The Sun.
London, England, 1869-03-16 00:00:00

SPIRIT OP THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Standard says that the question with which the
measure concerns itself is in no sense a party questi°,l;
As Mr. Beresford Hope pointed out, no one takes UP '-
ground of positive resistance to change in the manng,
ment of the endowed schools. No one asserts 0301:
present state of things is one which can be defended;
maintained. It is admitted on all hands that the abthle:
revealed by the royal commission report constitute
scandal which must be vigorously and promptly deale
with, and the only points in issue between the author ox
the bill and its critics on Monday night are those affectl
the mode in which it is proposed to remedy evils the e%')'
tence of which is recognised and deplored in all quarterg‘
'We are all working for the same end. The questO
raised by Mr. Forster's bill is whether we approve hie
methods of remedy and can work with him in aPPIYie!
them. The reception accorded to the bill on the OPP".
sition benches must have satisfied the right hon gentle:
man that he has nothing to fear from a " dead earth'
kind of resistance, On the other hand, he can lordrile
be surprised at finding that the provisions of a measlia-h
so wide in its scope, and dealing so trenchantly
interests of the highest importance, are jealously sctli-of
nised and closely sifted. Above all, it will be the dutY,p-a
the select committee to decide whether the powers paste
in the Government through their commissioners are cr sr",,
not excessive. Do they or do they not enable the Educe
tion Minister to upset and cancel every school trust in th
kingdom? Would it not be in the power of a 13ien
filling that post to obliterate the Church character
Church foundations, or of a Fawcett or a Dixon to 1133';
them the vehicles of purely secular teaching? It ilfsprs
not be forgotten that the bill finds its warmest suPPnri-it
amongst the Secularists and the Dissenters, and should
appear on careful inquiry that they have such specs
reasons for approving it as we have hinted at, .bct
trust the select committee will not hesitate to take 19"

its sting.
The Telegraph considers that a load was lifted off the
minds of many honourable and right honourable gentle
men by the time that Mr. Forster had explained what he
meant to accomplish through his Endowed Schools 131
All sorts of horrors had been conjured up by the first brie
tr;statement of its provisions, and a hasty—a very has
glance at the measure itself. His bill is temporary. 33'1.
in making it so he has done wisely. A year or two lie°c;
a great measure of national education must be framed,
and it will not do to block the path of reform with se;
tional machinery. Better for us to wait until seb°°,.
shall be placed under some authority, imperial or loe:11,
Finally, comes the task of examining the pupils-3 t3,-,
which Mr. Forster commits to a body of twelve gent;
men, six elected by the Government, and the remain
by the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and L°nd°:
That body is to carry out the plan of mid
examinations. In words of remarkable force, Mr. Forster
-
said that he wished to execute the intentions °f
founders. But that can be done only by attending t°
spirit of their bequests, and not to the letter. hl° i 9
have changed since the Tudor times ; the new Engl3l/,l:ye
unlike the old ; and, as Mr. Forster observed on A°s.'
the/
night, if the founders had been present in the House, 0
would have been the first to applaud a bill which seeks sp
rescue magnificent educational endowments from the grebe
of sloth and bigotry, in order that the money oilliea
devoted to the teaching of what our fathers justly

the " humanities."
The Post thinks that the strongest argument in favour
supplied by the
of the Abolition of University Tests lFl' '.ssu
fact that the disabilities which it is intend ed to rernove!r°
incompatible witn the spirit of the age in which we,11,-ocl
rie
•
It is simply an anachronism, when not only ordinarY t
conformists, but even Jews, are eligible for the iiiigthese
offices under the Crown, and for seats in the Legis.l3-u:';
.that.the University of Oxford should insist on 3 93.0:1,1'et
signing the Thirty-nine Articles if he desires to take a rct
degree than that of Bachelor of Arts • that both ° e
tc
;°
and Cambridge should exclude from the Senate
otherwise entitled to sit there, because they are iniab.le a
pledge themselves to be members of the Est3bilslle
deny
Church; and that the colleges of
both should
fellowships even to the most distinguished of their Te ing
ISt on
bers. If a college devoted itself exclibisively.to the tr
of clergymen, it might then with great propriety ivsis for
the observance of rules in respect to qualificationvat
office no less stringent than those now in operation. „J
if a college invites all comers, irrespective of their adopt
and their ultimate vocations,' then it bound to 3citl,
those principles of justice and impartiality re,sPrienac nt
the distribution of its rewards, and to the aPPcirt'°;,, eter
of legislative authority, which, on a pinch renter
scale, are acted upon by the State in which that ce'

fcaeoexmerlimstolatnasie.g:nDlßwi(.. tioeielivh.yteiriNyeneolfsrem newspapers,arkisi thatas
come s ir John
upon IL
e 37 ' t burroroe.. :oeisfil 5:
tob e a Roman
Limerick, i
know avowed
whi himself This gentleraan, ch At
concludinga a spee_eia
CatholicsStehepal.nriaelsiat,nrecent.whom
y mah:
servebcengapiipx,ears
which, according to Sir John Hal, be °,,,P eat,
nt with
a Feniant be following
Ireland for the
ought to be able to govern
Ireland, sympathiseris, with the Fenian inove.,:etw
tlbbruietsmh wordssief
themselves,
,`
meansl
tdi
ai.o:: a i ntlit
ro_ eFi_ssi,:ll,,:rinl
ifii
in my heart, and so is every priest in lrei for
The meeting, it is said, broke up with cheersthe
a Republic, President Grant, Stephens,- and Pigott• le t
terrible conjuncture Sir John Hay wished to knew what
t-t
to
her Majesty's Ministers indended do? Mr. Chiebes
Fortescue's reply was brief and to the point. : Icotilitehg;
IVe doubt not that the Rev. Mr. Shanahan, ivbtteshe ig
Chief
Secretary explains, did. not. say precisely Nv.e' .7'o
alleged to have said, is better pleased with Sir John Ile'
question than with Mr. Fortescue'si answer. . Nest t 0
delight of making a violent speech to an excited in . ,
• uir.y
the glory of being the subject of a parliarnentrzY 14 a
would probably be most gratifying to a vain and hothea“`
man. As to the meeting
.which seems to have been the
chief offender, it cannot be arrested or prosecuted, or even

Hdispersed, for'it has dispersed itself.
The • ald says that forty-nine of the Fenian cenvtil
are to be unconditionally released. It is with regretaibt:.
we must decline to look upon this act of grace as on
rel ,re.
gether of justice or policy. It certainly does not l.r,
sent the principle by which the Government, in the ever
vise of its prerogative, professed to be guided. Tbe: fora
ment put forward was that a distinction would be arbeeo
between the young and inexperienced, who
ringleaders
misled by worse conspirators, and the whatring do
who had entrapped them to their ruin. But vero
we find? Either that the judges of the realm an
recklessly indiscriminate or a inhumanly severe
assumption which would he monstrous—or that the
11),I01
tended principle of all this clemency has been lost sigie V !-
entirely. For among the individuals pardoned
the first instance, were actually condemned to 6ito
though their sentences were subsequently commutc'tpt
penal servitude for life. And what happens ? Why is
a sentence of death signifies just such a penalty'
often inflicted for an ordinary theft ; that Pe
a,
servitude for life is a penalty at which a prisoner I;ef,
mock, in the confidence that he would have
far snore stringently treated had he assaulted a 13-•,lleeci
man. Let us repeat, we do not begrudge the snisguil,'icis
and ignorant herd of the Fenian convicts the liberty wqhis
we hope they will not again abuse,lc and we, trust -a;
example of leniency may have its moral effect in Irelan r
but as for some of those who have.)chosen for Klici
it does appear preposterous that their punishment 6-°
be made ' a jest of, and that the law should confess it
thr.cl:itbu:
to be insincere when it dares to deal with treason- von
might almost be said, in spite of Mr. Chi h qtel. •
3149151( Y tea_ ai

( The 22772,6 s observes that the Endowed Schools Bill
baying passed its second reading and been remitted to a
select committee, it may be assumed that its principle is
conceded. We believe the bill deserves approval, but we
'confess that the ends sought by the bill are more open to
discussion than the adaptation of the means proposed
under it to the ends. It is, for example, very easy t°
overrate the efficiency of any method for discovering :15'
educating the best minds of each successive generation t:r
the winnowing of competitive examinations. The
tellectual powers of boys ripen at such different ages'
and in so many cases a full development of fan''
ties merely perceptive gives such appearances of
promise never capable of being realised, that under
the best system boys who prove eventually to be the
leaders of their generation will be neglected, and boys wile
as men will never rise above the work of routine will be
pushed forward. But this objection applies as much to
the existing application of educational endowments as te
that contemplated by the bill, and, simply stated, it
amounts to no more than this—that though the bill, wit°,
put into operation, might vastly improve the character et
our national education, it would still leave it imperfect i 3
its application to some minds. A more substantial cri'
ticism on the scope of the bill will be found in the danger
of uniformity of national education in developing 5
monotony of national character. No impartial Perse.ll
who has examined the facts will deny that this danger is
a real one, for it has been realised in those countries
where national education has been best promoted. In
New England, where we find a race most nearly akin t°
ourselves, and a system of graduated popular education
long established, a certain common level of character C
be distinctly recognised, and traces of a similar result are
not hard to discern in France and Prussia. 'Tice greater
diversity of English life would, indeed, go far to check the
tendency to a similar phenomenon among ourselves, slt
it is certain that private and auxiliary schools will long
flourish to control the predominance of one type of education.
The danger itself, however, though sensible enough tr" b:
noticed, is insufficient to affect the value of the reforms
proposed by the Endowed Schools Bill, and we hope
measure will return from the committee to which it bas
been sent invigorated rather than enfeebled by its maniPti.
lation.