The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-12-16 00:00:00

tion in point of form, and therefore he would now turn to '
the amendment. (Hear.)
Mr. BLACKBURN hegged permission to say one word. It
was his intention to withdraw his motion, and merge the
Whole question in the amendment, which he conceived • was
substantially the same as the motion. (Cheers.) lie sub-
mitted, however, to his worship's judgment in the matter
Whether it was proper; but, as far as be was personally con-
cerned, he had not the slightest objection to Mr. North
commenting upon his (Mr. Blackburn's) motion.
The MAYOR said, then there was nothing before the
council but the amendment of Mr. G. H. Lawrence.
Mr. NORTH was extremely happy to hear Mr. Blackburn
make this announcement. The general principle of admit-
ting children of Roman Catholics and dissenters to secular
instruction only was common to both these motions ; and he
would therefore now ask the gentleman who moved the amend-
ment, what be could expect as the issue of such a proposition ?
He could not expect, and he would almostsay he could not wish,
to succeed ; for he (Mr. North) was quite sure that success
there, in that room, would only place the unfortunate objects
of all their discussion at a still greater distance than they now
were from the benefit of admission into the schools, by ex-
posing them more ostensibly than they now were to the in-
terdict of their priests. (Hear, hear.)
The MAYOR begged pardon for the interruption ; but it
was still his duty to inform Mr. North that he was out of
order. (Cries of " No, no," and " Yes, yes.") He under-
stood Mr. North to be now discussing the merits of the
motion which stood upon the paper as to be proposed by Mr.
Blackburn. Now that was not before the council.
Mr. NORTH explained, that he bad distinctly said he was
not discussing that motion. He admitted the error in point
of form, but the principle, he contended, was common to
both. .

The MAYOR.—You are not only wrong in point of form,
but you are substantially wrong, because you are speaking
now upon a motion which may come on hereafter. Do I
understand that you are discussing the subject of Mr. Black-
burn's motion ?
Mr. Nmern.—Certainly not.
Mr. LACE said he had heard Mr. North say distinctly that
he should confine himself to Mr. Lawrence's amendment.
The MAYOR.—Then it is a misunderstanding, and I beg
pardon.
Mr. Coopea said, Mr. Blackburn could not withdraw his
motion without the consent of the council,
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE.—Yes he can, because it is not
before us yet.
Mr. BLACKBURN said he had withdrawn his motion,
because, as he humbly submitted, the motion and the amend-
ment were precisely the same. He might be wrong, but he
really thought they involved exactly the same principle.
Sir Taos. BRANCKER said it was not necessary to go into
that question.
Mr. NoRTu had said in substance that if the present
amendment, to say nothing of the motion, were carried, it
could do no good to the objects who were intended to receive
the benefit, for this reason—that it would expose them more
to the obstruction of the priests, who would never, under
any pretence whatever, allow the Roman Catholic children
to attend the schools. (Hear.) It was with reference di-
rectly to this pbjeet that the Education Committee had, very
judiciously as it appeared to him, discontinued the obnoxious
practice of reporting the comparative number of Protestants
and Roman Catholics—
Mr. EARLE.—It is not yet confirmed, Sir.
The MAYOR.—Order, order!
Mr. NoßTll.—Very well, it was not confirmed, but it was
recommended. (Hear, hear.) It was no answer to him to
say that the priests did allow the attendance of the children
at the schools under the late system, because it was unde-
niable that under that system the schools was essentially
Roman Catholic and not Protestant. (Hear, hear, hear.)
The Education Committee were of opinion that to inculcate
mere secular instruction, without religious knowledge, would
make them the vehicles of a curse and not a blessing ; and
surely all history, all experience, and even reason itself testi-
fied to this truth. (Hear.) What could avail all other know-
ledge if they taught not how to live and how to die? (Hear.
hear.) What was such teaching but to give a power
without the means of directing it? (Hear, hear.) What
was it, but to build and rig the ship, and set every sail, and
yet leave out the rudder? (Applause.) What as it, but to
add a giant's strength to the drunkard's folly ? What was it, but
to put arms into a maniac's hands? (Loud cheers.) Why, in
their case, the folly would be greater than even doing all these,
for this wretched system would, he verily believed, not only ruin
its own direct objects, but be most perilous by its example to
others. Let him suppose this amendment carried ; let him
suppose the remonstrances of the committee silenced by their
dismissal—for they could only be so silenced—all minor diffi-
culties got over, and the new plan in operation. Let him
then suppose a boy religiously educated pointing to the no-
religion class, and to ask his master this question—" Why do
you so carefully instruct us in the principles of our duty, and
in the religion of our Bible, if these, my companions, can do
without either ?" Was there any one in the council who did
not see the inevitable inference from such a question? Was
there one among them who would not shrink from a rebuke
so bitter, so withering, so unanswerable as that? Why, if
they were to propagate this wretched system, the very
children they taught would laugh them to scorn—(hear,
hear) ;—nay, if they held their peace, " the stones of the
wall would cry out, and the beam out of the timber would
answer it." (Cheers.) If anything could be devised which,
without compromising principle,could give them better than
by their own plan the hope of attracting Roman Catholic
children to the schools, God knew that no one would be so
delighted to adopt it as himself, for truly he had no prejudice
against them to overcome ; on the contrary, much as he
abominated their superstitions and deplored their errors, he
could never forget that with them they held all the
essential doctrines of Christianity (hear, bear) ; and that
there was much to be revered, both in their worship and
practice. (Hear, hear.) He belonged to a religious party
who were accused of leaning too much to Roraanism ; and
though he knew the accusation to be groundless, and though
he believed, on the contrary, that party were the best bul-
wark the church ever had, against Romanism and all other
error; yet for once he hailed the accusation, for it might at
least serve his turn in this respect. that it would relieve him
from all imputation of uncharitableness towards the Roman
Catholics. (Hear.) Sincerely did he wish they were as honest
as we were, by repudiating the aid of political dissenters with
whom they could have very little feeling in common. (Cheers.)
Thus far he had addressed, and no doubt very fruitlessly,
those who were always opposed to him upon this and most
other public principles; but as respected them, he should
have done all he wished and intended if they did him but the
bare justice of believing that he acted conscientiously.
(Hear, hear.) Something, however, he would say before he
sat down, to certain members of his own party, who, as he
presumed to think, from a mistaken sense of liberality, and
without due reflection, were wavering upon this momentous
question : and were half expected, in the -struggle. to side
with the common enemy—at least, to the extent of gracing
their defeat. He did not know that he could better illus-
trate his meaning than by referring to one or two of the argu-
ments by which, both in that room and elsewhere, he had
heard these sadly loose and unsettled notions justified. The
first was so singular a fallacy that he (the Mayor) would
scarcely believe, as the tact was, that it was the lapse of an
acute mind and an eminent man, strong in the good opinion
of his fellow-townsmen, and whom, therefore, he (Mr.
North) was the more anxious to answer. That gentle-
man had said in his (Mr. North's) hearing, " I go the
whole length of the Education Committee ; I believe that
all they have done I would myself do, exactly the same,
if the question was the education of my own children at my
own expense ' • but, as a member of the corporation, I hesitate
to act upon the same rule with the public purse." Now,
that gentleman, evidently acting most conscientiously, did
not see, and his might be the case of many—that no man had
two duties, the one public and the other private. (Cheers.)
On the contrary, the most pure and elevated exercise of
public duty must always be to act in office under the direct
influence of all those principles, and with that strict re-
ference to conscience which is our guide in private life.
(Cheers.) And if our office were an elective one the duty
was even more stringent upon us, for then it was obvious
that we were elected upon the faith and trust, and with the
very intent that we should act in office upon precisely the
same principles the exhibition of which in private was the
cause of our election. (Cheers.) Any other course ap-
peared to him a sort of fraud upon the constituency. (Hear,
hear.) Another argument urged both in that room and else-
where ad nauseam, was this—" Surely you may sacrifice
something even of principle, rather than see all these poor
destitute children let loose upon the world." But here again
the whole question was begged twice over. In the first
place he denied the fact ; lie did not believe there were those
crowds which were stated of Roman Catholic children run-
ning about the streets ; on the contrary, he believed they
were reasonably well taken care of by those of their own per-
suasion—and if they were not it was their own fault, not the
fault of the council. (Cheers. But suppose the evil to be as vast as
it was alleged to be, he firmly believed that it would not be dimi-
. wished but rather increased by the success of the amendment.
(Cheers.) Surely gentlemen calling themselves tories—he
should have said, for once, conservatives, as more appli-
cable to his present subject, but somehow or other that
bastard word always stuck in his throat (laughter)—surely
he said, gentlemen professing those principles would not de-
ceive themselves, strengthen their opponents, divide their
own party, and " make shipwreck" of all that was valuable
in their public profession, by voting upon such mise-
ble sophistries as those in favour of the amendment.
(Cheers.) If they were inclined to do so, he had but one
more argument to press upon them, and as it was the
unworthiest it should be the last. Let them beware of again
meeting their constituencies ! (Loud cheers and some
laughter.) Some of them might love martyrdom for its own
sake, but which he did not—more of them, with him, might
think that in happy as well as in evil times, " the post of
honour is the private station," and therefore be indifferent.
But none of us liked to be treated with contempt, of
reproached for broken faith. (Cheers.) Good almostalways
came obt of evil; and out of that mass of evil, the Reform
Act, some good might be extracted. (Hear.) And surely
it was a refreshing spectacle a new and a most
encouraging sign of the times, to see at the last election two
constituencies rejecting their members because they had
broken faith with them upon a religious question. (Hear,
and loud cheers.) He had now done, and to one and all he
sincerely apologised for having obtruded himself so long upon
their time ; but his heart had long bee;} deeply engaged
vfith the subject, and it was difficult to restrain the feel-
inge which ran away with him. (Applause.) Earnestly did
be wish that they could all regard that subject with? his feel-
ings, retaining their own better powers of judgment. (Hear.)
He could not adequately express his sense of the importance,
the solemnity of the duty which they were now about to
discharge. They were going to decide between truth and
error—(hear,)—between a hollow, specious pretension to
philanthropy on the one side, and the demands of duty,
under the unerring guidance of religious principle, on the
other. (Hear, hear, hear.) Could they hesitate? Strengthen,
then, he beseeched them, the hands of the Education Com-
mittee in the sacred trust they had confided to them, by
affirming the proposition of peace and usefulness with which
they come before them to-day—a proposition most certainly
true, because drawn from the very book of light and life itself
• —a proposition which was in the name of humanity charitable,
and in the name of GOD, just. (Great cheering.)
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE wished to say one word in ex-
planation, just to purge himself from the charge of want of
courtesy towards the Education Committee in having brought
forward the amendment without giving, that body notice of
it. He was not present on the occasion when the committee
agreed to that " manifesto." That certainly was an omission
which he could not avoid ; but the moment he heard of it—
the moment he saw it—he communicated in writing to the
chairman that he should feel it his duty to bring forward au
amendment. He really thought. therefore, that he was
r'estified in the course he had taken. Then, the honourable
rafernan (Mr. North) had asked him to retire from the
Education Committee. Now, it was very well known to
,Ally
how anxious he was, when he was appointed, to be re-
lieyed froi? dig Cgincpittee; told them at the time what
they 'knew very well, that he differed from them ; and he
differed from them as much to-day as he did last year. He
thought a little relaxation—a little compromise—necessary
then, and he thought a little relaxation and a little compromise
necessary still; but he begged to say that he did not intend
to retire from that committee until the council should be
pleased to compel him to retire. He had been one of those
members of the committee who had attended to the schools
personally, and he had done more, he was justified in saying,
at the South School, in the way of attendance, than any
other member of the council. He knew of huw little value
those services might be; yet still, having rendered them, un-
thete was .... nf the council, urging him to

retire, he should nut feel himseu
from the committee. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. EVANS said there was one consolation, from that la-
chrymose, laboured speech of Mr. North, which had threat-
ened every instant to rise into a psalm, that it smelled so
much of the lamp, and appeared to have occupied so much
of what was no doubt valuable professional time, that it was
not likely its author could afford to bestow upon them many

more such inflictions. As the speaker had said of Mr.
Hornby's speech, it was full of sickly sentiment. When it
was asserted that the schools had been filling, he would ask
how many had been emptied ? One large school, they had
learned, had been given up. Why was it given up ? To save
money. Mr. North had echoed the old cry that the schools
were open to all who came. This reminded him of the old
song of Mrs. Bond, who went to the pond and invited the
ducks to come and be killed. The Catholics were with-
held by the principles of their religion, from sending their
children to the schools conducted on the present system.
And their religion was the religion of our great and good
allies, who were formerly so much lauded. Mr. North was
a professional gentleman, but he never said one word of go-
vernment having acknowledged the rights of the Catholics,
of their having conferred upon them all the civil and religious
privileges possessed by others. Gentlemen who would deny
these privileges were going against the laws of the realm as
well as against those of humanity. Mr. Evans went on to
contend against the alleged danger of giving knowledge to
the poor. Crimes, he said, were committed by the ignorant.
e was assured that every fanatic and ignorant speech uttered,
either there or in parliament, helped the liberal cause, and,
therefore, he was well pleased with the address of the member
for Everton Ward, at the last council. That gentleman com-
menced by saying that he had intended to give a silent vote.
Personalities were repudiated, yet the late members of the
Education Committee were stigmatised as having introduced
abomination and idolatry ! Was not this personality ? The
Corporation Schools stood in high relief on the canvas, as
the work of the only community which repudiated the laws
of parliament and the will of the country. Lord Stanley was
the author of this system, which was called abominable and
idolatrous. He said that the system was adapted to Ireland,
but not to England. His acute mind was not directed to
Liverpool, or he would have seen that Liverpool waa in the
same position as Ireland. The poverty of the Catholics had
been urged, but he had frequently shown that this was their
title-deed, and that this was what gave them a right to
education gratis. The schools were not open to the rich
any more than the workhouses. It was impossible to bind
men down to one religion, though that was what had been
sought to be obtained; many shades of religious difference
were necessary. and had been indeed ordained, as they all
inculcated the same morality, in order to promote a healthy
competition.
Ai r. SHEPPARD felt, that under the circumstances in which
he had been returned to the town-council, he could not give
a silent vote, upon the momentous question now before the
council. He should not, however, detain them long, seeing
that many of the gentlemen around him were anxious to go
to the vote. Conciliation and concession had been again
brought forward in support of the amendment of Mr. G. H.
Levi/fence ; but he would ask, in all humility as an indivi-
dual, but boldly as one of the representatives of the people
who had sent him there, what had the Protestants of this
mighty empire gained by following that most mistaken line
of policy? (Hear.) Had they not in Ireland conceded first
£60,000 of church cess? Had they not next conceded
£130,000 per annum of the church's tithes in that country ?
Had they not further, at the suggestion of Lord Stanley,
struck off ten of the bishoprics of that land? (Applause.)
He (Mr. Sheppard) well recollected what Lord Holland said
in the 3 ear 1827, in writing to Dr. Shuttleworth, the warden
of New College, Oxford :—" You ask (said his lordship) it
the Roman Catholics would be contented, or promise to be
contented, with being placed on the same footing with other
dissenters. Again, but will they abandon all designs of sub-
verting the Protestant church ; and will they say so dis-
tinctly ? To this I can answer, that for these last twenty years
they have been saying so distinctly, solemnly, and, I believe,
sincerely, in every petition, in every declaration, in every
oath, and in evidence upon oath before parliament."
He (Mr. Sheppard) would now read the oath they swore on
going into parliament :
" I do swear that I will defend, to the utmost of my power,
the settlement of property within this realm, as established
by law ; and I do hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly
abjure any intention to subvert the present church establish-
ment, as settled by law, within this realm • and I do solemnly
swear that I never will exercise any privilege to which I am
or may become entitled to disturb or weaken the protestant
religion or protestant government in the United Kingdom."
Mr. PRIESTLEY asked the Mayor whether Mr. Sheppard
was in order in reading these documents?
The MAYOR replied that he was perfectly in order.
Mr. SHEPPARD would now turn to an assertion of Mr.
Sheil when he entered parliament in the year 1825. That
gentleman repeatedly spoke and voted, both in and out of
parliament, for the repeal of the union and for the appropria-
tion of the property of the church to other than its legitimate
purposes. On the 23d of July, 1835, he spoke in parliament
as to that church, according to the corrected report of his
speech, as follows :
" The church on which a faction fattens, by which a nation
starves—the church from which no imaginable good can
flow, but evil after evil in such black and continuous abun-
dance has been for centuries, and is to this day, poured out
—the church by which religion has been retarded, morality
has been vitiated, atrocity has been engendered.' Mr. Shell,
on the 15th of December, 1835, addressed an appeal ' to the
people of Tipperary,' urging attention to the registration of
voters. He says—' I appeal to all, but above all to the clergy.
Priests of Tipperary, on you I call at this juncture. Invoke
your flocks, and tell them that at this great crisis everything
is at stake. Let them pour in their notices, let them appear
in hucdreds at the quarter sessions, and let the conserva-
tives see that the virtue of the people of Tipperary is not to
be corrupted—that their courage is not to be daunted, and
that their strength can never be subdued.' "
The council would next permit him to read the following ex-
tract from a speech made by the Rev. Mr. Hughes, a Roman
Catholic priest, who addressed a meeting in the town of
Clanmorris, county of Mayo, in September 1840, and which
the Mayo Mercury stated was most numerously and respect-
ably attended. The Rev. Gentleman was reported to have
said :—" 1 have to inform every Protestant in the land, that
no Roman Catholic who is conscientiously attached to his
religion, from the king to the peasant, or from the pope to
the humblest curate in the church, can ever lose sight of
the establishment of the ascendancy of their religion."
(Hear, hear.) Now he would ask the council whether such
statements as those did not make it incumbent upon us, the
Protestants of this mighty empire, numbering twenty-eight
millions, to stand by the Protestant clergy, and assist them
by every legal and. constitutional means, in giving to the
rising generation a sound scriptural education ? (Cheers.) In
corroboration of what he had stated, he begged to refer the
council, with great respect, to what the dignitaries of our own
church, in Ireland, had stated on the subject of the school
question. He need not tell the enlightened Englishmen
whom he saw around him, that the churches of England and.
Ireland were by the act of union made properly and pre-
cisely the same ; they had the same rites, the same pri-
viliges, and the same immunities, He would here notice
what the Primate of Ireland had said on this subject. In a
charge delivered by his grace the Archbishop of Armagh to
the clergy at the visitation of his diocese, on the 15th of Sep-
tember, 1842, at the close of his 20th year of presiding over
the diocese, the venerable prelate said—
" The schools which we and our predecessors in the mi-
nistry of the church established in our parishes, were founded
on this great leading principle, that religious instruction was
the chief and essential part of education, which ought not
therefore to be separated from it." Again :—" But, at the
same time, making allowance, as far as in our power, for the
conscientious scruples of those who dissented from our com-
munion, we opened our schools to all who chose to attend
them, provided they would receive instruction, in common
with our children, in the Word of God. Had we allowed
them to attend in our schools without receiving any religious
instruction whatever, we should have violated the great prin-
ciple on which our schools were founded, namely, that in-
struction in religion is the chief and essential part of educa-
tion, and ought not to be separated from it."
In the year 1831 government proposed in Ireland a new
scheme of national education ; and upon the working of that
system, hear what the venerable Archbishop said :
" The Established Church could not approve of the na-
tional system ; they had strong objections to it. A child
might be sent to the schools connected with it, and receive
secular instruction, while at the same time he received no
religious instruction at all. A volume of scripture extracts
had been prepared for the use of the schools, but no child
was compelled to read it ; these extracts were in themselves
faulty, and such as the church could not sanction."
As to the working of the system in Ireland, the Archbishop
of Armagh proved, by reference to returns recently made to
government, that—
"There was less union in the schools now than before the
national system was established. The Protestant children
were rarely found in the national schools. In the whole of
the county of Cork there were not ten Protestants attending
them, and most other places were in nearly the same circum-
stances. The Church Education Society had established
their schools for the purpose of giving religious instruction
to the children belonging to the Established Church, as well
as to all others who might choose to attend, and they had
been successful. A large number of Roman Catholic dis-
senting children attended these schools."
He now called attention to the language held by the Lord
Bishop of London, at a public meeting on the 28th May,
1839 :
" I need not," said his lordship, " employ many argu-
ments in confutation of those (if such there be) who hold
that religion is not an important part of education. There
are few who are found to avow this principle in terms. We
have to deal with opponents of a different stamp. The per-
sons with whom we, at this time of day, have chiefly to con-
tend, are those who, whilst they admit, in words, that
religion is an important and advantageous element of educa-
tion for the people, yet do not speak of it as if it were
essential—as if it were the ' one thing needful.' I allude to
persons who have been exceedingly active during the last
three or four years, in disseminating their doctrines through-
out the country. I speak of persons who, when they would
construct a system of popular education, divide it into two
different and distinct branches, the one secular, the other re-
ligious ; making the one, the substance of education, and the
other its accident. I speak of persons who would provide
one uniform system of secular instruction for the people,
leaving the people to superadd (if they desire it) the religious
part; or they themselves will provide a system of religious
teaching, in some cases uniform, even as the barren surface
of the desert:is uniform; in other cases taught with such
vagueness and generality, as to deprive it of those specific
qualities, which make it an instrument of sanctification and
of truth ; or, stilt farther, leaving it to the casual and the
desultory inculcation of teachers, who are to bear no part in
the main process of education. Against all projects of this
kind we strenuously contend, and we hold, that education
for the people of a Christian country should be an education
uniform and undivided ; that is to say, uniform as to its dis-
tinguishing principles, and its great leading features, though
not as to all its minute details ; an education, of which in-
struction in all those branches of knowledge which fit man
for the duties and occupations of active life, should form an
important part, but which should make ' the one thing need-
ful' to be instruction in the will of God, and in the means
of its performance ; the training of an accountable being,
destined for immortality by ways and methods of God's own
appointment, for the enjoyment of his glorious inheritance.
Entirely to separate religious instruction from all other kinds
of instruction—to make the latter the substance and the basis
of education, the one subject of common consent, the one ob-
ject of common interest; and to thrust the former (re-
ligion) into bye places and corners, leaving it to be (as I
before said) inculcated by the desultory efforts of separate
teachers, not bearing a part in the main process of edu-
cation ; what is this, I would ask, but to deprive religion
of her due honour, to degrade her from her just supre-
macy ? what is it but to depreciate the worth, to disparage
the excellence of ' the pearl of great price, and to teach
those, who are the objects of instruction, to regard the best,
the most valuable instruction of all, with indifference, if not
with contempt? No; we hold that religion, the religion of
Christ Jesus, is to be intimately inteywoven with the whole
tissue of education ; that it is to be the one guiding, regula-
ting, sanctifying principle—that around which the whole sys-
tem turns, moving in beautiful uniformity and order, each
luminary of knowledge and of truth revolving in its own
proper orbit, religion being the centre, from which a genial
and holy light may be diffused throughout every part. We
protest then against the doctrines, and we are bound to re-
sist the efforts of those associated friends of education, to
whom I have before made allusion, who argue for the entire
exclusion of religion from the regular cycle of intellectual
instruction. We protest against the objects of all those who
assert (for it has been asserted in express terms), that the
exclusion of the Bible from what they term the secular
school, is a sine rad non to the establishment of any gene-
ral system of national education."
One extract Inure, and he had done. The London Times
of December Bth, 1812, remarking upon the refusal of go-
vernment to accede to the wishes of the Lord Primate and
clergy of Ireland, respecting a change in the national system
of education in that country, said :
" This is, indeed, that very system, and nothing less,
which in 1839 Lord Stanleydenounced as ' one which would,
however unjustly, induce a general belief. that in the minds
of the legislature, it is a matter of perfect indifference in

what creed the population of this country shall be brought
up ; which would speedily sap the foundations of all faith;
and, what constituted, in his estimation, the strongest ground
of objection to the measure, would gradually lead to general
scepticism, and from general scepticism to national in-
fidelity.' "
He thanked them for the attention with which they had heard
the remarks he had deemed it his duty to offer upon the sub-
ject now under discussion. He trusted he had confined his
observations within proper bounds ; if he had not done so,
no doubt the Mayor would have deemed it his duty to have
called him to order. lie should conclude by asserting, that
he had been returned to the council chamber unfettered and
unpledged. (Cheers.) The constituency of North Toxteth
Ward knew well his opinions upon the school question.
They returned him by a most triumphant majority, and he
deemed it his duty to declare, that under all the circum-
stances of the case, he believed that the system carried out
at present by the Education Committee to be the best, and
therefore he should support it, and give most decidedly his
vote against the amendment of Mr. G. H. Lawrence.
(Cheers.)
Mr. BLACKBURN, in a speech of nearly two hours length,
supported the amendment. He commenced by complaining
of the mode in which Mr. G. H. Lawrence had taken the
measure out of his hands; but, he said, the question was the
same as would have been before the council if he had intro-
duced his motion, and this had been brought forward as an
amendment. He was glad, however, that this course had been
taken, and he willingly withdrew his motion. He objected
to the pledge that had been spoken of, that parents should
take children to their own places!of worship. He grounded
all his arguments on this subject on the fact that the children
of alt denominations might claim an equality of instruction
as a civil right. They had not the power or authority to
dictate what religion should be taught; to admit one party
and prevent others from coming in ; nor was it competent in
them to hinder individuals from receiving religious instruc-
tion according to their own views. If he understand cor-
rectly what was stated at the last council, it was said that the
parents were required to take the children to their own places
of worship on the Sunday. In the case of the children of
Catholics, this was taking upon themselves directly to sup-
port Popery. (No, no.)
Mr. SANDS said, at the proper time he would give an ex-
planation of this. He was in error in making a statement to
this effect at the last meeting.
Mr. BLACKBURN resumed. He opposed the proposition
of the committee. He dissented from the tenets of the Ro-
man Catholic Church, as contrary to the Word of God, and
dangerous to the souls of men, and he would not give them
any sanction. He would ask if the children of Protestants
had any privilege. now which they had not under the former
system. ? He explained the former system in operation at the
schools, and contended that conservative gentlemen were not
correct in supposing that the whole Protestant body was
opposed to that system. The Catholic had the same right
to prefer the Douay version of the Bible that he (Mr. Black-
burn) had to prefer the authorised version; the same right
to punish him (Mr. Blackburn) for his preference that he had
to punish the Catholic for his preference. The children were
not excluded; but they were not permitted to enter the
the schools merely because' they were not permitted to tram-
ple on the consciences of others. The party who had intro-
duced the present system might boast that they had swept
idolatry out of the schools ; but it was the proud boast of the
reform party that they had swept persecution out of the
schools. There was then a large attendance of Protestant
children, and parents took their children in such numbers
that they could not be all accommodated. There was no-
thing inconsistent in the proposition of the member for West
Derby to give the Catholics a secular education; and the
system could be arranged, by separating the children during
the time devoted to the religious instruction of the Protes-
tants. It would be perfectly well understood by the latter,
that it was not from any indifference in the teachers to the
religious welfare of the Catholic children, but that the pa-
rents of the latter did not approve of their joiuiug others in
worship. Dr. Cooke, an Orangeman, a tory, and a member
of the Synod of Ulster, was an advocate of a similar system,
had joined in framing a similar system, which was now in
extensive operation throughout Ulster and worked well, and
the application to government for the formation of that sys-
tem was approved by three distinguished prelates of the
English Church, who said that no Protestant could reason-
ably object to it. He noticed Sir James Graham's exposition
of theplan which government had pledged itself to introduce
into the parish schools, and contended that it was
precisely the system now taught. The committee
had taken great pains to put down this system here, but in
the immediate neighbourhood it would start up like Banquo's
' ghost,' " with twenty mortal gashes on its brow to push
them from the stools," and it would start up too, established
by those Conservative ministers. They would soon find them-
selves in a minority, for the government was decidedly against
them. One gentleman was horror-struck when he saw his
(Mr. B's) proposition in the notice-paper. Let them look
this goblin in the face ! The fact was they averred all the
other blessings of education would go for nothing if the
children were not allowed prayer in the morning and even-
ing, and the reading of the authorised version of the Bible.
Could any man say that a child would be better without any
instruction at all, than with merely the secular instruction
which was proposed to be given ? He would admire the chi-
: valor of the man who would stand up and say so.
Mr. HODGSON.-1 say so.
Mr. BLACKBURN.-1 thank you, sir. I admire your chi-
valry. He next drew a picture of a child left to itself tolearn
all the depravity of the evil companions which it would pick
up in the streets, and to imbibe wickedness amongst the pro-
fane at the docksides. After showing what such a child
would be likely to turn out when grown up to be an ignorant
man, with nothing but animal instincts and passions, he con-
trasted it against another picture of a child educated as they
wished to educate the children of the Catholics. Religious
instruction would not be neglected, but in the very les-
sons there would necessarily be much religious truth taught,
and much religious principle inculcated. If they could not
do all the good they desired, let them at least do all the good
they could, The question might be asked would the Catho-
lics attend ? It had been said they would not, but he had
put himself in communication with the Catholic priests, and
be was assured they would. He concluded by making an
appeal to the council in fauour of the amendment. He agreed.
however, with Mr. Turner in anticipating present failure and
ultimate triumph.
Mr. SAMUEL HOLME commenced by observing, that he
begged to assure the council that on ordinary occasions he
should ever be unwilling to trespass at any great length on
their attention, and should most gladly abridge any observa-
tions which in future he should feel it his duty to make, lest
they should militate against the convenience of gentlemen,
to whom time was necessarily valuable. The common routine
of business brought before the council might in general be
adjourned or delayed, and they might amend their former
decisions, without subjecting themselves to the imputation
of inconsistency, or without the public business materially
suffering by the delay. But the question then before the
council was of an extraordinary nature, and formed an ex-
ception to the general rule. it was of paramount impOr-
tance, and had agitated the town so long, and with such
fearful violence, that it became the solemn duty of every
member of that body, honestly, openly, and fearlessly, to
express his sentiments upon it; to vindicate his opinions,
and to justify his vote; and be thought that every consti-
tuency had a right to demand that their various representa-
tives gave utterance to the opinions of the electors as well as
their own, and that they did not shrink from a candid and
fearless avowal of those opinions which they were sent into
that room to express. (Hear, hear.) It was his desire to
argue the question in the fairest and most open manner, and
with courteous deference for the opinions of those gentlemen
who differed from him, and who were, no doubt, as consci-
entiously convinced that they were right, as he, on the
contrary, was conscientiously convinced that they were
wrong. Disguise it as they might, however, this ques-
tion involved a most vital principle, for it was part and
parcel of that mighty struggle which ever did exist; and
which ever will exist, between truth and error. It was a part
too of that struggle which ever did, and ever would exist, be-
tween the reformed Church of England, and the unreformed,
and the unreformable Church of Rome. (Loud cries of
" Hear.") He, therefore, would not condescend to debate
it on the low and swampy ground of expediency ; but he
should treat it as he had observed, as involving a most im-
portant principle. No man could debate it as its importance
deserved, unless he could divest it of the semblance of per-
sonal triumph or party victory: and, unless he could view it
on the lofty ground of its own intrinsic merits. (Hear, hear.)
It bad been looked upon as a triumph, that Mr. Blackburn
had again been returned to council, to astonish, as it was said,
thehigots and intolerants. (Laughter.) He for one did not re-
gret the circumstance, because, in the continued discussion
of the question. truth would be elicited, and would rise on
the surface. That gentleman, in the spirit of chivalry, of
which he had himself just spoken, and like a knight-errant
of old, had boldly placarded on the walls of the town, that he
should never cease to denounce the system of scriptural in-
struction at present in use; and, although he (Mr. Holene)
would not use such harsh language as denunciation, yet he
begged to tell him that he should beready at any time to
join issue with him on this question ; and, he should always
be ready to defend that system now in operation, based upon,
and interwoven as it was, with the word of the Most High.
(Hear.) He bad no desire to introduce theological topics
into that room, although he was of opinion that to place
the question on a proper basis, some reference to it was
necessary. He trusted that he was not addressing one gen-
tleman who did not cheerfully admit that the Bible was a
divine revelation, because it would be a gratuitous insult to
every man who had entered that chamber making a Christian
declaration, if he could for a moment even, suppose the con-
trary. What, then, did they find in the Bible on this sub-
ject? Did they not find that, in the Jewish dispensation, it
was read one-fourth part of the day, not to a section merely,
but to the whole of the people ? Was it not to be made
known to all, whether they would hear or whether they
would forbear? Were not teachers, masters, and fathers
commanded to make it known to their children and de-
pendents, not only in their private, but in their judicial and
relative capacity? Were we not told that all Scripture was
of divine inspiration, and was profitable for all? Were we
not commanded to carry it into all the world, and make it
known to every creature ? And was not a fearful denuncia-
tion held out to any man who should presume to add to, or
take from, the words of that book? It appeared, therefore,
to him, that the question resolved itself into this :—Was the
Bible true, or was it false? If we believe it to be true, let
us act up to its dictates ; but if we do not believe it, then let
us at once honestly avow our disbelief, and cast it out of our
schools altogether, for that is the only consistent course to
adopt. If a monarch issued a proclamation to the whole of
his people, and any man, or set of men, to please their own
fancy, suppressed the whole or part of such proclamation,
would it not be a fraud upon the monarch who issued it, as
well as upon those to whom it was sent ? But the presump-
tion was increased when it was remembered that in this case
the proclamation was from the Eternal; and he solemnly
declared, that he dare not lend himself in his legislative
capacity to do that which he dare not do in his private
capacity ; and he should be guilty of a lie to his own con-
science if, with this belief, he supported the amendment of
Mr. George Hall Lawrence. (Hear.) If man was merely an
intellectual being, and religion itself was fabulous, then lie
would admit that the cultivation of the intellect was of para-
mount importance ; but if they admitted his immortality—
if they admitted his eternal destiny—they must also admit
that his education, to be complete, must be identified with
the things of eternity. as well as of time. (Cheers.) .He
knew it was urged, " You have nothing to do between man
and his maker, and yog violate a man's conscience by forcing
down that which is unpalatable." Then why is our ecclesi-
astical establishment a recognised part of the constitution,
and why, as a nation, do we profess any religion at all ?
Why does the government provide for religious instruction,
and sanction the erection of places of worship ? But he
denied the premises. It was the duty of the state, in its
legislative capacity, to provide for the religious education of
the people—to stand in loco parentis to those who could not
provide it for themselves ; because the public would be bene-
fitted by the inculcation of such knowledge—because the
education of the present generation was to stamp the cha-
racter of its successor; and if the government paid more
attention to this, and would aid in establishing schools, such
as the old Scriptural grammar schools, they would have
need of fewer gaols. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Birkett and
others.) But he contended that the Education Committee
did not violate any man's conscience, more than God him-
self did, who had commanded that his word should be
made known to all ; and he could not join those who went
contrary to that command. They provided a sound and
excellent education, based as all education ought to be, on
the Word of God—they threw open the doors for the adtnis-
siou of all—they invited all to enter, and if parties from pre-
judice refused to avail themselves of such education, they had
at least done their duty, and the blame of rejection must
rest on them and not on the council. They surely ought not
to be required to lower their standard to suit the prejudices
of every man who differed from them, because that was ask-
ing them (the council) to violate their consciences to satisfy
the scruples of others, and they would fall into the very error

which they called on them to avoid. They might rest as-
sured that if they departed from the present system, they
would get to sea without a chart, a compass, or a rudder, and
education itself would eventually founder in the ocean of la-
titudinarianism and uncertainty. (Loud cries of " Hear.")
So far as he knew, the only malcontents were the Roman
Catholics. But let them extend their ideas. Society was
composed of others as well as they. When the late Educa-
tion Committee was in power, and introduced the Irish ex-
tracts for genera] use, how could they consistently ask the
Jew to subscribe to the New Testament extracts ? The
chartist and tbe socialist, what did they do with them ? God
forbid that he should ever defend their doctrines ; but as
much had beers said about tests, it might happen that there
were men amongst these who were conscientious, and he pre-
sumed that in their case, their consciences must have been
violated by refusing to countenance their pernicious doc-
trines. He would give a familiar instance, that those who
decried tests sometimes applied them, and, indeed, lie was
not frightened by such a bugbear as the word test, for
men were obliged to resort to tests in almost every transac-
tion of their lives. When the first council was chosen after
the passing of the reform act, it became their duty to
choose a number of gentlemen to act as magistrates.
Now, he thought that every candid mind would admit,
that the seat of justice ought to be placed above all
political considerations—(hear, hear) ;—but what did the
gentlemen in power then do ? They seected men who were
all of one political creed, and they excluded all who differed
from them in opinion. Their political opinions alone were made
the test by which they were judged, and by that test gentle-
men were excluded from occupying the magisterial chair.
(Hear.) The same test was applied in the selection of
aldermen ; and yet he hesitated not to say, that the town of
Liverpool contained numbers of gentlemen, equally respect-
able, equally intelligent, and equally fitted to fill the offices
of either the magistracy or the aldermanship, as any of those
who had been selected, so much for the consistency of those
who talked about tests. (Laughter.) Let us, however, be just,
as well as generous. Have the poor Protestants of the town
no consciences to be consulted on this subject? (Hear, hear.)
They seemed to have been forgotten entirely. In the name
of his poor Protestant brethren, a loyal and maligned body
of men, he protested against the alteration of the present
Scriptural system, not, he solemnly believed, to please the
great body of his poor Roman Catholic townsmen—many of
whom would gladly send their children to the schools, if they
were permitted to exercise their own discretion—but to please
a knot of priests who had, he doubted not, received their
instructions hot from the Propaganda, an institution which
had done more to hoodwink mankind, trefetter the energies,
and to enslave the human mind than any temporal despot
had been able to accomplish, (hear, hear,) and he asserted
that it was a violation of the conscience of the poor Protes-
tants to be compelled to send their children to schools where
the Bible was considered so unimportant that it might be
dispensed with, leaving their children to draw those infer-
ences. which children are quick enough at perceiving, and
creating in them a distaste for religion, by finding others
possessing exclusive advantages not conceded to them, of
coming half-an-hour later arid retiring earlier, and the poor
Protestants might justly say, as it was said of old. "So
shall your children make our children cease from fearing the
Lord." (Hear.) But lie contended that if they were to le-
gislate according to the wishes of the people, the man was
inconsistent who admitted the premises, and denied the con-
clusion. Did they want to know the opinions of the Electors
on this question? Let them look at the result of the late
Elections. For his own part, he had acted honestly by his
constituents. Every body knew what his opinions were on
the subject of popular education, and yet in a ward styled by
one of the brightest of its inhabitants the Gihralter of
Reform, (loud laughter,) the result was before them. Were
gentlemen really blind on this question ? They might de-
pend upon it, that the Electors would not look with favour
on any man, who conceded where a vital principle was con-
cerned, and they might go on conceding till they had nothing
left that was worth preserving. (Hear.) Let them as in
this case, yield the outwarks, and it will only be to give an
advantage, by which the citadel may be the more easily
stormed. (Loud cries of hear.) Let but the papal chureh
get in the point of the wedge, oiled as it is by liberalism, and
in a short time they would find thousands ready to drive it
home, and the conservative party will be split up amidst the
contempt and derision of its bitterest foes. (Hear.) He
knew a little of the under ground work.
Mr. Alderman Evans.—I am sure you do. (Laughter.)
Mr. Hoeme.—Well then, of the under current, and if
they now made the concession, other demands would soon
be made, and the concession will not bring the peace they ex-
pected. But he contended that mere secular education was
not beneficial to society unless united to moral culture. As
Mr. Blackburn had occupied some time in reading extracts,
lie should do the same. And first in reference to crime.
Mr. Boime here read an extract from a work by Mons.
Guerry, quoted by Mr. Bulwer, in his Monarchy of the
Middle Classes, in which it appeared that in France the
greatest number of crimes are committed in those provinces
where there is the greatest amount of education, and the
fewest where the people are comparatively ignorant; and Mr.
Bulwer makes the admission, that all the nine pins are
bowled down with which so many writers had been amusing
themselves; and lie again sets up many of the old notions
which had gone out of vogue. From statistical tables it ap-
pears, that in England and Wales, from 1812 to 1832, crime
had doubled, while the population had only advanced in the
same period somewhat under a half. In America Mons.
de Tocqueville, himself a liberal, and a great advocate for
instruction, laments that in Connecticut, where there is far
more education than in New York, crime increases with a
terrible rapidity ; and he adds, if one cannot accuse know-
ledge as the cause of this, one is obliged to acknowledge it is
no prevention. Mr. H. adduced the testimony of Dr.
Beattie, Mrs. Caroline Fry, and also of the Rev. James
Carlile, one of the Commissioners of National Education in
Ireland, who had observed, that " education might be con-
sidered infidel which rejects the use of the Bible, and would
tolerate in school, no religion but that of reason, and no
morality but that of nature." The returns fi our Coldbath-
fields Prison in 1835 were—
Prisoners educated
Uneducated.
In Glasgow Bridewell in the same
year, educated
Uneducated
And the chaplain of Coldbath Fields Prison draws the con-
clusion, " That it is not the want of education, but the
absence of principle, which leads to crime." It men wanted
a proof of the effect of education without moral culture, they
had it in France. Previous to her revolution, she was flooded
with the labours of the encyclopaedists and philosophers.
She sowed the serpent's teeth of mere secular instruction and
she reaped the harvest. They might differ with him in his
views, but let them consider where a latitudinarian spirit led
them. A few years ago they viewed education by the light
of the materia medica. The homoeopathic was then the
newest and most fashionable system, and they came to the
determination of giving Scripture in infinitessimal doses by
Irish extracts. (Loud laughter.) A newer system was now
to be introduced—the hydropathic ; and the children of the
poor Roman Catholics were to be drenched with cold water
only. (Renewed laughter.) Who did not know that the
Roman Catholic church refused to give the Scriptures to the
people ? God has said his word shall be made known -to
all. The pope says it shall not. Which, then, would they
obey? He would give them the opinion of one of the most
enlightened of the popes on the subject, that of Pius VII,
who, on the 29th of June, 1816, issued a bull to the Primate
of Poland, and which he would read to them. It was this—
" Venerable Brother,--In our last letter, we promised
shortly to answer your letter, in which you earnestly desire
instructions from the Holy See, as to the manner in which
you should conduct yourself as to what are commonly called
Bible societies. We have long abhorred their abominable
doings, by which the very foundation of religion is under-
mined. It becomes the duty of the episcopal office to expose
the wickedness of this abominable scheme. Indeed, ex-
perience has proved that the Holy Scriptures, when circulated
in the vulgar tongue, have, through the temerity of man,
been productive of more injury than advantage."
This was the opinion of Pius Vii, and he, therefore, thought
that the question before them was this—Should they in their
legislative capacity join the papal church in a crusade against
Scripture ? And in defending truth, he could not join in the
distinction drawn by Mr. George Lawrence between a man's
duty in his public and private capacity. If religious and
secular instruction was disunited, the result would inevitably
he the total neglect of the religious portion of instruction; and
he contended that according to Mr. Lawrence's amendment,
it would be absolutely requisite for every Roman Catholic
parent to attend on the Monday to certify that his child
had been taught Popery on the Sunday. (Hear.) But what
security had they that these poor children would be taught
any religion at all? Those who were acquainted with the
habits of too many of the lower orders—who had visited their
dwellings, and made themselves familiar with their habits—
unhappily knew that blasphemy and intemperance were un-
happily too prevalent amongst them ; and it was highly
probable that the school would be the only place where to
many of these children any religion would be taught. (Hear.)
Connected with this topic, he hardly knew how it was pos-
sible for gentlemen to send the Bible abroad, and still refuse
it at home. The London Missionary Society, of which he
believed Mr. Blackburn to be a most efficient member, and
he honoured him for it, for he did not hesitate to avow pub-
licly that he was the decided friend of missionary societies—
this society had sonic time ago sent a vessel along the coast
of China to distribute Bibles among the Chinese, contrary to
the commands of the Chinese government, and contrary to
the wishes of their Mandarins ; and he was at a loss to know
why gentlemen should be at the expense and trouble of send-
ing the Bible to the antipodes, when they yielded to the pre-
judices of those at home who refused to receive it. He also
agreed with Mr. Blackburn, that in discussing this question
all personalities ought to be avoided—and he hoped he never
should be guilty of offending in this respect. But he would
avail himself of that Opportunity of observing that persona-
lities were not all on one side. (Hear,) He agreed with
him that personalities were a proof of a low and vulgar
mind ; but some months ago a work was issued from the
press in weekly numbers, probably not much read, in which
he found the following choice selection of phraseology, which
for his advantage he would read. Alluding to the decision
of the council on the education question, the author thus
expressed himself—" The whole scheme is mean, selfish and
dishonest : I denounce it as a great social crime. There is
involved in it the fourfold guilt of cruelty, tyranny, injustice
and meanness." He then observes "that all religious de-
nominations are, in the eye of the muncipal law, on a footing
of perfect equality." The town-clerk says they are not, and
the municipal act says they are not. He (Mr. H.) merely
quotes the remark that lie may observe, that the municipal
hill was not framed by the wicked tories. (Hear.) It was
framed by the whigs; and if they have by that bill excluded
all but the members of the Church of England, let the
blame of such exclusion rest with those who framed it, and
not with those who had no hand in it. (Hear.) The author
then goes on to charge the tories with " unblushing menda-
city," and asserts that they are " unprincipled traducers,
some wearing black coats, some blue"—speaks in a lofty
way of " blood-thirsty and tyrannical priests filling the gaols
with victims," and likens the members of the town-council
to Archbishop Laud. He then alludes in the choicest
phraseology to members of the council " stiffing their con-
victions in fumes of tobacco and libations of gin," and does
not forget to notice the " pots of Mr. Parker's strong ale."
A COUNCILLOR :—Who is the author of it ?
Mr. House :—You will hear soon enough ! The writer
continues, that "from time immemorial the drunken, the
profligate, the profane, have always been the main bulwarks
and buttresses of that worldly corporation of priests, which
glorifieth itself in all Christian lands, (except America,) un-
der the names, style, and title of the Church." (Loud laugh-
ter.) But not content with all this, he goes on to observe,
(of course, this is not personal,) " We, David Hodgson,
Thomas Sands, Christopher Bushell, James Parker, Richard
Harbord, Wm. Birkett, James Aspinall, John B. Moore,
and others, are the only persons in Liverpool who are enti-
tled to have their consciences treated with respect. More-
over, it is our bounden duty to adopt and act upon our opi-
nions, and if any refuse to do so to punish them for their
wicked obstinacy and contumacy to the utmost extent of our
power. But so fettered are we by oppressive laws, that we
cannot even cut off men's ears, or slit their noses, or put
them in the pillory for the good of their souls. We shall
make it evident, by going to the utmost length of our power,
that we would go further if we could.." And then, after more
of the same sort, the writer, who is evidently a man of peace
and charity, consigns the above gentlemen to a place which ;
—but he shall speak for himself :—" All persecution for con-
science sake is, emphatically, the work of the Devil ; and all
who aye engaged in it, whether they be good men or bad, are
to the extent in which they are so engaged, his vassals and
slaves. Ile cannot, indeed, force men to do his bidding,
contrary to their own wills, but when, by the criminal indul-
gence of their own prejudices and passions, they voluntarily
surrender themselves to his machinations, he never fails to
fan the natural depravity of the human heart into a flame,
until it breaks forth in deeds of violence and wrong. The
instruments he employs are very various; at one time he su-
bordinates to his own purposes the terrific energy of Wide-

brand, at another the consummate ingenuity of Loyola, and
at another the ignorance and folly of a Town Council." The
writer also asserts that " the system pursued by the late
rulers recognized the right of private judgment." The Church
of Rome recognizes no such right, and they might, therefore,
leave them to settle that point between them. Did not all
this shew personality ? And did it not prove that it was hos-
tility to our established Church—(hear)—rather than love of
truth and peace which caused the writer to overturn this
bucket of bilge wateron gentlemen quite as sincere andas much
actuated by Christian principles as he was ? He believed
the work was itself out of print, and it had not, as far as he
recollected, any title. He would, therefore, give it one, and
would designate it the Garden of the Soul. The author dated
from Camden-street, and signed himself Thomas Blackburn.
(Loud cheers and laughter.) He would not trouble th,:! coun-
ell much longer, but there was one subject on which he must
say a few words. The battle of scriptural education must be
fought in Liverpool. (Hear.) It had been stated that her
Majesty's government were favourable to the new-fangled
system of education. Attached as he was to his party, no-
thing should prevent him from boldly and independently
speaking out on this subject. If Sir Robert Peel should,
unfortunately, have such a leaning, then he begged to say,
that neither Sir Robert Peel nor a thousand governments
should influence him contrary to his own feelings and con-
victions. (Cheers.) He did not consider the argument
worth a straw. If any member of the government chose to
fight a duel, was that a reason why he was to fight one ?
Was that a reason why he was to countenance the system of
duelling, by which a man ran the risk of living in the world
an assassin, or going out of it a voluntary suicide ? The
government were favourable to the Poor-law Bill. Was that
any reason that he should be enamoured of a bill, many
clauses of which he considered inhuman and detestable ?
He could conscientiously support Sir R. Peel's government
on general grounds, and yet preserve his own independence
and integrity by opposing them when he believed them to be
in the wrong. (Hear, hear.) He was not so wedded to
party as to look on Sir R. Peel as a conservative pope, whose
decrees were infallible ; and it was his decided conviction—
and in this conviction he should be borne out by hundreds
of his fellow-tradesmen, and by thousands of his operative
brethren, that if Sir Robert Peel, in an evil hour, should
venture to inoculate this country with the virus of the so-
called neutral system of education, the fall of Sir R. Peel's
government will be as speedy as, he knew from the temper
of the public mind, that fall would be certain. (Loud cheers.)
In all the discussions that had taken place on this subject,
there were several of the dissenting ministers who had pre-
served a cautious silence; and that vast body, the Wesleyans,
made no objection to the present system. He did not know
of one of their ministers who had condemned it, but he
knew of many who had supported it. If, indeed, a broad
foundation was laid on religious teaching, they might safely
build upon it the luftiest superstructure of speculative
science ; but if they did not lay such a foundation—that
genei'ation might not live to see it, but their children pro-
bably would—the popular tempest would hurl it to the
ground in irretrievable ruin. (Hear, hear.) He loved the
established church, and would never see her injured ; and he
believed that, Protestant as she was, and based on Scriptural
truth, she was the sheet-anchor of the British constitution.
He implored every one of her members to lend no helping-
hand to her enemies to lift that anchor from its moorings,
nor to weaken its hold on the affections of a religious people ;
for if they did, the vessel of the state itself would be driven
high and dry on the shore, and nothing would be left but a
mighty wreck, to display to future ages her former magni-
ficence and glory. (Cheers.) He might be taunted with
the charge of bigotry and intolerance for expressing his
sentiments. He despised such charges—for those who made
them were generally actuated by the same feelings which they
so loudly condemned in others. Mr. Blackburn had con-
cluded his speech in a solemn manner, and he should in this
respect imitate him. He called, then, upon all who heard
him, to resist Mr. Lawrence's amendment; and in that
awful hour to which they must all soon come, and of which
he was forcibly reenined by the memento before him, ren-
dered, to his mind, doubly striking by the absence of the
canvas, it would plant no thorn in the dying pillow of any
man, that in his public life, as well as in his private capacity,
he had been found a consistent supporter and a willing advo-
cate of that system of popular instruction which is based
upon, and interwoven with, the will of the Eternal.
Mr. SANDS begged to make an explanation. He had
stated last week that lie believed that the parents of the
children brought to the schools were asked if their children
went to the church. No such pledge was given ; but it was
understood that the parents took them to some place of
worship on the Sabbath.
The council then divided, when there appeared
For the amendment 2O
Against it

Majority in favour of Scriptural
Education
For the amendment—Councillors—W. Thornhill, T.
Blackburn, W. Preston, H. Holmes, H. Hornby, J. Holmes,
J. Aikin, J. Priestley, 11. Lawrence, G. IL Lawrence, A.
Lace, J. Platt ; Aldermen—T. B. Barclay, T. Bulley, W.
Earle, J. H. Turner, W. P. Freme, 'J. Moon, E. Evans, and
the Mayor-20.
Against the amendment —Councilors—F. Shand, T. Shaw,
D. Hodgson, J. Holmes, H. Copeland, J. C. Thompson, J.
Edwards, R. B. B. H. Blundell, J. North, T. Sands, S.
Holme, E. Rae, T. Toulmin, T. Royden, J. Lawrence, J.
Cooper, J. N. Wood, W. Birkett, C. Bushell, J. Procter,
R. Rigby, J. B. Lloyd, J. Kilshaw, R. Jones, J. Parker,
Brassey, J. Plumpton, J. S. Leigh, S. L. Trotman, J.
Sheppard, A. Smith, jun., A. Harbord ; Aldermen—R.
Houghton, Sir T. Brancker, R. S. Crook, W. Nicol, J.
Bramley-Moore, E. Molyneux, T. Chilton-39.
Absent.—Councillors Houghton, Fawcett, and Aspinall;
Aldermen Griffith and Holt-5.
The MAYOR, in giving his vote, said, " My own vote
(and I beg to say that it is my own vote, though an allusion
has been made to the contrary) is for the amendment."
Mr. HODGSON supposed the proceedings were now con-
firmed?
Mr. EARLE said they were not, for there was something
more to talk about yet.
Tiae MAYOR said the original motion now was for their
confirmation.
Mr. EARLE had no objection to their confirmation, but
he wanted to know why the returns were to be discontinued
of the numbers of each denomination of children? It had
been remarked that it was an obnoxious distinction ; but it
had been first made by Mr. Hodgson's own party. The
reformers did not object to it, and why should it be discon-
tinued?
The MAYOR.—Do you move an amendment?
Mr. EARLE.—No ; it's of no use.
Mr. H. LAWRENCE thought it would be favourable to the
views of those who wished the Catholic children to go there,
that the numbers should not be published.
The MAYOR said the proceedings were now confirmed.
The council then rose at four o'clock, and adjourned till
Wednesday week, for the despatch of the remaining business
on the paper.