The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-05 00:00:00

OFFICERS.

Captain FITZROY wished to know whether it was
the intention of the Government to introduce this set-
sinn a Bill to provide a superannuation fund for poor-law

officers.

Mr. BAINES said the subject was one on which a
gieat number of petitions bad been presented to the
House in the course of the present session, and ho was
anxious to take. that opportunity of stating what the
Poor-law Beard had; done with respect to it. It, had
appeared to him that the only principle which was
likely to receive the sanctiln of the House vra-, that of
forming a fund from deductions out of the salaries of the
pour-law officers themselves, without resorting to the
poor-rates or any other public tend, end, in order that
no missrprehension *hould exist on that point, he ha .•1
ordered the draft of a Bill to be prepared, and had cir-
culated copies of it, among all the poor-low officers in
the country, and although the Bill was approved by
many there .rare a considerable number of dissentients,
and net wishing to proceed on the principle of compul-
sory deductions of their salarit s against the opinion
of the , majority, or without their general con-
currence, it appeared to him that the only re.talt he could
arrive at after the pains he Lad taken to ase.,rtain the
most expedient course to be pursued was not to proceed
with the Bill; -therefore, in answer to the Hon. Gentle•
man, he had to state that it was not the intention of the
Poor-law Bt and to submit any measure on the subjtct to
Par!iament this session.
SPEAKING FROM ITI r, GALLERY IN THE
NEW HOUSE.

Mr. BANKES wished to put a question with ri fzrence
to the construction of the new House. Oa the occasion
when they last met there tin Hon. Member addressed
toe hose from the gallery, and he wished to know
whether it was in c.informity with the rules of the House
to do so, as the gallery was *hoisted behind the bar?
OPEAKER replied that, though the gallery was
behiud th,i bar, it was within the House, and a Member
had toererore a right to speak from it.
EDUCA s lON BILL.

Oa the question for resuming the adjourned debate on
the second reeding of this Bill,
Mr. C. ANSTEY, on behalf of the population of the
United Kingdom, thanked the Hon. Umber for ad-
ham for having introduced the Bill, %and expressed his
deep regret that a man like the Noble Lord the Mem-
ber for Arundehshould have fet himself called upon to
oppose the liberal design which the promoter of tht
measure contemplate 1, namely, conferring the blessings
of education upon the great mass of the people .—(tlver,
hear.) Whatever might he raid of the measure, or the
motives of those who had brought it forward, it was the
duty of all parties to discuss the Bill in a calm and dis
passionate spirit.—(llear, hear.) It had been said that
the great question at issue was between Christianity and
Atheism between hzaven and hell, but he fa
one did not accept that as a corn et definition
of the matter in ci,pute between the promoters of the
' Bill and the supporters of the amendment. If, however,
this discussion la ore really tantamount to a struggle be-
tween heaven and bell, all he ceuld say was that his toe
at least would not be on that side which the Noble Lore
the Member for Arundel had termed heaven.—(Hear and
a laugh.) He had listened with much attention to this
debate, in the vain hope of finding out what the objecti, ns
to the me mure were. The House would remember that tht
speech of the Hon. Member for Oldham, iu introducing
the Bill, was at once explanatory of its object and of the
machinery by which it was proposed to carry out that
object; but the objections urged against the Bill did not
seem to him to be quite so char. An Honourable
Member, who represented the peculiar interests of the
Established Church, had declared that the only
objection he entertained to the Bill related to the
dangers which lurked under it, and not to those that
were apparent.—Gear, hear.) The Lion. Member was
auspicious of evil because none appeared—( A laugh)—
but when the second reading came, and the Bid was
found to be precisely the same as that which the Hon.
Member for Oldham had described in his introduction,
then the cry , was raised that Christianity
was in danger.—(Hear, hear.) He then fore
became naturally anxious , to ascertain what
reasons could be urged in favour of-that cry, but when
he did ascertain what the objections really were, it
seemed to him they were no objections at all.—(A
laugh.) It sins said that in France the adoption of
the system propounded in this Bill had proved injurious
to the State, while other Honourable, Gentlemen who
opposed the Bill, said they did so because it was nct in-
tended to mute education subservient to religion. Now
thdse who entertained the latter opinion 'Might to
be the strenuous supporters of the principle prevailing
in France, for there the education commonly known as
the University of France 63 stem, was based entirely
on religion.—(Herr, hear.) These then appeared
to be the objections to the Bill. On the other
hand, what ayes the object of the measure? Why
it was to establish a system cf education which made the
teaching cf religion its first principle, but denied the
right of the State to (hetete to a parent the peculiar
religious tenets with which he should inoculate.
his child. The .Honourable Member for Oldham had
used The term education in its popular and vulgar
sense, as' synonymous with instruction, but, for his
pea, he should prefer the Bill better if " secular in-
struction" were substituted for the •term education,
because religious teaching, which some Honourable
Members seemed to think was the true definition
of the term , education, was not all that
was necessary to form the moral and in-
tellectual character of a child.—(Hear, hear.)
The fifth clause enacted that the master and mistress of
every free school should allow the children committed to
their care sufficient time to receive religious instruction
under their parents. • But there was', no provision in the
Bill for giving those poor children religious instruction
under the ministers of religion; under whose teaching
they might desire to be brought up. , Instead of the
machinery proposed by this Bill he should have preferred
the mode of governing those free schools laid down in the
report of the society for the establishment of free schools
in Lancaster. ' If the House Meant to separate secular
and religious education, they had better not have two sets
of teachers, as was proposed by the Hon. Member for
Oldham.: It was an infringement Of civil liberty for the
State to' educate at all ; and it was even more objection-
able for the State to teach religion. There were five or
six millions ;of your people, waiting• for secular educa-
tion, and at the same time it was confessed that the vo-
luntary system, though aided by Parliamentary greets,
was totally unable to supply the want, of the population
in this respect. The National Society was recognised by
the bishops, ,and recognised the bishops too, so that they
were convertible terms, and yet that society had con-
fessed that there were not sufficient means employed
for the attainment of their object.' The voluntary
principle bad nothing to do with secular education, and
must be put out of view altogether. All denominations
concurred
religious e
the point at issue between the supporters and the opposers
dinuedarthioand,ng
and it was in that distinction that
a distinction between secular and
of this Bill lay. If they were to throw out the Bill, and
in doing so they would adopt the' principles of the op-
position, they would express their concurrence with the
existing state of things, which admitted of no efficient
control over public schools. In Scotland alone, there
were 100,000 Roman Catholics, refugees from Ireland,
who were in need of religious and Secular education,
and who could not avail themselves of those schools
or churches which were supported by the State.
By the returns that .were already before them it would
seem that in Liverpool alone there were 250,000 children
in want of instruction, but that want could not be sup-
plied solely because the Educational Board of the Privy
Council insisted that all instruction to be given in free
schools should consist entirely of religious teaching.
He concurred in the principles of the Church of Scot-
land, but he differed with them in the mode by which
they proposed to carry them out. The machinery
by which the principles would be put in opera-
tion would have the effect of making the Church
of Scotland the be-ell of education, an evil which the
plan contained in this Bill would avoid. He supported
the principle of the Bill most heartily, but let it not be
understood that in making this statement, he pledged
himself to all its details.—(llear, hear.)
Mr. H. DRUMMOND thought the speech of the
'Hon. Member for o!dhem in introducing this Bill had
been received semewhat harshly on both sides of the
House, for certalely if there was a question upon which
Honoarable Members epeeaae I to be more unani-
mode than :Another, it wr,:s th7t the S'Att, ought
to undertake the education of ehe-prople.-7(Bear, hear.)
Now, when this subject was last befoee the 'House be
ventured to remark that the e was a sad confusion pre-
vailing in the minds of Hon. Umbers as to the mean-

ing of the words education and instruction. It
was indeed remarkable that even the Honour-
able and Learned Member for Sheffiel,l, who
was g' n rally pretty correct in his appli-
cation of terms, the other evening used the words
education and instruction in one and the seine sense.—
(Hear, hew.) It seemed, however, that in dealing with
this question all agreed upon the substantive, but dis-
agie ed about the adjective.—(Hear, and a laugh.) All
were for education of same sort, but some
want secular—some biblical--some religious—some
scriptural—in fact, all sorts of education, but still state
education they would have.—(Hear, hear.) Now he held
that state education was an impossibility.—(Cheese)
No two things could be more distinct or unlike
each other than education and instruction.—
(Hear, hear.) Instruction was putting something
into a person, education was drawing something
out of him.—(A laugh) Instruction and education
was divided into two classes, scientific and historical;
now the necessary tendency of scientific education e. as
to make sceptics.—(A laugh.) In science nothing wee
taken for certain: the anatomist, in lecturing to his
pupils upon tendons, joints, and sinehs, invariably
told them that they must take nothing upon
trust, and so it was with every other science;
but in historical researches the case was different.—
(Hear.) There you must trust entirely to the asser-
tions of others. It was too late to raise the question
whether or no Hannibal ever lived; they must eb peed for
that not upon experiment, but upon the assertion cf
others.--(hear, hoar.) No new discoveries could be
made in history, it could only le modified.— (Hear.)
But education was a mater wholly different.—(llear.)
It was taid in a blue book on the subject, that " the
preponderance cf more intellect, unaccompanied with a
corre,ponding amount of liveliness of the moral affec-
tions, would ever tend to boldness in religious rnittere,
and ultimaeely to something worse still." Learning,
was after all not an unmixed good. By lean-
ing, they inducel a boy's irritability, they in-
creased his tense of suffering, egeut they gave
him no increased means of happiness.— (Hear,
hear, and a laugh.) Nor did they elevate his morals,
for there was no connexion whatever between intellec-
tual power and moral elevation. But education was
a thing wholly different. Education was that which was
carried on by the drawing forth of that a hich was good,
and the non-lrawing forth of that which was evil. It was
a work which could be carried on only by the parents when
the children were young, for it was not sufficient merely
to tell people What they ought to do, and what they
should Rot do; they must have the power of the Church
to convey the power to do that which was right; and they
were day by nay disturbing that Church, and endeavour -
ing to substitute the system of universal instruction in lieu
of theperformance of moral and relic taus duty. It was
wholly fellacions; it was the love of the mother, and nut
the learning of the mother, which educated the infant;
and it was the pastorship and the love of the Church,
and not its theology or its teaching, that would ever
melee religious and moral men.— (Hoer.)
Mr. PAGE WOOD had always taken a very deep in-
terest in this question, as one in which our prosperity
and happineas were involved. The Hon. idernher op-
posite (Mr. -Arista)) had described the National Socha y
es bring in a great measure effete. Feeling us he (Mr.
P. Weed) did, that religion was the handmaid of edace-
tiu he would proceed to demonstrate that by argument
rathern' than by feeling. He said that elthoueli he was
glad the Hon. Member who novel this Bill d
some of the erroneous notions abroad on ethic etion. yet
et the clone of his speech he read a report cf a society
of working men, in which many of these erroneous nu-
tions were propounded. He (Mr. Pape Wood) knew
enough of working men to lerwev that Sat report sans not
written by a working man, for the very first sen-
tence of that document made reference to the
"plastic mind." and the neweent judgments" of child-
ren—(hear, hear.) Now, no working man ever tool
language like the'.—(Hear, hear.) Men's minds were
variously inform eil; and he doubted if any man had
ever been happy enough to see truth wholly un-
adulterated with errnt; but there were mediums vete-
eusly coloured through which truth was conveyed.
To begin at the:beginning, with the daeleneee. What
education was there then seearated from religious
? He, like many other Hon. Members, had a
debt of gratitude teeperlorm; he had heti the eclvantege
orrkceiving an etincation in the oldest religious founda-
tion for education in the country. Could any one say
ethat-William ,ot Wykehana was opposed to the intelh c-
ereal develnpinetit '; or that the other schools, such as
Eton and Westminster, which were founded on
the Eton_
this; had ever neglected the development
elditelleet? The Church had alto fostered throughout
all ages the progress Of, intellectual development. In all
times, even when there were plenty of philosophers who
talked wisely of the destruction of secular and religious
instruction, the great advancers of education were the
clergy. At the time of the Restoration the most dis-
tinguished in the cause of education were the me. t distin-
guished in the Church. Stillinefidet, Tiilotion, nay, he
would name even Baxter, for his argument was that the
lergy were the most ardent promoters of education, and
the Church merely the foremost. The Hon. Memter
for Mane! other acid that the Church always came se-
eond, and he (Mr. Wood) was sorry that there was such
en amount of ignorance oven in that place. Why, ',who
were the founders of _the Society for the Promotion cf
Christian Knowledge, which had done so much for
the advancement of knowledge in • this country ?
He denied that the Church bad been backward in estab-
lishing rchools fof the education of the people. It had
been said t! ey had never thought of laming national
schools until the Weeleyans and the Dissenters had set
the example; but the truth was, that Dr. Bell establi,
a school at St. Betolph, Altigate, in 1789, at which
time Mr. Lancaster, the celebrated founder of the
Lancasterian schools, was only eighteen years of
ego. The question was whether the Church had done
her duty to the people. If not, he was quite ready to
admit that all she had hitherto done went for nothing;
but the facts were otherwise. The National Society
was first established in 1811, and from that time
up to 1838 it had expended 104,000/. to promote the
education ef the people, and from 1838, when the
voluntary exertions of the society were stimulated
by the Government grants, up to 1840, the sum it an-
nually expended was increased to 183,0001 That te s-
tem was producing great and valuable results, and, it
properly carried out, would complete the education of
the people throughout the country. The number of day
schools connected with the Church was 'lOB,OOO in
1537, and 170,000 in 1847, and the number of
scholars attending them was, in the former
period 588,000, and in the latter 955,000, the increase
in those few years being 6,200 schools and 400,000
scholars. Facts of that kind ought to guide them more
than declamation and fanciful theories. Now, he thought
he had established three points—that the education of
the people had up to the present time been con-
ducted on religious principles, that the Church had
throughout borne her share of the duty, and taken
the lead in the movement, and that the existing system
of education, combined with religious instruction, was
ample for the wants of the times, as well as sufficient to
meet futtire exigencies. The annual sum spent by the
Church from 1833 to 1838, to promote education,
amounted to 87,400/. ; and since 1838, it
had been increased to 720,000/ But he had
a correction of some importance to make. There
were some contributions of a pleasing character
that had been received from the scholars, and he found
that out of the total, 199,000/, expended by the Council
of Education, no less than 80,000/. bad been contri-
buted by the children. Still making all tie se
feductione, the Church expended half a million of
money in promoting education. But. there was another
mode by which the Church .was proinoting education.
In Lancashire, in Middlesex. ig,Surrey, and other parts
of the country, training schools had been established for
preparing masters, •upon which no less than 90,000/.
had been spent, and from • which as . many
as 1,050 masters had' been sent out:—(Hear, bear.)
Theee masters were most efficient indeed, since, a little
while ago, the knowledge they had attained would have
entitled them to a common degree at Cambridge, fully
proving the admirable system upon which the training
schools were conducted.—(Hear.) It was a mistake to
suppose that the crime and immorality arose from any
defect in the mode of education now is operation, it re-
sulted froth the iacompeteney of the parties who were
entrusted with the cure of schools; and therefore, if the
Masse or the Government -wished the country improved,
in that respect, they would proniote the establishment of
these training schools, and help the masters in obtaining
ample remuneration for their services.—(hear, hear.)
Settee allusions bad been 'made to the dispute going on
the educational orders, ;but the principle involvedbetween Government and the Church on the subject of
is that dispute was so trifling that he entertained
a confident hope of a.. speedy settlement.—(Hear,hear.) At all events; there could be no doubt of the
fact. that the working of the' existing system had kept
Pace with • the increase in the poPu'atioh, and as the
.•
principle -.contained in this Bill had been tried, and to a
certain extent foiled, it was the duty of the House nut
to support it. There
was no necessity for it—
nay, it would prove highly injurious to the state, because
it must inevitably
obstruct the progress of a system
which had produced, and was producing, the
most satisfactory ' results.---(11"0 The age was
too far advanced in civilization to admit of
the state neglecting the education of children.
The mind of a child in its early condition was like a
blank book, and if the Government did not write upon
it they might depend upon it some one else would.
But in educating children Government should be eyeful
not to encourage the exclusive system proposed leimedeis
Bill. At present there were schools enough in
all the large towns for every sect,
and the pewee who
did not like to send his child to a school where the
principles of the Church of England were • taught,
could select some other where they were excluded.
Under the present system of training they would have
etellett
teachers whose feelings came not from any selfish mo-
tive-, but direct from the inmost heart —(Cheers.)
wwhhci)cwh
was
se
ssoh should
just deliver
Mr. M. GIBSON wished to say a few words before
never have he bad used in the speech he had
he gave a vote on this Bill. With reference to the Hon.
Member for Oxford,
forward a question
able to bring much better and abler arguments. If an in-
dividual expected from
of such great importance, pray when would the question
ever be brought before the House ? The great masses
of the working classes in the manufacturing districts
Member had no right to bring
gentleman who
were almost unanimously in favour of the principle of
secular education. He did not think there was soy prin-
ciple in which the working classes took a greater in-rest
than in this; amid he toomght that the working classes in
those districts, since the passing of the Bill by which all
children employed in mine were obliged to attend
schools, were placed in a very peculiar position. For
if school attendance were made a condition of earning
bread, and if re ligioue fheedone were eny thirds he e
11-T., he i.i,t "v:
Wiliite the children would not be exposed to pt.-mere:it-3g
influences: They ought licit' tb- lifac *teetlVoikiug
classes in the position of having to choose- be-
tween their religion and their breads Why; if the