Privy
Council unless they bad a certificated teacher ; but ragged
schools had not that disadvantage, and they had in addition
special aevantages which the others had not. Two of the
disadvantages under which they laboured were these, that
they must have industrial teaching, and they could not take
fees from the pupils. The right hon. gentleman had by his
argument paid a high compliment to the Privy Council,fand
he would ask him, did the right hon. gentleman mean to
overthrow the principle upon which the Privy Council
acted ? And if that was to be done, let it be understood
what system was to be substituted. The right hon. gentle-
man wanted the elementary schools to be continued. Some
might think that too much was given to the ragged schools,
and others might think that too little was:given; and that
seemed to be the opinion of the right hon. gentleman; but
what he proposed would have the effect of dragging down
education in this country. If people found that by calling
schools ragged schools, they could get more money, a rush
would be made to Government for larger aid by that means.
To act simply on the reports of inspectors would not be
right or justifiable. When aid was claimed by a school
calling itself a ragged school, it was necessary that he (Mr.
Lowe) should be supplied with some test to sustain the
allegation. The right hon. gentleman had accepted the
definition of what schools should be considered ragged
schools. Before the Government parted with the public
money it was necessary it should be seen that claims should
bo properly substantiated, and it was deemed necessary that
a certificate should be bent in signed by two magistrates. Let
them see how the grants to ragged schools had increased. In
1854 the grant amounted to £llB. In 1857, after the new
arrangements had been made, the grant was £19,000. In
1858 it was £27,000, and in 1859 it was reduced to £15,000.
After referring to further statistics he said it was the duty
of the Privy Council to manage the education of the chil-
dren of those who did not come under the definition of
paupers. In his opinion the matter of education must be
left to the voluntary principle, or to the compulsory one if
the views which were put forward by many were to be car-

ried out.
The question was then put, when the house divided, and
the numbers were—
For the motion
For the amendment
Majority

The house then went ints committee. •
Mr. LOWE, on the first vote (L 538,167) for education in
Great Britain), read statistical tables to show that the
number of children in the schools had increased above the
number of last year by upwards of 50,000, and that in point
of economy there was a large diminution—Z3o,ooo. He,
however, thought that liberality was the truest economy,
and that the, avoidance of sectarianism would lead to
economy, inasmuch as, if to satisfy denominational feel-
ings you had two schools where one might have sufficed, a
double staff of officers would be required, and many other
contingent expenses would have to be multiplied. This was
an evil in itself, and should be avoided as far as possible.
• Then came the expenses of the public offices in London,
which had to communicate with the various schools, the
number of clerks employed, and the quantity of post-office
stamps used, and other matters connected with the ad-
ministrative department, which involved a large expen-
diture—much larger than would be required if those
sectarian differences were not recognised. The sums paid
to !pupil teachers were well expended, as it encouraged
young persons in the acquisition of learning, and secured
to the country a large number of competent instructors.
Even those who did not remain in the schools amply repaid
the country for whatever they received by the valuable
services which they were enabled to render society in other
departments of industry.
Mr. HADFIELD thought the grant had already been
too much. It Lad accumulated from £20,000 to £900,000,
and it was impossible if the present system were pursued to
know where it would atop. If the Government proceeded
in its present course the expense would soon be £3,000,000.
There were now among the Dissenters 350,000 volunteer
teachers educating about 3,000,000 of children. That system
had worked successfully, and in his opinion ought not to be
interfered with. Those grants were a hindrance and im-
pediment in the cause of education, and therefore he would
oppose them.
Mr. NORRIS apprehended the Government was pursu-
ing a perfectly correct course. It might at times commit
errors in giving more in rich districts than was necessary,
while in poor districts they gave no more. He hoped that
some plan would be devised to reduce the grants in wealthy
localities and increase them in poorer places. This system
improved the morals and principles of the population, and
that was much better than paying judges and gaolers for
punishing therm
Mr. HEN LEY said that If the British and Foreign School
system was dying out, it was because the country generally
were becoming more impressed with the importance of re-
ligious instruction, which, in many places, it was impossi-
ble to give the children in their own homes.
Mr. ADDEItLEY said some districts were often called
poet because the people were poor; but there might be rich
landlords. He approved of the system of stimulating vo-
luntary ()forts. Ile thought denominational zeal would
keep tip denominational elorts.
Mr. LONGFIELD said it seemed that the system of
subsidising private enterprise was the most successful, and
that, therefore, voluntary efforts should be encouraged.
They Were the most conducive to the education of the
people. in Ireland education was not supplemented by
local aid, and the result was, that private benevolence was
insufficient for the purposes of education in that country.
He was disposed to think that the educational system of
the Privy Council should be introduced into Ireland.
After a few words from Mr. BItIICA
Sir d. PAKINGTON said he agreed with the Vice-Pre-
sident of the Cettircil that the denominational system was
the best. He also agreed with the right hon, gentleman
behind him (Mr. Henley), that specific instruction was de-
sirable. lie thought that no minority sirorilci be bichided
on religious grounds. This whole subject was in a provi-
sional state, for he was looking with great interest to the
report of the Royal Commission. he believed the Aisting
system loft a large substratum of the people who were not
at all educated, and yet a cry was raised from both sides of
the house that more money was required. If they wished
to educate the people of England properly they must
change the present system altogether.
Mr. PULLER thought there could be no doubt that the
denominational system was an objectionable one, but still
the advocates of it had no confidence in the present system
of education.
Mr. AYRTON complained that the vote was not divided
into general heads, so that the house might see what they
were about to grant. Besides, he believed a great deal of
the money was wasted in building and decorating schools,,
instead of providing for the proper education of the poor..
Ie denounced the ptinciple of keeping up a toy like the