The Sun.
London, England, 1860-10-12 00:00:00

50 Sovs Plato.

Bloomsbury
Spiteful Dick
Volatile

MR. HARDY, M.P., ON 03'ECUL..4.7t

EDUCAi'IOY.

CROYDON, THURSDAY.
The annual meeting of the Canterbury Diocesan
Education Society was held in the New Public Hall
in this town, this afternoon ; his Grace the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury presided ; and among those
present were the Earl of Romney. Mr. G. Hardy,
M.P., Sir Walter Stirling, the Rev. B. Smith
(diocesan inspector of schools), Mr. IL Hoare, the
Rev. J. Hodgson, the Rev. D. D. Stewart, the Rev.
G, Morley, &c.

The report having been adopted,
Mr, HARDY, M.P., moved the following reso-
lution :—" That this meeting desires to convey
to the Committee of the National Society the
thanks of the Canterbury Diocesan Education
Society for the watchfulness and ability it has
shown in its correspondence with the Privy Council
on the subject of the trustedeeds of schools ;
and the meeting desires also to express its conviction
of the great importance of maintaining and still
further advancing the system of sound religious
education on the principles of the Established
Church, and in union with the National Society."
The hon. gentleman said—The report which has
been presented to you to-day raises a question which
has suddenly come before the public, but which will
I trust, as suddenly disappear, inasmuch as it is a
question which ought never to have been raised at
all. I refer tothe new propositions of the Committee
of Privy Council in reference to national education.
Their plan is, I think, inconsistent with the scheme
of education which has now existed in the country
for many years, and would go far to undo all the
good which has been done under the minutes of the
Privy Council. It is impossible to look at the course
which has recently been taken by the Committee of
Privy Council without feeling that it is one that
must sap to its foundations all the movements in
favour of voluntary education in this country. If
we look back to what has taken place in reference
to education we shall find that the clergy at one
time were the only educators of the country. At a
period not very long distant certain persons taking
advantage of the increased opportunities afforded
for more skilfully imparting instruction, introduced
improvements which gave a better system of educa-
tion. They were not, however, the persons who ori-
ginated the education, but simply a better mode of
conducting it. As time has gone on, the system has
remained unchanged. It began as a voluntary sys-
tem, and when it ceases to be voluntary and religi-
ous in my opinion it will be a greater evil than a
benefit to the country. (Hear, hear.) In estimating
the object for which we have been called together
by his grace the archbishop to-day, it is impossible
to omit considering that we have met in our diocesan
character for the purpose of promoting secular edu-
cation. I have long entertained a strong opinion
that if you were to interfere with the groundwork
of religious education, you would interfere with the
groundwork of that voluntary support which is at
present accorded to our society not only by the clergy
but, I am happy to say, by an increasing number of
the laity. In the year 1859 a strong wish was
expressed to introduce into this country a grand sys-
tem of education on the same footing as that which
had previously been established in foreign coun-
tries. At that time there was a great deal of talk
about having a system of secular education to
which all classes of children, whatever might be the
religious sect to which their parents belonged,
might resort. Those persons wished that children
should be taught without reference to creeds at all,
but the mind of the country was against it, and in
my opinion is still strongly against it. I think
that any person'who supports that system by argu-
ment ought to be prepared to show us the triumphs
which it has achieved. Where are those triumphs ?
The talkers to whom I allude tell us that we are
conducting our schools on a wrong principle; that
we ought to enlarge them and extend the secular
element. And I cannot help thinking that the
opinion which was expressed by the Committee of
Privy Council on Ethication if carried out to its
logical conclusion, would produce a state of things
which above all others I should dread to see in this
country. In 1839 the Committee of Council began
to act, and put forward their minutes as to the
mode in which education shk-mld be dealt with. At
that time the State had come to the conclusion that
it would made no advance of money for strictly re-
ligious purposes for the future, and. they ceased to
grant money for such purposes, because, they said,
we find the country divided into a great number of
sects, and we will deal equally with all. They,
therefore, left in the hands of those who gave the
money towards the schools the power of controlling
them, only leaving them subject to State inspec-
tion, so that it might be seen that the money
granted by Parliament was properly applied to the
purpose for which it was granted. Beyond that the
Committee of Privy Council said there should be no
State interference, and no State superintendence or
control. That was the system which was established
at that time. Upon what principle is it, then, that
the Church of England—for when I speak of the
National Society I speak of the Church of England
—is now asked to make an alteration in the deeds
of trust under which the schools are held, and adopt
in the schools principles in reference to religious
teaching which the Roman Catholics or the Wes-
leyans, er any other sect, are not called on to adopt?
(Hear, hear.) All that we ask for is simple justice,
and a guarantee that in working the schools pro-
perly no difficulty shall arise as to religious instruc-
tion. The clergy who have the management of the
schools know perfectly well that in most of them are
a number of children whose parents are Dissenters,
but would the parents send them at all if they were
told that in no case would religious instruction be
imparted to them ? I venture to assert, without
fear of contradiction, that such a system of education
would drive the child of the Dissenter away from
the school quite as much as any attempt at prose-
lytism. Our object should be to return a child to
his home so imbued with the elements of religious
knowledge as to enable him hereafter to work with
his parents for the common benefit. What is the
attempt which has beer made by the Committee of
Council to which this resolution refers ? The rule
adopted by the Committee of Council is exceedingly
strict. They say that members of the Church of
England, who have contributed their money to-
wards the establishment of schools, are to under-
take not to force upon anybody that religious in-
struction which was the very object of the founda-
tion of their schools. All we say in reply is that
it ought to be left in our own option to impart re-
ligious instruction just as it is left to the Wesleyans
or Roman Catholics. (Hear, hear.) I entertain a
firm impression that the moment this system be-
comes introduced its effect will be to dry up the
sources of voluntary education. If you look to the
minutes 'of council as originally framed, you will
see that they studiously avoid interfering in any
way with religious instruction. The Committee
of Council said, " We will have nothing to do
with religious instruction ourselves ; we will only
provide that in any schools to which we make
grants religious instruction may be provided ac-
cording to the denomination to which they be-
long." Why is it that we are to interfere with
the Church of England Schools, and not with
those of any other denomination ? In my opinion
very great injustice would be done to church schools
by endeavouring to put a stop to that which has
worked so well for so long a period. Those who
wish to see how the present system has extended
of late years need only refer to the last report of
the Committee of Council. Without going into
details, I may state that both in the number and
efficiency of the schools, in the number of children
attending them, the education imparted, and the
instruction of the masters and pupil teachers, there
has been a steady and progressive improvement,
such as could scarcely be anticipated during the
short time the system has been in operation. It is
not twelve years since the National Society began
its work; and when you consider how short a time
that is in the history of a nation, you must admit
that the results are very encouraging. During those
twenty years nearly 1,000,000 children have been
brought under the inspection of the state, and we
who are connected with the diocesan societies of
the country know that one of our main objects is to
make provision for regular religious instruction.
Any person who will take the trouble to read the
charge lately delivered by the Archdeacon of Mid-
dlesex will see, from the account he there gives of
secular education in America, how the efforts which
have been made there have been thrown away,