The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-06-04 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL kfAi‘niAfit6.

CORRESPONDENCE.

MR. BLACKBURN'S SPEECHES.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.
Ssa,—As the speeches of Mr. Blackburn in the council
in December, 1842, and on the Bth inst. on education,
have been published in the form of tracts, one of them
under the specious title of " the injustice and impolicy of
excluding the Roman Catholics from the Corporation
Schools," and every effort made to disseminate their fat
lacious statements, I do think, sir, it becomes the duty of
those who know them to be such to endeavour to disabuse
the minds of as many as are disposed, without perhaps
much thought on the subject, to allow themselves to be
influenced by them ; this I shall now proceed to do if you
will permit me, through your respectable and influential
medium. Although far indeed below the author in abi-
lity, yet knowing that I have truth on my side, I hesitate
not to face even the " leviathan of liberalism." Before
doing so, however, allow me to say, that for Mr. Black-
burn, as a gentleman and a Christian, I entertain the
highest respect, and my only astonishment is that preju-
dice should have so much influence on so good a man. I
shall first take up his former speech ; and the first topic
which 'he touches on (for I shall endeavour to answer
every relevant statement as it occurs, to prevent my
omitting any, although not the course I should have chosen
for myself) is, that the schools being public property, all
have an equal right to them. He will doubtless admit
that it is the duty of the Council, as a body delegated by
people, to do what they believe to be most for the benefit
of the whole; and where principles are at stake, if they
are true to them, no consideration can influence them to
deviate even to ;he right or to the left hand, even to conci-
liate! This argument, then, rests on the decision of the
point—what is their duty with regard to education ? and
this I shall now endeavour to answer. I believe that the
Bible and the Bible alone should, as far as religion is con.
cerned, be taught in the schools, and therefore agree with
him that no sectarian books should be admitted ; and the
authorised version is the only one, on this principle, that
ought to be taught there, the Douay being sectarian be-
cause it has notes forcing some of the most important doc-
trines it contains into a meaning that fosters the errors of
Rome. Let them expunge these notes, and the question
may then be considered as to its being used by those who
prefer it to our version. But the question arises, is it
their province to interfere with the religion of the people?
The author says, no. He believes that the Bible was
given to us to teach us our duty towards God—how we
are to live to Him on earth, and attain to His infinitely
blessed presence beyond the grave. How, then, is it his
duty to educate a man for the performance of his duty to
his neighbour, and not his province to teach him those
things, which are by far the most important to him, and
which alone can make him a really good citizen? But
then he will say, " I have no right to interfere between a
parent and his child—to require of the child what the pa-
rent disapproves." Admitting for a moment that he is
right in this view ; he takes it for granted that the parent
does object, whereas in nearly ninety-nine cases in every
hundred he is coerced by his priest; and if the parents'
real wishes were known and acted upon, we should long
ago have had our schools filled with Roman Catholic
children. This I know to be a fact, and many who sup-
port the author's views know it to be so too. But I differ
from him widely ia the sentiments which he expresses on
filial obedience. It is only in as far as the requirements
of the parents consist with what God requires, that the
child is to obey, for he is desired to obey his parents " in
the Lord." Is it not the bounden duty, then, of those
who have committed to them the education of the young,
when the parent objects to what is due to the child, to
say, " We believe that the education which the child re-
quires most is that which will prepare him for his long
destiny, and we therefore cannot conscientiously withhold
it from him if he be under our care ?" I perfectly agree
with the author, to any length he may wish to go, in con-
demning the proposition to enjoin on the parents the
teaching of their own religious opinions to their children.
His next statement I am quite as much astonished at as
was he at the remarks which called it forth, which is to
the effect that the children of the Established Church were
not excluded from the schools when be and his party had
the conducting of them. " It is mere drivelling to deny
that they were excluded," and this by one who holds that
a person should never violate his conscience. Does he
not know that the members of the Establishment, with
many others, believe that to countenance in any way a
system that treated all religions as of equal importance,
would be (to speak of it in the mildest terms) to confirm
those in error in their views, and to lead others astray?
And was it not then excluding them to adopt such a sys-
tem ? and does he not in his late speech enforce this very
point with regard to " the present exclusion of Roman
Catholics?" In the beginning of the sth page the author,
in a most glowing passage, endeavours, one might think,
to appease his own conscience, as well as that of others, by
an effort to show that in a sort of compromising, half-and-
half worship at the opening and close of the school, they
were in the most happy unity and unrestricted purity of
worship; while there was excluded from it what God in
his infinite mercy and wisdom, saw meet and necessary
for us ; but he, to please those, of whose errors he says,
they are " in a great many points contrary to the word of
God and dangerous to the souls of men," in the perform-
ance of nrs duty to them has seen right to withhold.
But had the author been at my side on one occasion when
visiting the North School, what I heard and saw
narrow.
minded have detracted a little from the " thrill of joy and grati-
tude which expressed itself in tears," and the pleasure
with which he looked forward to all terminating in " union
and peace." I was in the school-room during the hour
appropriated to religious exercises. The Roman Catho-
lics being about eight or nine-tenths of the whole were
kept in the school-room, and the Protestants, &c. &c.,
were taken into another. When the hour had expired
they were brought back and ranged along the one or two
first seats on the platform (all the others, to the top, be-
ing occupied by the Roman Catholics), and as they came
in, the Roman Catholics commenced " hiss,'' " hiss,"
" hiss,". I was standing before the platform, and the
Roman Catholic teacher (Kearney) beside me, who seemed
very angry ; and although he threatened and did all he
could to prevent it, yet they loved their little schoolfel-
lows so much that they could not be prevented giving this
fond expression of their feelings in an occasional" hiss,"
hiss," till all were come in. Now sir, I give you my
name and address, and am prepared to testify to this on
oath, if that be necessary. So much for the unity which
those schools were calculated to inspire I With reference
to what the author says about shutting up private schools.
to fill those of the Corporation, I believe the fact to be,
but cannot speak positively, that they were opened. intoc%);
tspheugebyul
public
seccreir oroeflsstt,ohareenddsystem
their
rrwsoehriwicgeh
were
ntheyo longer intit
tr
uo tdiuocned
requiredltnn
patwheng e
having prohibited its being read at all, or
ecfiyhhei
ired:wa'
iaadss asserts boldly,
prohibited,sboe lrdel?yf,roaTmnhdisrdeeai
sfijanisnlgiacontradiction," G
itlohyna,etwhnao
ac-
cuses them of
bbuytanwyeobnleaamteantyhetmimefo,
for not
othtishais v
having
gart
ehqiusirdeedn iiatl— fimplies,orn o t
having made it a sine qua non in admitting children to the
schools, that they should learn that BOOK which alone
can teach them to be not only truly good citizens, but
truly wise for eternity ; and as this life is but a preface to
our existence, surely, surely, sir, this must be the duty of
those who have committed to them the training that will
in all probability lay the foundation for their unchangeable
destiny. Of his personal attack upon Mr. Hodgson, I
say not a word, but would ask the author the next time he
repeats the LORD'S prayer, to pause at the petition,
" forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that tres-
pass against us," and think of this passage. No man is
without his faults; but it would more become the charac-
ter and dignity of a Christian to have forgiven him than
to retaliate. The next passage respects the extent of se-
cular education which it is proper to give : with this I
shall not meddle. The following one is quite foreign to
the point at issue ; and next his explanation of the line of
argument he has pursued. Anti then he proceeds to lay
down his pcnacean scheme ; but it is all nonsense to be
seeking for some new scheme so long as the principle re-
mains untouched ; therefore this plan is as visionary as the
rest. And by allusions to the conduct of some good men
with regard to this question, and by long extracts from
the writings of others, he seems to endeavour to hood-
wink his hearers; and winds it up with, as he appears to
think, a triumphant reference to the support which the
present government has given, (alas !) and is likely to give,
to a plan similar to his own. But he has often and often
condemned in strong language those in the Conservative
ranks who have accused him of being in league with
Popery, becau e they were acting in concert to obtain one
object. How can he reconcile this with his elaborate
essay to prove that because a Conservative government
approve of his scheme, therefore all Conservatives are
bound to support it. If his party will thus bind themselves
in blindfold pertinacity to their leaders—and his treating
the matter as if it were a matter of course that we should,
would imply that to him at least this was no new thing--
I can assure him he is very much mistaken if he thinks
ic h b e greeted
itis-tNnhioart:
that we will do so.- We care not who brings it forward;
0:11\.
fui eni denouncetltenghshedtoeshes
uedifttcha secular
itti
.haei
catnreohp.
mpiaßortefoias
Bible—more
t most
approach
h _no n
educationsts
ear
nopc
animated
toa,i
igi p‘mrlle
eeot
antiquated
aunul
treb2el
a t,
ediimant
oaonamnsdttdveihni delusive.
real
allowconfident
? pointtfi,,
InA aen e
prejud i c e s , " that
bdabnyneeadltnaei issue—
"ntecildotlianuphriroecnaaiwa teadt
that'sle. hie
sa believed
his
admiration Christian.
ou
is t
chivalryheg the author
withasacwi
duhr
education
withoutwhen
e i gentlemanigi o
religion
was
by an effort to " pluck up courage," buyt from
sober, deliberate conviction of its truth, and
wtclas
I now proceed to prove. Will the author, will any
man point me to a people or nation that was ever be-
nefitted by secular education alone? Was Athens ? Wit-
ness the Apostle Paul's success there; and be it remem-
bered that his labors there were almost entirely confined
to the educated—as far as we can learn, at least, from
the account given of his sojourn there. And hear what
that same Apostle says in addressing a church formed in
the midst of another of the most educated people of that
day—the Corinthians—" Ye see your calling, brethren,
how that not many wise men after the flesh, (and then,
lest it should be thought that he meant here the rich and
powerful, he adds,) not many mighty, not many noble are
called ;" and this is expressed in a way which leives no
e
doubt that it was his constant experience. And look at
those countries in the present day that boast of their wide-
idrumc aatriaolns
with F r s n ce,
England,
w
Germany,her they say, and truly,
that learning is not so widely diffused : lamentably bad
&c. &c.—and corn-
though oar own country be, it stands far before them in
morality and religion. There are few criterions that bet-
terattest this than the observance of the Sabbath; and
will they bear any comparison in this respect ?
I might refer also to the success which has attended
missionary exertions. Look at the South Sea Islands. It
will not do to say that it was after many years of arduous
labor that success was apparent there, for some of the
islands where Christianity was most cordially received had

no missionaries till recently. Now, these are fac'ti. It
is vain to picture the hippy results that might arise from
secular education. and would, doubtless, arise from it, if
imparted to holy beings; hut it is quite a different matter
with us, whose every tendency is to sin, and, therefore,
the enlarging and invigorating of our `• mental powers"
must have the effect of strengthening and confirming these
tendencies, without having counteracting principles simul-
taneously instilled into the mind ; to do which. in faith
and prayer for that " blessing which alone maketh rich,"
is our duty :—whether that blessing be bestowed or not is
quite beyond our sphere. The author, in illustration of
his views, draws a picture of a boy first allowed to grow
up in ignorance, and then of one educa•ed : it would be an
easy matter for one who had as imaginative a mind as he
has, to depict, in as strong terms and with more truth, the
awful end of an infidel, whose education but cherished and
strengthened his unholy dispositions, besides having his
capacity for misery greatly increased. I recollect having
heard Mr. M'Neile express this sentiment beautifully
some time since. But the author, in representing what
education would in his opinion do for a boy completely,
" begs the question ;" for it is not on the secular educa-
tion which the boy would receive that he founds his argu-
ment, but by the religion which by a sort of sidewind he
contrives to steal into his sketch. Is his " receiving
much valuable religious instruction of an elementary cha-
racter—learning much about the being, perfections, and
character of God, his responsibility to Him, the value of
His favor, and the value of His displeasure," secular edu-
cation ? Let secular instruction stand on its own basis,
or let them give up the point. I must object to his manner
of stating the difference between what is now required of
the children, and their training under the late system.
He says in page 13, " Will any man of sound mind say
that this course of school training and tuition is a curse to
this child, merely because he did not attend at prayer
time, and read with others the authorised version?" Now,
I candidly put it to the author, is this a fair statement of
the case ? One would suppose he looked upon the reading
of the Bible as of no moment whatever, and had nothing
to do with either the moral or religious training of the
children. This is an evident straining throughout the
whole of his address to bolster up as strong a case as he
could ; I do not say intentionally at the expen-e of truth,
but clearly under the influence of strong prejudice.
The author, as he draws to a close, indulges in the
happy prospect which his imagination pictures before
him of the genial prevalence of his own views, which he
sees gradually developed in the progress of events around
him—and truly a curious way they take to exhibit them-
selves. Perhaps the doctor views it, as be seems to do
the whole of this subject, inadvertently ; for I should like
him to point to that part of the Liverpool horizon where
it has appeared. It may be, however, that be only means
that the seed is sown now, and we may soon expect to see
it sprout and flourish under the disinterested, cultivating
care of Popery.
There are many more points which I felt tempted to
touch on, but was compelled to refrain ; and, indeed, I
have to apologise for the length to which 1 have already
extended these remarks. I wish truly that your space
would permit me to follow the author through the inge-
nious sophistries which his late speech contains ; but, as
the principles which I have above endeavoured feebly to
advocate meet most of them, it is the less necessary that I
should do so. If some of your many able correspondents
do not in the interim take it up, I may perhaps, ere long,
trouble you with a few remarks on them.

Liverpool, 251 h May, 1844.

SUMMONSES FOR PARISH RATES.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

SlR,—Will you permit me, through your valuable
paper, to inquire who directs summonses to be issued
against parties for the payment of parish rates ? My
object in asking this question thus publicly is, that I fear
the person, whoever he may be, does not make the neces-
sary inquiries before taking such a step. For instance—
a friend of mine was called upon by the collector of his
district for the payment of his rates, and not being quite
convenient to him at the time to pay the amount, he re-
quested the collector to call in about a fortnight, and he
would take care to be prepared for him. Two or three
days after he received a summons to appear before the
magistrates to show cause why he had not paid them, and
this too after having arranged with the collector positively
to pay on a certain day. It appears to me the collector
must have acted in a manner to call forth censure, other-
wise there must be some party who adopts such a course
without, I am sure, the sanction of the churchwardens,
or those who may have the power to direct such matters.
I would not have troubled you had this been a solitary
instance, but I can assure you such is far from being the
case.

Do, Mr. Editor, insert this in your paper to-morrow,
in order that the matter may be investigated and rectified
without further delay.—l am, yours, &c..
June 3rd, 1844. FAIR PLAY.