The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-07 00:00:00

(PRICE ID.)

complained of works of a most improper cha.
racter having been introduced by the parents of
•he children, which was an evil the Commissioners
were desirous of remedying. Such books had be
generally introduced without the masters exercising
,any
discretion, and such as the parents thought were easiest read.
The Commissioners therefore recommended that no books
should be admitted which had not the sanction of the
Board. The Right Honourable Gentleman then
adverted to the charge of mutilating the Scrip-
tures—a charge which he said was a most awful one.
The Synod of Ulster asserted in their petition the doctrine
that it was the right of every man freely and fully
to enjoy the use of the Holy Scriptures.
From that doctrine he did not dissent ; but
he asked those gentlemen whether they were prepared to
give the free and unlimited use of the Scriptures—not to
every man, but to every child ? Were they prepared to
place in the hands of their own children the whole of the
Scriptures without note or comment ?—(Hear.) Were
they prepared to place in children's hands the whole of the
Bible, leaving it to themselves to pick out those parts most
beneficial for them ?—(Some Member here called out
" Question.") He begged pardon, but that was the question.
He asked whether it would be proper in a combined edu-
cation to offend the Protestant or Catholic by the hitt oduc-
lion of the whole of the Scriptures, to which they could
not assent, and leave them to judge what portion
was best for them and what not ? Upon that sub-
ject he begged to read an extract of a letter from a
Preshyt-rian minister of the Board, the Rev. James
Carlisle. A man of more unblemished piety, or possessing
a more deeply rooted sense of religion than that
gentleman, did not exist. He was a member of the Pres-
byterian Synod of Ulster, was secretary to a Bible Society,
and a member of almost every religious society in Ireland.
If the House would permit him, he would read what the
view of the individual to whom he had referred was, with
respect to the plan proposed by his Majesty's Govern-
ment. He stated that it laid no obstacles or impedi-
menta in the way of any children reading the Scriptures,
whose parents were desirous, bona fide, that they should
do so, but that the late system compelled parents
to suffer their children to read the works pub-
lished by the Society under the penalty of forfeiting
their whole education. Was this, he would ask, the
language of a man unacquainted with the Scriptures, or
one who held the present plan in disrepute ? He would
ask, could any man read the passages to which lie
had referred, and say that by the system intended to be
adopted, the Bible would be mutilated ? It was said that
the selection from the Scriptures were exceedingly unjust
and improper. Why, in the 14th report of the Commis-
sioners, there was a provision which stated that in the cir-
culation of books for the use of the schools, it would
be necessary to select such books as were fitting
14 the education of the children, but not the whole
Bible, but ample extracts from it. It therefore ap-
peared to the Commissioners that it was only necessary
the most important passages of the sacred history should be
included, in which all the precepts of morality were brought
forward and enforced. In that opinion his Majesty's Go
vernment entirely concurred ; they thought that volu-
minous extracts would form the best criterion and
standard for the education of children. Was the House, he
would ask, prepared to allow the evidence of the Divines
he had alluded to ; and if they did, could they in corn-
mon sense say, that they had recommended a rob-
bery of the Bible ?—(Much cheering.) If there was any
difference in the present plan to that which bad hitherto ex-
isted—it was that it would further it. He wished to state,
for the information of those who were against the with-
drawal of the grant to the Kildare-street Society, and who
stated that that society did not deal in extracts, but fur-
nished the whole—that according to the report of the
Commissioners, very few extracts were given from
the Bible, and that it was not included in the
books given by the Society. He (the Right Ho-
nourable Secretary) had seen extracts from several other
works used by that Society, which be was sure the
House would consider as a mutilation of the
Scriptures ; if they were not, he did not
know what mutilations were. It had been
asked what could a Board, formed of Catholics, Protes-
tants, Presbyterians, and religious characters of every
denomination do, as there would always be dissensions
among them ? In answer to that argument he would state
that the greatest harmony existed among all the
Members of the Board, that there had not been a division
among them, and that the two Roman Catholic
Members had had no difficulty whatever in drawing up
such books as were considered necessary to the edu-
cation of the children. The Hon. Gentleman opposite
had thought fit to assume that the Protestants of Ireland
could not safely rely on the Protestant Archbishop of
Dublin—that he was at variance with his clergy, who
had pledged themselves, before they were aware or had an op.
portunity of knowing the merits of the measure, to give it
their determined and systematic opposition. If from
that it was meant to be inferred that the Arch-
bishop of Dublin disapproved of the system of education
proposed by his Majesty's Government, he (the Right Hon.
Secretary) would take upon himself to assert, that there
was no statement more utterly without foundation than
that. There were some who said (whose opinion he
disregarded) that he was not a Protestant alone, but
a liberal Protestant. He would say, those gentlemen had
no right to assume that, because he had liberality of mind,
he could not therefore feel so deeply an interest in religion
as those who talked more of it, but did not think more of it,
If Hon. Gentlemen wished to know Mr. Carlisle's
motive for connecting himself with this Committee, he
would read them an extract from a letter which he had
written. He said, " that setting apart four er five classes
of persons whose motives for opposition were bare-
faced, there is a remnant of persons who object to
the Government plan, or stand aloof from it, whom
I much respect.—( Hear.) And it is one of my
greatest trials, that I have felt myself compelled to adopt
and persevere in a course which these persona dis-
approved of. I would not be understood, how-
ever, as intimating that I should stand alone
among those with whom I was accustomed to co-operate.
My motives are simple and scriptural, and if they be other-
wise, I pray God to change them, and direct me to a
course consistent with his will. I connect myself
with the Board from a desire to do my duty to the Go-
vernment of the country, for the success of not only a
lawful but a wise measure, awl the hope of promoting the
peace and well-being of the people too long subjected to the
operation of a system which outrages the first principhs
of Christianity." He would say that if all men were actuated
by the same spirit, if all men conducted themselves on the
same motives, he should not look upon this as a doubtful
experiment, but as a question already decided, as an ex-
periment that would not fail to contribute to the educa-
tion, but to the harmony and peace of Ireland. He looked
on it still as an experiment, and it remained to be seen
whether party prejudices—whether religious animosity--
whether political rancour, were sufficient to prevent the two
great parties in Ireland from meeting together and joining
their children in one common system of education,
which will promote among them in after-life the har-
monies and charities of common brotherhood.—(Hear,
hear.) He believed that common instruction in
their respective religions opinions would be well
calculated to promote this, and always preferring a
good Roman Catholic to a bad Protestant—although
there were errors undoubtedly in the Romish Church—
he would anticipate as the result of this plan, if angry
feelings were kept down, the best and most satisfactory
effects on the future peace, interests, and welfare of the
people.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. LEFROY said that the charge which he should
prefer directly against the system was, that it actually ex-
cluded the Scriptures from forming any part of it. For
this reason he must dissent from the eulogium pronounced
upon the plan by the Right Hon. Gent. (Mr. Stanley), as
the subject of that eulogium involved a departure from the
basis of all Christian principle. In testimony of this, they
had the letter of the Right Hon. Gent. and the fact of the
old system being superseded, which allowed the reading of
the Scriptures without note or comment. It did not ap-
pear to himto be any advantage that the new plan pro-
vided selections as recommended by former Committees.
He must persevere in objecting to a system which recom-
mended these selections to the exclusion of the Scriptures
themselves.__(Hear, hear.) In touching upon this point
his complaint was not solely made on behalf of his
fellow Protestants, but also on behalf of his Roman
Catholic brethren. lie must regret on account of the lat-
ter that a system, by which they had access to the Bible
when they thought fit, had been superseded, and another
substituted which rendered it impossible for any Roman
Catholic child to get access to the Divine Word. And as
to the charge of proselytism advanced against the friends