The Sun.
London, England, 1866-12-07 00:00:00

and that to have a national and thorough system
of education we must get over that difficulty, and
have secular instruction, and better secular instruc-
tion than nothing at all. The reply was that if we
wished to Christianise the country we must stick to
denominational education. Then there were:complex
difficulties about building schools, getting children
to come when the schools were built, and then,
when the children and the schools were obtained,
getting the clergy, managers, and parents to work
harmoniously together. His own impression was
that the chief difficulty was that of getting the chil-
dren to go to school at all, because in that part of
the question there were three formidable questions
to deal with—the apathy of parents who could afford
to send children, the competition of the labour mar-
ket, and the poverty of those who could not afford
to part with school pence. He thought the last was
the least serious. The amount of pence per child was
not more than 2d. per week, for the Government
returns showed that in the schools under inspection
the cost per child per annum was not more than £1
65., or 6d. per week, towards which 2d. was contri-
buted by the parent, 2d. by voluntary contribution,
and 2d. by the Government grant. In some cases
the inspectors reported that 2d. a week might be a
burden on the parents where, for instance, a man
was oat of work ; but it was disgraceful where the
children of working men who were in good wages
and full work were kept from school because those
people would not pay 2d. a week. In the pauper
districts of large towns 2d. might be a serious item,
but, supposing there were 3f millions of children
belonging to the working classes of an age to go
to school, and supposing 500,000 were so pau-
perised that they could not afford to pay 2d. a
week, what would it amount to? Why, £225,000,
or one thirty-third of the 7} millions paid by the
ratepayers under the system of the poor laws; and at
that cost the ratepayers would make a good invest-
ment to relieve themselves of that immense burden.
The competition of the labour market was a much
more serious difficulty, because of its greater temp-
tations, for there was not the mere sacrifice of school
pence, but the question of what a child could earn.
Take the case of a man with three children, between
six and twelve years old, and who could earn toge-
ther 4s. a week. Now that 4s. and the 6d. a week
school pence made a vast difference in the comforts
of a working man, therefore the temptation was
great, and it might require some pressure to get
children to school. But who was to employ it?
Employers must rise above their own interests if it
was to be done by them, for it was often to their
advantage to have cheap infant labour in the place
of adult labour. The Factory Act afforded the
principle on which children might be made to go to
school, and he was not sure whether some further
progress would not be necessary in that direction.
He thought the difficulty could only be solved by
further progress in the direction that had been sanc-
tioned and admitted as a principle by that act. But,
after all, the difficulty that was more serious than
any other was the positive apathy of a number of
parents to send children to school, even if their edu-
cation was paid for. He thought that the evil was
so great that it could only be dealt with by a law
that was even worse than the Factory Act. That
act prevented people from doing something, but in
the case of apathy people must be compelled to do
something. On that branch of the subject Mr. Bruce,
late Vice-President of the Board of Education, had
recently given some statistics respecting an inves-
tigation made in Manchester to ascertain the state
of education in that city. A canvass was made of
7,650 families, comprising 11,000 children ; of that
number 4,500 were at school, 760 at work, and
5,750 neither at work nor at school—of that 5,750
three-fifths were absent on account of the poverty
of their parents, and two-fifths from the apathy of
their parents. It was said that in London there
Were 150,000 " missing children." That was denied;
but taking the estimate at 80,000, it was painful to
think there should be so many whose future was
denied them simply by the apathy and carelessness
of their parents. Many of the ministers of religion
believed it to be necessary to come to some kind of
compulsory system, for they conceived by that
means only could neglected children be reached.
But there was another difficulty, which no one
speaking on the subject of popular education could
avoid touching, the denominational difficulty aril
ing out of the conscience clause. On that subject
the position of the State seemed to be this : the effect
of that clause was limited to parishes in which the
population was too small to be able to support two
schools, and the State said—We cannot expend the
money of the taxpayers on two schools which cannot
be filled, and we must support one or none at all ;
but as the money is contributed by all without dis-
tinction of religion, we cannot consent to give the
whole of the grant to a Church of England school,
unless that school undertakes that the children of
Dissenters shall not be excluded by the enforce-
ment of doctrines to which their parents objected.
There was a great deal of misunderstanding on that
bclergymen were called
us upojcne
tt I
o.-
teach
was nottna
t truewhichthat
they
did not believe, or
upon which they differed from others ; they were
to have full power to teach the dogmas of the Church
of England, and the only point was that, if Dissen-
ters could not get their children into any other
school, they were to have access to the secular edu-
cation of that. That was the difficulty which had
caused so much heart-burning, and under which
schools remained unbuilt and children untaught.
The view taken by the bulk of the clergy was natural
and clear enough. They could not undertake, as a
matter of bargain, to promise not to teach the doc-
trines of the Church of England to all children ;
they could not admit that religion could be severed
from education ; nor \could they admit that any in-
struction could be given under their authority and
at their schools apart from the formularies, doctrines,
and books of the Church of England. That was a
logical and conscientious view ; and so it might also
be said of the opposite view. Hence parties came
to a dead lock. Many of the clergy asked that the
clause should not be enforced upon them, and they
would not be intolerant, but in a matter of such
vital interest were they justified in trusting any-
body ? Could they trust to the discretion of a body
of men, however reasonable, but amongst whom
from the nature of their high vocation fervent en-
thusiasm and ardour were a greater virtue than dis-
cretion ? (Applause.) He would readily admit that
education in its highest form could never be severed,
from religion, but supposing that higher form of
education could- not be given, were the Dissenters'
children not to be taught to read, to write, to
sum, and needle-work ? He did not think that
could be contended for one moment. Let denomi-
national schools be continued as far as possible,
they were the schools to which he himself would
best wish to give support ; but where there
could not be two schools in a village the
people should not be deprived of secular know-
ledge because they could not get the other; the
latter might be the more valuable, but don't let it
be said that the Dissenters should have nothing be-
cause they could not take all. (Applause.) He
thought that religious instruction could be given
without encountering theological or controversial
difficulties, and that it would be a great calamity to
the country and to the Church if the clergy were
to stand upon a theoretical non possumus, and with-
draw from the work of education. He acknow-
ledged their great services, though he believed that
the monopoly they had long claimed in education
would not be much longer allowed. England, how-
ever, did not wish for secular education, and if the
country should be driven to it, the responsibility
would rest with those whose uncompromising ten-
dencies declared that, as a matter of conscience they
could not undertake not to press their doctrine on
those whose parents did not want it. (Hdar, hear.)
But the general difficulty was not confined to small
parishes ; it occurred in every department from the
university to the most remote infant school, and
under that conflict education and religion suffered,
and the great danger was that unless some com-
promise was effected the result would be what all
would deplore that education would cease to be re-
ligious, and religion would cease to be educational.
(Applause.) The State could not be a party to the
oppression of the conscience clause, or to ignorance;
it must distribute its funds with an impartial hand.
But apart from the question of funds he had doubts
- whether the community had not a right to insist