The Sun.
London, England, 1867-04-06 00:00:00

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.

THIS Der.—Morning, 2h. 50m.—Afternoon, 3h. 10m.
I`o-Moßßow.-Morning, 3h. 30m.—Afternoon, 3h. 47m.

y
eyt qt
nit

LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 6, 1867.

Mr. GLADSTONE has come out in his true colours
at last, and shown himself to be the uncompromis-
ing enemy of all Reform, and the inveterate oppo-
nent of those who are in power instead of himself.
This is the sum and substance of his opposition
to the Ministerial measure, and he has now realised
the worst fears of those who have watched his
course since the beginning of the session,
with suspicion as to the honesty of his objec-
tions and the validity of his professions of
impartiality. At the meeting which took
place yesterday, at Carlton-terrace, the right
honourable gentleman spoke at great length, and
exhibited extraordinary eagerness in the matter.
Of course he went about his work in the most
roundabout manner possible, and explained the
why and the wherefore of his proceedings from the
commencement of the Session. It was stated at
former meetings that he was to do three things, and
in point of fact each was to counteract the other ;
so that, whatever apparent concession was made to
Ministers, the Opposition were to reserve
full power to themselves to " reconsider their
position and duty." No doubt this is very
ingeniously done, and reflects great credit on the
skill and saroir faire of those who plan and those
who carry out such doings, but we are firinly con-
ainced that the public will not admire such quib-
bling, but, on the contrary, consider it to be con-
duct most unworthy of leading politicians at such an
important crisis in affairs. Perhaps never more
than during the present session have we had cause
to wish that Mr. GLADSTONE would be definite and
keep to his meaning. Whatever is the use
of his saying that they desire a Reform Bill to be
passed during this present session when he and
those assisting him are doing everything they can
to prevent the passing of the measure now before
the House. We pity the discernment of any one
who still thinks that the right hon. gentleman is
trying to get the Bill passed. He is hindering it
with all his might, instead of helping it, as he at
first promised to do, and the sooner this is univer-
sally recognised the better. It is quite out of
character for Mr. GLADSTONE to pretend he is
merely acting for the best, and it requires a great
deal of patience to peruse his remarks. Ile actually
goes so far as to say that he is influenced in his
present course by the reading he gave to the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer's speech ; he thinks that
" pressure from the Liberal party" is all that is re-
quired to ensure the passing of a good measure.
We do not call this a manly or straightforward
course to adopt, and it would have been much more
consistent':for the Leader of the Opposition to
have said that he did not think the
present Government were fitted to carry a
Reform Bill through Parliament, and he should
move a resolution to that effect. How can we give
credit to a man who keeps on contradicting himself ?
Was it not only the other day that he announced
his intention of dividing the House with respect to
dual-voting, and now that that feature of the bill
has been abandoned, lo and behold ! up he starts
with another objection. His own followers might
well exclaim, " Will these scruples and exceptions
to the Government measure never end, but last
till the " crack of doom." So long as Lord DERBY
has a Reform Bill before the House, so long will Mr.
GLADSTONE pick holes in it, and continue to raise
objections to its passing.
So far as we can make out the meaning of the
instruction which has been drawn up, it intends to
proceed in a retrograde fashion, and, if
carried, we shall really be in a worse con-
dition than we were before. Mr. CLAY was
the most sensible man present yesterday, and
gave excellent advice when he suggested that only
the first line of the instruction should have been
acted on. As he stated very truly, the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had promised to make conces-
sions in committee, but not before ; and, added he,
" I give my opinion with the deepest sincerity that
the instruction is fatal to the bill, whereas we mig
• ht
make a good bill if we contented ourselves with the
first line only." Of course Mr. GLADSTONE was
very indignant at this suggestion, and declared
that it was " totally impossible" for him, under any
circumstances and conditions whatever, to agree to
what Mr. CLAY proposed. We cannot think that
Mr. BRIGHT really approves of this proposition of
Mr. GLADSTONE'S, for his speech was very tame
throughout, and he let out some home truths,
whether accidentally or not, to the effect that having
turned the corner of the second reading, some of
them were sanguine enough to think that they saw
" daylight,".and might out of a bad bill make such a
one as would satisfy the House and country. We
confess that we have shared Mr. BRIGHT'S opinion
in so far that we thought the corner had been
turned, and though we certainly did not
think that the Bill was a bad one, we thought
that it might be greatly improved in Committee.
It is all very fine for Mr. GLADSTONE to talk of
putting a " gentle pressure" upon the Government,
but we suspect the " gentleness" will be the same
which actuates the executioner when he shakes hands
with his victim, or desires to appear better than he
is. At any rate the tug of war has now begun in
earnest, and on Monday it must be decided whether
the House will give the Ministers fair play or
not.
raembeArs,garncieat responsibility will rest upon hon.
they must not accept Mr. GLAD.

STONE'S decision as the ultimatum of their conduct,
if they -wish to do their duty to their constituents,
and serve the cause they profess to honour. The
country will appreciate alike the good intentions of
the Ministry and the factious spirit of their oppo-
nents ; and to the country must an appeal be made
_ _ _

if Mr. GLADSTONE'S mischievous instructions be
carried. He knew very well that the Ministers
must accept this as a motion of want of
confidence, and of course they have done so. We
have hitherto been hopeful as regarded the progress
of the Government Bill, and our hopes have been
realised. We still hope and believe that the renewed
struggle of next week will only serve to bring the
Ministers a renewed victory ; but, if not, they must
go on boldly, and appeal to that which can control
the spirit of faction—the voice of public opinion—
and the result will not be favourable to the con-
spirators of Carlton-terrace.

The important though complex question of
national education was last night brought up for
consideration in the House of Commons. Mr.
LOWE took occasion to object to the new minute
of the Committee of Council on Education, the
object of which is to increase the grants made to
primary schools. Mr. Low E entered at some length
into the question, and although he has been
associated with most of the reductions in this de-
partment, he begged the House to understand that
he did not begrudge the money—£7o,ooo—for
any useful purpose connected with national
education, but that he thought so far from
increasing the efficiency of the existing
system it was likely to diminish it. The right
hon. gentleman drew an alarming picture of the
condition in which national education was found to
be in 1862, and he expressed his conviction that the
great and sweeping changes made that year by the
Committee of Council on Education had been most
beneficial, notwithstanding the panic created
amongst thos:3 concerned in education. The num-
ber of schools had been increased by 1,350, and the
number of pupils by 110,000 , and that had been
effected with a saving estimated at £400,000,
though he should be disposed to reckon it
at £lOO,OOO more. So much for the present
state of things according to Mr. LOWE, but these
figures do not show that there is no possibility of
improvement. Every year the importance of edu-
cation is becoming more widely recognised ; every
year some of the old prejudices die away ; and we
may naturally believe that the number of scholars
will go on steadily increasing in proportion to the
population, because the number of totally ignorant
and therefore indifferent parents is constantly di-
minishing. The next generation will not have so
much to contend against in the illiterate fathers and
mothers who, having "no learning" themselves,
cannot see the necessity of their children having
any. We may reasonably ask, however, whether
there is not something unsatisfactory in the
system which requires so much voluntary help.
The State is certainly rich enough to pay for
public instruction of this kind, and in many
countries such schools are altogether the business
of the Government. No one wishes to see that
method adopted here, and most of the parents
would greatly prefer paying something them-
selves fur their children's education. Still
the public grants might be made, we
think, in a little more liberal spirit, and
since the necessity of public instruction is ad-
mitted on all hands, it would surely be well to re-
serve voluntary effort and pecuniary assistance for
the classes below and beyond the reach of National
Schools. The Ragged Schools of our great cities
may fairly claim a grant in aid, but the bulk of
their work and their cost must be borne by those
enterpri:ing philanthropists who undertake them.
The National School, on the other hand, has no claim
on charity, though a powerful one on justice, and the
grants of the State should be ample enough to defray
what is required beyond the children's pence. Of
course there is no object to be gained by extrava-
gant expenditure, and unless efficiency is secured
the smallest sums are excessive, but the first object
should be the satisfactory working of the system,
not the reduction of expenses. Mr. LOWE regards
the whole question too much as it looks upon paper
without regarding the practical effect on the scholars.
He asserts that the additional grant will be wasted
where it is not mischievous, and in his speech
last evening he examined the three eharges
brought by Mr. CORRY against the present sys-
tem. The first objection is that the smaller
schools are unable to comply with the con-
ditions of the Revised Code ; the second, that
too much attention is given to reading, writing,
'and arithmetic, to the neglect of grammar, history,
and geography ; and the third is that, under the
present system, the number of pupil teachers has
very much declined. Mr. LOWE proceeded to dis-
cuss and to contradict these charges, but not alto-
gether satisfactorily. his argument against the
first objection was not a little singular. He con-
tended that it was no harm if the Government con-
ditions pressed hardly on the smaller schools,
because denominations were too fond of having
their own, and there were often two or three
small schools where one large one would be much
better. To the second objection he replied that
it was no use to teach grammar and history with-
out a sound substratum of rudimental knowledge,
and as the children generally left at eleven little
more could be attempted. This answer, at first
sight, seems plausible enough, but good authori-
ties have told us that in the schools where the
highest proficiency is attained in the higher
branches, reading and writing are most carefully
attended to. We fully agree with Mr. CORRY that
it does not speak well for the existing system
that an intelligent boy of ten years of age,
who had left school in a country town,
should never have heard of Edinburgh or Dublin.
The third objection, respecting the falling off of the
pupil teachers, Mr. LOWE treated lightly, and de-
clared it to be false political economy to give a
bounty upon the employment of pupil teachers. Mr.
CURRY summed up the case very briefly and con-
clusively when he said that he did not care about
political economy, but that finding a great falling
off in the teaching power of the country, a great
injury to the education of the children, a
great diminution in the supply of candidates for
certificated masters, thereby endangering the
whole system,he felt it to be his duty to take imme-
diate action. It had been found that the average
attendance in the schools throughout England and
Wales was 863,420, of whom 566,037 were pre-
sented for examination ; 284,000 passing in the
lower standard, 80,000 in the fifth standard, and
only 13,000 in the sixth or highest standard. It
is evident that some change must be introduced,
and we believe these grants to the primary schools
will be most beneficial. Where one pupil teacher
is expected to instruct 89 children, we need not
wonder that none of them know where Dublin is.
The House thought with Mr. CURRY, and ex-
pressed themselves very decidedly adverse to Mr.
LowE's misplaced economy. On a division 203
against 40 decided on behalf of the more liberal
proposal.

A grandson of the ex-Lord Chief Baron Pollock
is second in the Cambridge Classical Tripos for 18G7.
Sixty-one years have elapsed since Sir Frederick carried
off the blue riband of tho University; he lives in the full
enjoyment of all his fine facultios to see a grandson attach
an honour almost as great as his own to the family name.
—Lew Times.