The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-27 00:00:00

ning

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1850.

Last evening witnessed the real debfit of one of the
most popular orators of the day in his character ai- a
legiblator. A success more genuine and legitimate
has seldom been obtained in the House of Commons
than that which was yesterday secured by the bold
and statesmanlike speech of the Honourable Gen-

tleman the Representative of Oldham. We felicitate
him upon the utterance of an oration which was
sufficiently conspicuous for its ability to elicit the
panegyrics of the Prime Minister, and sufficiently
generous and moderate in its tone to call
forth the acknowledgments of the Honour-
able Member fur the University of Oxford.
Our felicitations, moreover, are only the more cor-
dial, seeing that the speech delivered by Mr. W. J.
Fox was introductory of a Bill destined, if enforced
with the sanction of the Legislature, to affect the
moral and intellectual condition of the population of
the United Kingdom. The subject of his remarks,
in fact, was none other than that of the necessity
of adopting a national system of education. Al-

though last evening's discussion was altogether of a
most superficial character, excepting only the
harangue out of which it emanated, it is nevertheless
one entitled to very particular consideration, for in-
asmuch as it is a formal recognition of a great popular
requirement by the representative branch of the
Legislature.
Saving only the few whimsical personalities ex-
changed between Mr. NAPIER, Mr. Law, and Mr.
BERNAL OSBORNE, there was little to be regretted in
the debate of yesterday beyond the inevitable
objections thrust in with so much cross-grained
and cantankerous pertinacity by Mr. PLUMPTBE and
Sir R. HARRY INGLIS. Naturally enough those two
honourable representatives insisted upon the urgency
of the danger threatened by any proposition such as
the one then submitted to the consideration of the
Parliament. Anything at all approximating to a
negation of religion of course excited the trepidation
both of the Member for the University of Oxford,
and of the Representative of East Kent.
A godless education is as much their terror
as it is that of a certain influential

party in Ireland. Upon this principle it
is that we have witnessed so much purblind opposi-
tion to the efforts made by the Society for the Diffu-
sion of Useful Knowledge—efforts as laudable as
they were beneficent. Unable to acquire a plan by
which they can force controversial matters down the
throats of the children of the multitude, without any
regard whatever to the religious predilections of the
parents of those children,these persevering sticklers for
a strictly Scriptural instruction, would prefer allowing
the evil of popular ignorance to be perpetuated. Their
notions, indeed, upon the subject of education e
us as bearing a considerable resemblance to those“ en-
tertained by Mrs. Malaprop in thy comedy. Above
all, Sir Anthony, I would have them taught
orthodoxy!" It would be impossible for them, how-
ever, to add to their catalogue of the requirements of
education—" and I don't think there's a superstitious
article in it"—for there is. The superstition of
their objections is their most prominent cha-
racteristic. Because they cannot drill the religious
ideas of all children into an accordance with the
Thirty-nine Article 3, they would keep for
ever from the grasp of the community the
golden amulet of education, the beautiful
and powerful talisman of knowledge. Upon the
same fallacious system the poorer members of the
community are forced to slake their intellectual
thirst from the Sewer instead of the Fountain, those
hypothetical publications upon which Mr. CHARLES
KNIGHT has rccently descanted so eloquently. Now,
however, thaoks to the fortunate interposition of Mr.
W. J. Fox, the gifted representative of Oldham, the
nation is'afforded some reasonable prospect of placing its
moral and intellectual upon an equality with its
political and physical emancipation. Let us hope
that the sanitive cup of the national intellect and
the national morality has not been raised once more
to the lip, only to be dashed down again into the
dust, that the " waters of life" may not evaporate in
the illusive aridity of a mirage, but that the glorious