The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-22 00:00:00

THE

receiving money-grants from Government, confined
themselves to educating their own children, but that
was not the case with the Church Education Society in
Ireland. The Kildare-street Society was abolished for
refusing to carry out a system of education, unless
under certain restrictions. The same exclusive prin-
ciples actuated the Church Education Society in Ire-
land, and upon that ground alone lae would oppose the
motion. There were various other religious so-
cieties, who were pledged not to carry out education,
except under their own peculiar t-nets. If they granted
the aid required to the Church, then every other religi-
ous society would be entitled to demand it.—(Hear,
hear.) The • national system was a most admirable
system, considering- that it was founded upon the old
system. He considered that religious instruction was
abundantly accorded by all religious denominations to
their children in Ireland. The Roman Catholics held
that the Scriptures should not be put into the hands of
children of tender years as a school-book. There were
now 800 schools in Ireland where the Bible alone was
taught, and 800 others in which Bible and Scripture
lessons were both taught. That made 1,600 out of 4,400
were the Scriptures were taught. Therefore the Hon.
Member was not justified in stating that the Scripture
was not taught in the schools in Ireland. It was a
mistake to say that the Catholic clergy were opposed to
the high scientific and literary instruction imparted by
the national system. For these reasons he must oppose
the motion. _ _

Sir HARRY: VERNEY raid that the national edu-
cation which had been lately introduced into Ireland was,
so far as he could learn, attended with no beneficial re-
sult. He contended that the Hibernian Society schools
were of the greatest benefit to Ireland, and that the pre-
sent system was far inferior to that which preceded it.
Again, he would refer to the Kildare-street Society, end
he was prepared to prove that never was any system of
education so beneficial or so much admired by the Ro-
man Catholic parents of the children attending those
schools. He then referred to the thousands of Romer'
Catholic children who attended those schools, and who
were known to have been educated, not only in the ge-
neral system of temporal interests, but their moral edu-
cation was fully approved of by the gentry in their re•
spective neighbourhoods. He would ask the Irish Mem-
bers and the Government whether there was any alle-
giance on a late occasion evinced by those who had been
educated at the national schools which were in existence
for the last eighteen years without producing any fruit
or benefit whatever? - •
Mt. HEALI) said that he felt it his conscientious duty
to support the motion of the Hon: Member (Mr. G. A.
Hamilton), for he consideied that the money to be
afforded-to.. the' ii.attonat
.system of education was• not
distributed to all parties in Ireland, no matter what their
religious, Opinions might be. He should say that the
objection raised by the Hon. Member for Cork (Mr.
Fagan) could have;no weight on the House, for it is the
peculiar characteristic of Christians that the members of
every religious persuasion should exert themselves to
gain to their creed every one whom they considered was
in error, and he was glad •to say that the Noble Earl
(Earl of Arundel and Surrey) very justly advccated the
same principle on a very late' occasion. He was asto-
nished that any member in thatilOUse should deny that
the Established Church in Ireland was not an integral
part of the Church of this country, for, he would ask,
was not the doctrine of the one Church the same as that
of the other—(Hear, hear)—and were not the interests
of both churches, the English and Irish, identified?
This, he contended, served as ,a proof that they were one
and the same in interests and benefits, and that on these
ground& he should support the ;notion.
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, the subject now before us is
sufficiently_important and difficult to induce us not to
mix with it any question with regard to the Church
Establishment in this country Cr in Ireland.—(Hear,
hear.) The question now before us concerns a system
of education which is aided and supported by grants
voted in this House and collected from the taxes paid
generally by the people of the United Kingdom, and is,
therefore, a question totally apart from any question
that may be stated or debated With respect to the Church
Establishment in Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) With respect
to this question then, I should say, in the first place,
that in disposing of these grants, as a matter of justice
we ought to make the benefits of the education which
we give as extensive as possible.—(Hear, hear.) We
ought to diffuse as widely as possible among the chil-
dren the benefits of the education that we propose to
aid, and it would not be a fair and just application of
the money thus derived from the taxes if upon any nar-
row and exclusive principle we were to distribute
these grants. But, in the next place, as a matter of
policy and expediency, I should say, if you wish
your grants to be useful—if you wish to diffuse the bene-
fits of instruction upon secular subjects, in morality, and
in religion, amongst the people of Ireland, that it should
be your object to have such a system as would not pro-
voke opposition and jealousy in the very outset and
commencement, and that you should endeavour to avoid
all those rules and regulations which may induce the
suspicion that you are attempting to convert that which
isthe largest, the most numerous, and the poorest sec-
tion of the people of Ireland to the religion of that other
section which has in its hands the greatest proportion of
the power of the state in this country, which is the
richest in Ireland, and which, by endowments and other-
wise, is most likely to use its power for the purposes of
proselytism.—(Hear, hear.) Both on the ground of
justice and policy, therefore, if you mean to be just and
fair towards the people of Ireland—if you mean to diffuse
education as widely as possible—it is your bounden duty
to avoid giving your grants in such a manner as may in-
duce the belief that you mean, in proposing to promote
education, to convert the children of Roman Catholic
parents to the religion o ithe Protestants. The lion.
Gentleman who has just addressed the House, inde
speaking of the earnestness with which religion should be
inculcated, says that he has no objection to proselytism.
Ho avows that proselytism would bo a part of
his object; but if that were the case, his very ob-
ject, I submit to him, would be defeated, because
immediately that you declare to the Roman Catholic
clergy and laity of Ireland that your purpose is not to
give them a good education, but that your purpose is
proselytism, they are themselves against that purpose,
and your grant becomes a grant given only to a small
portion of the people, fir those who dread that prosely-
tism, or who consider it a fraud upon them to attempt it
under the guise of school learning, will indignantly re.
ject it.—(Hear.) Now, if these are right principles,
then we come to that which I shall certainly not venture
to attempt to explain to the House after the able state-
ment which we have heard from the Hon. Gentleman
(~sr. Stanley), who has not only shown great ability in
defence of this cause, but in addition to that great ability
has an hereditary right to defend the cause of education.
—(Heer, hear.) In adverting to the speech of the Hon.
Gentleman who spoke last, I must refer to the vary di`'-
ferent conclusion which was arrived at by the Commis-
sioners of education—l believe a Commission originally
begun by one to whom I am nearly related, the Duke of
Bedford, when Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, and after-
wards continued. [The Noble Lord then read an extract
from the report of that Commission, to the effect that
they indulged more confident anticipations of success if
all interference with the particular religious tenets of
those who were to receive instruction in the national
schools were, in the first instance, unequivocally
disclaimed and effectually guarded against; that they
conceived this to be of essential importance to any new
establishment for the education ;of the lower classes in
Ireland; and they expressed their unanimous opinion
that no such plan, however wisely and unexceptionably
contrived in other respect., could be carried into effec-
tual execution in that country unless it were explicitly
avowed and clearly understood as its leading principle
that no attempt should be made to influepce or disturb
the peculiar religious tenets of any sect or description
of persons.] This was tho conclusion arrived at by men
who were custinguished ornaments of the united Churches
of England and Ireland, and who had, in addition to
their attachment to the principles of their Church, a
knowledge of the condition of the people of Ireland, with
whom they had to deal, and knew what would be a com-
plete and effectual bar to the 'success of any plan that
might be proposed. -Now, considering the whole his-
tory of past events, and the history also of voluhtary
societies, it IS no wonder that the Catholic clergy and
laity should be peculiarly jealous—that they should be
peculiarly sensitive in regard to any plan of national
education for that country. And when they heard that
the Bible, according to the authorised version of the Pro-
testants, was to be read in these schools, that they should
regard it with suspicion, as an attempt to seduce them from
the religion of their fathers, and induce them to adopt
the Protestant religion, was, I must say, natural and
almost inevitable.—(Hear, hear.) With this view, then,
Lord Stanley, in founding the present eductional system
in Ireland, declared that all suspicion of proselytism
must be carefully guarded against. Well, these schools
were thus established, and aided by grants made by this
House, and what has been their progress? From 107,000
children taught in these schools in the year 1833, they
have advanced to 480,000 children in 1849.—(Hear,
hear.) They have established admirable normal and
model schools in Dublin and elsewhere, and agricultural
schools in various parts of the country, thus aiding and
assisting not only in the promotion of religions learn-
ing, but likewise in the knowledge of those arts which
are most likely, to advance the people of Ireland in in-
dustry and civilization.--(Hear, hear.) ' They have,
therefore, after seventeen years' experience' strong ground
for asking the support of this House. They come before
ytionuuawnicteh toirstrong case for the further support and con-
think, entitleldheetaoilsethsgtem. They come beffire you, I
that unless there be made out an
overwhelming.
we
htreittilterfering with that system, you
should say,
which the various sects of Christians
in search of a plan by
bined education in Ireland. haveßte
etians would receive corns
at a system which in the course of at length arrived
moilslieavaenatr
anhiylderarns hasa
come to this point, that half
maintained in those schools and receive education children
them. We will not intemperately or hastily discard such
a system, but allow it to go on, and see if it will not bear
fruits which will be highly advantageous to the people
of Ireland."—(Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman who pro-
poses to interfere with this system does so, first, upon
the ground which has always appeared to me to be a
ground which, though plausible, is entirely untenable,
namely the conscientious scruples of the Protestant
clergy and laity. Now, I could understand very well
that the parents, whether Protestant or Catholic, 'may
say, " Here is a system of education which interferes
with my religious belief, and does not allow my child to
receive that education which I conceive to be necessary,
and you should not by public grants force me to support
this system." BUt the objection made by the Hon.
t obligedbt
that
to ta
Gentleman (Mr. Heald) is entirely of a diffetent nature.
rletcieisvne an educationotthatchil drewn,hbicehingisPrnoottesptarnottse,s
areta Protestant,
children of a different faith are not compelled to receive
an education which is sufficient for Protestant children.—
(" No, no," from the Conservative benches.) That cer-
tainly was what I understood by
,the proposition made
in firmer years, and by the-proposition made this year.
that
Upon the testimony of persons of great authority,

is, in fact, the principal objection which has been taken.
It was the Bishop of Cashel, I think, who at a meeting
in Dublin, declared that a Protestant child might-
receive in the national schools a good Protestant educa-
tion; but what he objected to was, that the Bible was
not admitted as a school-book in the schools in which
Roman Catholic children were taught.—(Hear, hear.)
I hold in my hand a pamphlet writtenday Mr. Sadler, a
clergyman, in which he gives an account of his own
school, and who, on being asked if he would become the
patron of a national school, said he agreed to it, and
then be describes what is done in that school in
the way of religious education. (The Noble Lord here
read an extract from the pamphlet, which stated that
the children in the school were daily taught to read
portions of Scripture which contained the essential doc-
trines of the Gospel, and that when the school hours
terminated they retired to separate rooms for the pur-
pose
of receiving the religious instruction approved of
by their parents.) After this, I think no person is en-
titled
to say that the Protestant child is obliged to re-
ceive a religious education which is at variance with the
conscience of his parents. There are some of these
schools from which peculiar religious instruction is ex-
cluded,
but this, I believe, has been done at the request
of the more zealous Protestants, who would. not
agree that Roman Catholic instruction should .
be given in an establishment for the maintenance of I
which public money has been granted. But, gene- ;
rally speaking, the rules which are contained in the
last report of the Commissioners are that the peculiar re-
ligious
instruction may be given at a certain interval
after the school hours, upon condition only that the
Bible in the Protestant version shall not be read as a
school-book during school hours.—(flear, hear.) If this j
be so, then it is perfectly plain that to the first proposal ;
of the Hon. Gentleman the modification that he asks is
not a modification that the religious education of Pro-
testants may be better provided fur, but a modification ;
which will be contrary to the wishes. and which will
arouse the suspicions of the Roman Catholics by declar-
ing that the Bible shall be read in the schools, not only
for the sake of the Protestant children, but for the sake
of the Roman Catholic children who belong to those
schools. I say that if you were to introduce such a ,
change as that, you would at once strike a fatal blow at
the whole system. Those jealousies which have been al-
layed,
and those suspicions which are now sleeping,
would at once be again aroused. You would have
300,000 or 400,000 of those children taken away from
the schools, and all your hopes of a united education for
the people of Ireland would thus be blasted.—(Hear,
hear.) But then it is said, "If you do not approve of
any modification of your plan, let the national schools
remain as they are, conducted according to the na-
tional system, but make a separate grant for the sake of
the children belonging to the Established Church of
Ireland. It is very plausible to say that that is what is
done in England—that that is your system here—and
' why not therefore adopt it in Ireland? But I see no
face in the objection that there is a difference of system
in England and Ireland. What I wish to see effected
is the greatest degree of good that is practicable; and if
I find that, according to one system, the most good is
practicable in England, and that, according to another
system, the most good is practicable in Ireland, I will
take the system that effects the most good. If you say
that the members of the. Church of Ireland, who are as
one-sixth or one-seventh of the population, and at the
same time the possessors of the greatest proportion of
the property of that country, shall have a separate grant,
how will you deny to the Roman Catholic Bishops,
who wish likewise for separation, a similar grant for
Roman Catholic schools, as separate and as exclusive?
—(Hear,. hear.) 'Considering the advantages which
you have in Ireland—considering the means which the
Church of Ireland now possesses—considering that
Archbishop Mllale and others are as strongly
for separate education as any of the bishops and clergy
of the Establishe4 Church of Ireland— how could
you deny to them their separate schools, conducted ac-
cording to Roman Catholic maxims, and exclusively and
rigidly worked by the Roman Catholic clergy ?—(1-lear.)
Of the advance of 120,000/. for educational purposes,
you would perhaps have to give 20,000/. to the Estab-
lished Church, whilst 100,000/. would bo given exclu-
sively to Roman Catholic schools. And who can tell
me what will be the course of education in these Roman
Catholic schools, when they are entirely set loose from
this system of mixed education, which has taught them
to know and to love their Protestant brethren, and to
act upon the precepts of the Christian religion? Do not
think that the effects will be the same in Ireland that
you see in England, where the grant is apportioned to
the Church of England, to the British and Foreign
School Society, to the Wesleyans, and the Roman Ca-
tholics. In Ireland you have it totally different. In
that country, where there has been so much of separation
and animosity, you would see that animosity revive,
and fostered by restoring the separate system ;
and yet it would be impossible to stop. If you say that
you will have a separate .grant for the Established
Church, it will be impossible for you to stop there and
say that to it, and to it alone shall this 'separate 'grant be
made—that to no other religious persuasion in Ireland
will you give the same advantage. You would thus be I
introducing an injustice, you would thus be raising an I
exclusion with respect to a new system which we have
so much t ) deplore with respect to the system that has
long been established.—(Hear.) The advantages that I
look for from this grant is, that, being a matter of very
recent introduction, founded upon grants by Parliament
to which no one has a claim, except on the grounds of
general justice and policy, you have it entirely in your
own hands to distribute that sum in the way that will
produce the greatest influence on the future progress of
Ireland. You have it in your'power to say that you will
make it the means of reconciling persona of different re-
' ligions, of saying that your rule in Ireland is just, and that
' it is not because one person is called a Protestant, another
a Presbyterian, and another a Roman Catholic, that you
Bill depart from your rule of doing equal justice.
That rule has been lately established. It is working
well, and it a ill be your own fault if it be departed from.
I hope, therefore, on all these considerations, that the
House will not agree to make any change in the grant as
it has hitherto been distributed—l hope they will sup-
port the Commission of Education, comprising, as it.
does, men of great eminence, though of different reli-
gions, like Archbishop Whately and Archbishop Murray.
—(Hear, hear.) Oae of the complaint; made is that the
clergy of the Church of Ireland receive no support, coun-
tenance, or favour from the State, unless they are friends
of the national system of education; but I beg to observe
that the clergy who are declared to be hostile to this
plan of education, are not excluded from the most valu-
able benefices or preferments of the greatest value in
Ireland, in consequence of their opposition. If it were
true that the State had the monopoly of all the benefices
that might be the case. But the fact is that generally
speaking the bishops have the far greater portion of
the patronage of the Church. I find that in Armagh
the Crown has four livings and the primate 49, that
in the diocese of Ferns the Crown has 1 living and the
bishop 44, and that in Cashel the Crown has 3 livings
and the bishop 34.—(Hear.) I do not think, therefore,
that the worldly prospects of these gentlemen are blighted
in the manner which has been represented. Where the
Crown does not favour them, the bishop, generally
speaking, prefers them; and I do not find fault with him
for that: But if I do not find fault with him, neither is
the Crown to he condemned nor censured, if—in the dis-
posal of such patronage as may fall to the Crown, when
the dispenser of that patronage meets a man of piety,
learning, and character, who is favourable to the system
of national education—they prefer him to one who is its
decided opponent.—(Hear, hear.) I think, therefore,
that upon every ground there is no reason for the claim
that has been preferred. I regret deeply to ob-
serve that the clergy of the Church of Ireland still
entertain such strong repugnance to the national
system of education in that country. I think that the
clergy of the Church of Ireland, in consideration of
their merits in every respect, but especially for the
charitable exertions they made during the late painful
years of famine and distress, are deserving of every re-
spect on the part of this House. lam concerned, there-
fore, that upon this subject I should be compelled to
differ from them; and were it not that I think their
wishes are opposed to the general welfare of the people
of Ireland, and that we should be committing a serious
inroad upon our system 'of education, I should he glad to
comply with the desire they have. expressed. But seeing
that such serious consequences must result—seeing that
many schemes and plans for Ireland have often failed in
ourhands—seeing thatahis is a plan,as established by Lord
Stanley in 1832, which has had good success—which has
prospered, and which promises to strengthen religion—
to promote good conduct and obedince to the laws
amongst the people of Ireland—l earnestly call upon the
House to give it their support, and not to consent to
abridge its efficiency.
Lord CLAUDE HAMILTON would not address the
House on the present occasion were it not that he had
a public duty to perform to those who had chosen him
as their representative. He was anxious to correct a
mistake into which the Hon. Member for Cork (Mr.
Fagan) had fallen, in stating that the bishops of the
Established Church were opposed to the national system
of education in Ireland. So far from that being the case,
seven out of the twelve were in favour of it. With re-
spect to the Noble Lord who bad been referred to as fa-
vourable to this system—Lord Stanley—no one could
for a moment doubt that the Noble Lord had regarded it
as a great social experiment, and that he had given to it
all the attention of his mind, with a hope and view of
carrying out the system successfully.—(Hear, hear.)
But there were great mistakes committed in the statis-
tics on this subject in relation to the children in various
parts of Ireland of the different denominations of Chris-
tians. No doubt it was desirable, if practicable, to have
the children of the several religious denominations meet
together within the walls of one school-room; but the
system
at
thad notb the
e en tried,
bestsystem and he didba
that could
ot hesitateld bea
dot to
adopted,
that ,
isonvdittehiattbiotswe awsbfoar
bfrooamstebdeinsgo
much of perfect
the
yasetoeumr
ay o
. accuracy
the statistics of the national education system, as in ope-
ration in Ireland, to try and prove that accuracy, and
tions were fallacious.
he thought be would be able to show that their calcula-

Sir J. GRAHAM said he was a member of the Go-
vernment along with Lord Stanley and the Noble Lord
opposite who had proposed the national system; and,
therefor-, although he could not hope to add anything to
what had been said by the Noble Lord and other speakers,.
ho felt bound to address the House, for the purpose of
declaring his continued adhesion to that system. He
most cordially agreed with the Noble Lord the Member
for Tyrone that religious instruction was the best pos-
sible cure for the largest part of the social and moral
evils of Ireland; but it seemad to him that the Noble
Lord, in insisting upon that, put altogether apart Roman
Catholi,_! religious instruction, as a thing not to be re-
garded in treating the question. He (Sir J. Gra-
ham) altogether and entirely dissented from that doc-
trine.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord in analysing the
proportion of Roman Catholic children at these schools
in Ulster talked of the small proportion of Protestants to
be found in them, but did the Noble Lord mean to set
aside the Presbyterians?—(Hear)—and was not the
national system adopted by them in that part of the