The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-05-06 00:00:00

EDUCATION COMMITTEE

The proceedings of the Education Committee were next
read. They stated that Miss Ellis,' one of the mistresses of
the South School, had been reprimanded for having been
guilty of insubordination, and allowed to remain in the school
on trial; and that Charles Taafe, the second master of the
North School, had been dismissed for having been also guilty
of insubordination. The number in the schools at present
was stated to be as follows :—North, 444; South, 467.
Mr. SANDBACII, in the absence of the chairman of the
Education Committee, moved the confirmation of the pro-

ceenn'rs,
Mr. YATES moved, as an amendment, that Mr. Taafe be
not dismissed; and, in support of his motion, read a memo-
rial which he had been requested by Mr. Taafe to present to
the council.
_lt stated that Mr. Taafe had been six years in
the school, and that he had been dismissed for refusing to
carry into effect certain orders of Mr. Stone, which he be-
lieved had never emanated from the committee, and for
having answered certain questions put to him by Mr.
Yates. It further stated that the orders of Mr. Stone were
to order all the boys to learn the Church Catechism, and to
go to church on Sundays, and to drive the apprentices who
refused to teach the Church Catechism out of the school
by force and violence. In the memorial a copy of the in-
formation given by Mr. Taafe to Mr. Yates was enclosed.
It stated that Mr. Stone had denied that he wanted the Ro-
man Catholic children to be taught the Church Catechism,
but that he simply wished them to be present in the class
when it was taught. All the rest he tacitly admitted to be
correct. Mr. Taafe was of opinion that he would have been
guilty of an assault if he had turned out the apprentices by
force, and that Mr. Yates had a .perfect right to go to the
school and to make inquiries on the subject of the education
afforded. He, therefore, humbly hoped that the council
would take his case into consideration and reverse the de-
cision of the committee. In another letter to Mr. Yates,
Mr. Taafe informed him that Mr. Stone's first visit to the
school was only on the 23d of February, although his appoint-
ment had taken place in January or early in February. Mr.
Yates, after having read these several documents, which were
of some length, and included a testimonial from Mr. Nelson,
the late master, as to Mr. Taafe's good conduct, said that
the subject was a most important one. Mr. Taafe had been
turned away on two grounds—first, because he refused to
turn the apprentices out of the school as well as refused to
compel them to teach the Church Catechism or to learn it;
and, secondly, because he hall given him (Mr. Yates) the
information he had submitted to a previous council, but
which the council did not hear upon that occasion. He
maintained that Mr. Taafe had done nothing but what hg
was bound to do as a man of integrity and a servant of the
corporation—that he had simply answered the questions put
to him, and that the " head and front of his offence" was,
that he had written a letter to him (Mr. Yates) giving him
the required information.
Mr. HODGSON begged that Mr. Yates would state the
Questions which he had put to Mr. Taafe.
Mr. YATES said that he would endeavour to recollect them,
as they had never been reduced to writing. A letter from
Mr. Stone, dated the 10th of March, had been submitted to
the council ; and he referred to this letter on the present oc-
casion in order to show that he felt bound to go to the school,
and to make the inquiries. He thought it was the duty of
the Education Committee to make the inquiries themselves.
On the 10th of March Mr. Stone stated that the schools could
not be properly conducted so long as the apprentices were
permitted to absent themselves during the time of religious
instruction : and on the 25th of March there was a statement
brought before the public in the Liverpool Mercury, showing
that the Roman Catholic apprentices had been ordered by
Mr. Stone to teach the Protestant Catechism and to go to
church. These things ought to have led the Education Com-
mittee to make the inquiries. On the 6th of April the same
statement had been repeated in the council ; and thus there
were three occasions upon which a direct variation of the
rules of the council had been charged on Mr. Stone. Tlfe
Education Committee ought not to have lost an hour
in making inquiries which were, so important ; but as
they had not done so, he (Mr. Yates) had made the
inquiries himself. He went to the North and South Schools.
At the North School he was met by Mr. Taafe. He told
that individual his name, and that he had come to make
inquiries from him, and he said—" I think it is your duty to
answer those inquiries as I am a member of the council."
Mr. Taafe then answered all the inquiries, as it seemed to
him, very candidly. He asked whether Mr. Stone had or-
dered the Roman Catholic apprentices to teach the Church
of England Catechism and to go to church on Sundays ; and
another was with respect to the attendance of Mr. Stone at
the North School. Mr. Taafe stated, in reply, that Mr. Stone
came regularly to the school on Monday, the day the commit-
tee met there, but that in general he did not come above a
quarter of an hour for each day during the rest of the week. H e
(Mr. Yates) thought this was information which ought to be
submitted to the council4ind accordingly he brought Mr.
Taafe's letter on the Bthlof April. He thought he should
hardly be credited when he said that there was not a single
minute brought before the council as to any inquiry insti-
tuted on the subject of Mr. Stone's conduct, up to the pre-
sent moment, by the committee. He maintained that it was
the duty of the Education Committee to have Investigated
most narrowly into charges which affected so deeply the reli-
gious liberties of the apprentices who have been bound to
the corporation.. He now called upon the committee to in-
vestigate fully into the charges brought against Mr. Stone.
If they refused so to do, he should move for a committee upon
the subject. He had sent a letter to the Education Committr e,
in which he suggested the propriety of their examining the
five apprentices and three of their parents, whose names
he had given them. He now asked the committee whether
they had asked anybody as to the conduct of Mr. Stone—
conduct which, he maintained, was in direct contradiction to
the rules of the council? He entreated the council to direct
their attention to a subject so important. He asked them to
say whether Mr. Taafe could have acted otherwise than he
had done ? and he put the question with the more concern
because he (Mr. Yates) had been the innocent cause of the
man's dismissal.
Mr. HODGSON.—No.
Mr. YATES.—The words set forth in the proceedings are,
that he has been guilty of insubordination, " particularly in
consequence of sending the letter to Mr. Yates."
Mr. Honcsosr.—No.
Mr. YATES.—Let the passage be read.
Mr. RADCLIFFE having read the paragraph,
Mr. YATEs continued to say that there was great vague-
ness in the charge of insubordination. He never would be
content, and the public never would be content, when char-
ges were brought against a man so vaguely and dismissal
followed ; and he thought the council would not confirm the
proceedings under such circumstances. Since 1829, Mr.
Taafe had supported his mother and four of his brothers and
sisters, and be was at present supporting his mother, a sister,
and a brother, the latter of whom was dangerously ill of
consumption. The case was one, therefore, of peculiar hard-
ship, against a man of exemplary diligence, irreproachable
conduct, good manners, and great ability as a teacher. If
theie was one man more than another who deserved the sym-
pathy of the council it was the man who dared to be just,
although he thereby brought down upon himself the frowns
of his superiors. He thought if ever there was a case which
called for their sympathy the present was that one, and he
appealed to the sense of justice and humanity upon the part
of the council to act uprightly in the matter.
Mr. EARLE said he had great pleasure in rising to second
the amendment proposed by Mr. Yates, but would not make
any observations at that stage of the discussion, as he had
been informed by the Town-clerk that he might reserve him-
self until after other gentlemen had spoken.
Mr. HODGSON.—I appeal to the Mayor whether you can
speak again upon the question.
Mr. EARLE.--11l do so when I choose. (A laugh.)
The TOWN-CLERK said the Mayor must determine this
point. Acc6rding to the rule of the House of Commons, a
member seconding a motion might reserve to himself the
power of making his observations at a later period.
Mr. Alderman EARLE.—And it has been acted upon here.
Mr. Alderman TURNER.—Before the discussion proceeds
I should like to be informed whether every member of the
council has not a right to attend either of the schools, and to
ask any questions they may think proper ?—because, if they
have that power, the resolution of the Education Committee
is an infringement of that right. How can we attempt to
discharge our duty, if a resolution of the kind is to be put
upon the books, and we are told, in direct terms, that we
have no right so to do ?
Mr. G. H. LAWRENCE.—You have every right, certainly,
to attend them.
Mr. BOLTON.—Perhaps the Town-clerk will declare it
authoritatively.
The TOWN.-CLIERIC.—In answer to that question—whether
every member of the council. not a member of the Education
Committee, has a right to be a visitor of the schools—l must
only give the answer I gave on a former occasion, according
to the best of my recollection, in the case of Mr. Isaac
Holmes. I then declared that a member of the council, who
was not a member of the Education Committee, had no right
to visit the schools. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BOLTON.—Has he not a right to ask questions:for his
information and guidance?
The TOWN-CLERK.—My opinion is that he has no other
right than that which belongs to any gentleman in the town.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Alderman EARLE.—Then, how are we to judge if
these gentlemen have reported nothing as to the investiga-
tion going forward respecting Mr. Stone?
The TOWN.CLERK.—I know not that I am bound to
answer that question, but you know that every committee of
the council is subject to the control and correction of the
council in every respect.
Mr. BRIGHT.—The Town-clerk labours under a misap-
prehension with regard to Mr. Holmes, who wanted to be
present in the committee, and not to go to the schools.
The TOWN-CLERK.—It was so with respect to the Watch
Committee ; not with respect to the Education Committee.
Mr. EARLE.—Has a burgess a right to go to the schools
and ask those questions ?
The TOWN-CLERK.—Certainly not. (Hear.)
Mr. EARLE.—Then we are kept in glorious ignorance.
(A laugh.)
Mr. PLATT was of opinion that Mr. Taafe had been un-
justly dismissed.
Mr. BOLTON did not rise to speak on the question, but to
protest against the opinion just given by the Town-clerk.
He maintained it was the right of every councillor to visit the
schools, and he thought it the duty of the masters to give
such information to the councillors going there as might be
asked for in a civil manner. He certainly would bring the
question fully before the council on an early day.
Mr. HODGSON said he was of opinion they might dispose
of the present question without a great deal of discussion.
Mr. Yates had entered into it with much good feeling ; but
it should be recollected that the management of the schools
had been entrusted to a committee, who were responsible for
the carrying of them forward in a proper manner. The pre-
sent was not a question of feeling, with regard to whether
Mr. Taafe took care of his mother or his sister, neither was
it a question of moral conduct, though moral conduct might
bey involved
bringing
ness, for which the committee were to be responsible. Mr.
Yates had attempted to damage the character of Mr. Stone,
forward vague reports against him. He had at-
tempted to cast a slur upon the conduct of the head master
who had been appointed by the council, and who bad been
approvedmae
oo Of,
issocafaser
basyhe had gone, by the committee of ma-
nagementin gan
t t :;:iudpohne
an
nhoiught Mr. Yates had been trying to
adtravellingaai o!,
whose o f hisway,
conduct andwas byna mak-
ing abke
fore the council. (Hear, hear.) What was the fact with
regard to Mr'. Taafe ? That he had repeatedly told Mr. Stone
he would obey his masters, but that he would not obey him !

Could discipline be carried, on under these circumstances?.
(Hear, hear.) He said that he should see the orders of the
committee; but a most essential part of the instructions of
the committee was, to teach the children obedience to their
superiors, because if subordination were not to be established,
nothing in the shape of benefit could be inculcated.' Ile
next refused to carry out the orders of the committee with
regard to the apprentices, from fear, as he said, of commit-
ting an assault ; but this was a fiction of his own. It was
an attempt to put a colouring on that which was not fair
nor honest, and could not be allowed to have any weight with
a man who was to teach, not merely obedience, but truth
in every respect. He (Mr. Hodgson) alleged that Mr. Taafe
had thus shown himself unfit for his situation. In the firstplace,
he refused to turn out the refractory apprentices who would
neither teach as they had been directed, nor transfer their in-
dentures. Then, with respect to Mr. Taafe giving a account
to Mr. Yates of the attendance of Mr. Stone at the school,
did Mr. Yates so little understand the proper discipline to be
observed that he should go to the sceond master in the school
and ask hint•to become a spy upon his superior. (Laughter.)
Was that Mr. Yates's discipline ? He thought if Mr. Yates
happened to be upon the committee, they would teach him
that they held different views upon the subject. (Renewed
laughter and cheers.) Mr. Yates had next spoken of the
violence offered with respect to the teachers in religious in-
struction, and he had said that it had been deemed contrary
to the orders of the council, and that it had been attempted to
enforce on the Roman Catholics the going to church. But he
had failed to draw a distinction between teachers in the school
and the taught. (Hear.) The committee never held that
they would have as teachers in the school, people who would
refuse to give instruction in the Church Catechism. The
teachers must tea,:h that which ,had been appointed to be
taught, because there was no way of enforcing the plan on
which the schools were to be conducted, except by making
the teachers teach the Church Catechism. The teachers were,
however, told that if they could not comply with those re-
quisitions their indentures would be cancelled ; but they
stood in the anomalous position of being nobodies in the
schools, when they were told that unless they adopted the
plan pointed out they could not be there at all. There was
no question contrary to common sense in saying that the
council could not expect to go on with people under them in
such a situation, and so refractory as the apprentices seemed
to be. He would not say anything with regard to Mr. Taafe's
m oral character. He would not do what M r.Yates had, impugn
theconduct of men perfectly unimpeachable on the committee,
but he would say that Mr. Taafe's mode of going to Mr.
Yates, and reforming his letter and breakfasting with him,
and giving him private information, rendered him unfit to
hold any situation in the schools as a teacher, although it
might be no breach of what Mr. Yates would consider
" moral conduct." (Laughter and cheers.) He should like
to know how Mr. Yates would himself act under similar cir-
cumstances ? If the gentleman were going to choose a servant
would he be likely to engage an eavesdropper, who would tell
privately what had been passing in his house ?—(hear, hear)
—or, rather, would he not say to such a servant, " If you
find anything wrong you had better come to myself and tell
it ?" (Hear, hear.) Why had not Mr. Taafe done this ?
Why did he not come to the committee and tell what he
considered to be wrong ? (Hear.) But, no • he went and
reduced his private information to writing; and whether Mr.
Yates wrote a letter for him to copy or not it was difficult to
say, but, at all events, Mr. Taafe had made but a sorry figure
at composition, and had rendered himself totally unfit for
the situation by his conduct. The committee were deter-
mined to subdue any spirit of similar insubordination which
might evilice itself in either of the schools; and, notwith-
standing all the spirit of faction abroad, and all the attempts
made to ex ite discontent, he was happy to say that the
schools were increasing from day to day. (Cheers.) They
were taking in more and more children every week. Both the
schools would be filled much sooner than he had expected,
and in a short time, he trusted they would be an example
worthy to be followed by the country at large. But mean-
while he called upon the council to give their cordial support
to put down the spirit of trifling and vexation which was
being constantly evinced, and taking up thetime of the council.
He called upon the council to give their support to the
schools for only a short time longer, when the progress of
improvement would, he was satisfied, be such as to render
entire satisfaction. He believed Mr. Yates to be acting in
accordance with the feelings of his party, and he admitted
his candour, but he dissented from his judgment in toto on
the present occasion. He hoped the proceedings of the com-
mittee would be confirmed by such a majority as would show
the gentlemen opposite that although they might amuse them-
selves by bringing statements of this kind forward, such state-
ments were altogether out of place. (Hear, hear.) When
the radicals had been in power in the council, it was well
known that they had used their power. The conservatives
had certainly protested against their proceedings on the sub-
ject of education, but what had been the conduct of the con-
servatives at that time? They said they dissented, but then
they never became disturbers of the common peace. (Hear,
hear.) And all he would now say was this—the conservatives
have got the power—that power they will exercise ; and the
radicals may enjoy the vox et pr&terea nihil, as all that
belongs to them in their fallen position. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. PRIESTLEY contended that Mr. Taafe had not done
wrong in answering Mr. Yates' questions, because he was
under the impression Mr. Yates had a right to ask them, as
one of the councillors.

Mr. A. SMITH said there existed some misconception as
to the cause of the dismissal of Mr. Taafe. Mr. Yates
seemed to think it was because he had written a letter to
him ; but this was not the fact. (Hear.) He had been
dismissed for insubordination, in having brought charges
against Mr. Stone, which were not founded on fact. (Hear,
hear.) The committee had investigated these charges, and
found that every one was incorrect. In the first place, the
Roman Catholic children had not been compelled torn the
church catechism, or to go to church. In the next, the ap-
prentices had refused to do what Mr. Stone had ordered them,
and Mr. Taafe refused to turn them out when Mr. Stone had
desired him to do so. Then Mr. Stone had been accused of
not having attended the North School when first appointed,
but the fact was that he had been compelled to pass the
greater part of his time at the South School, there being no
other master there, and of course he was unable to be in two
places at the same time. In short, every charge against him
had undergone investigation, and was found to be incorrect.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. YATES asked Mr. Smith if he would be so good as to
say whether the committee had examined the five appren-
tices or the three fathers whom he had named ?

Mr. Alderman EVANS expressed a hope that Mr. Glad-
stone would fulfil the engagement he had given some few
weeks ago, and inquire whether the Roman Catholic child-
ren, who had been in the school heretofore, had returned.
There were only twenty-five who could be called Catholics
at the South School; and when they heard of the schools
being filled again, he would ask Mr. Gladstone to purgbe his
inquiry, and to ask what had become of the Catholic child-
ren, and whether other schools had been denuded of their
scholars to fill up the void in the corporation schools?
Mr. PLATT said the number of Roman Catholic children
at the North School amounted to fifty-four.
Mr. Alderman EVANS.—What has become of the others?

Mr. GLADSTONE, in reply to what Mr. Alderman Evans
had said, would remark that he was not aware of having
given any pledge. He had asked a question, and he would
ask the question again, when the system had been tried, but
the system was not yet matured. (Hear, hear.) He had
asked what had become of the catholic children, formerly in
the corporation schools; and he had since had the pleasure
of seeing a small sprinkling of them return. Whether the
number would increase, of course it was impossible for him
to pronounce an opinion ; but he adhered to the opinion he
then expressed that, if the schools were not made available
for all classes, he for one, would propose some change in
them, but he would not say what the change would be.
Mr. PLATT, in answer to a question, said the number of
Catholic children at the South School was 25.
Mr. BUSHELL was only afraid that the expectation of the
gentlemen opposite, of a change in the views of a most influ-
ential member of his (Mr. Bushell's) side of the house,
would operate rather as an inducement to continue the agi-
tation of this question than to allay it. That was his fear,
however benevolent the motive which prompted such an opi-
nion, or which dictated conduct based upon such opinion.
It might, he greatly feared, operate as a premium upon agi-
tation instead of a check to it. There seemed to be some
misapprehension with regard to the record of the committee's
proceedings : the committee merely referred to Mr. Taafe's
letter as evidence to bear out the fact of insubordination,
and it was the very best evidence that could be given, inas-
much as it proceeded from Mr. Taafe himself. The letter,
proceeding from himself, was evidence of his insubordina-
tion ; and he (Mr. Bushell) would ask the committee how
discipline could be preserved in a large body, such as the
army for instance, if every man insisted upon receiving his
orders and instructions directly from the commander-in-chief?
Each officer was there responsible to the one above him, and he
was merely the machine to put his orders in execution. 'When
Mr. Taafe said he would not obey Mr. Stone, insubordina-
tion commenced, and it might have descended through the
whole system if it were not stopped. The committee, there-
fore, could do nothing else than what they had ; and, how-
ever he (Mr. Bushell) might sympathise with Mr. Taafe on
the situation in which he was placed, the committee, he
contended, could not have acted otherwise towards him.
He thought the wonder was, not that there was not a large
body of Roman Catholics in the schools, but that there was
one Roman Catholic in them. That there should have been
so many as twenty-five in one school was matter of surprise.
In conclusion, he thought that none of the present attacks
ought to receive any sanction from the council until the sys-
tem had first received a fair trial.
Mr. AWN asked when the time was to arrive when the
system would be considered to have had a fair trial? He
cared not about the military law of the last speaker or the
uncivil law of the town-clerk; but he thought the common-
sense law was, that the council should make particular and
personal inquiry into the mode of conducting the schools.
He was satisfied that no man could lay his hand on his heart
and say that Mr. Taafe had been properly and honestly dis-

missed.
Mr. BIRRETT thought that the privateaffairs of individuals
would soon go to wreck if the conduct of Taafe, which
seemed to have been approved of by Mr. Aikin, were gener-
ally adopted. He maintained that the man had been guilty
of gross insubordination. He had refused to do what Mr. Stone
told him, and he had made statements wholly untrue of the
head master ; he had put them into the hands of Mr. Yates ;
those statements had gone to the public ; and was it likely,
under those circumstances, that Mr. Stone and Mr. Taafe
could ever draw together ? Was it likely that the children
could learn obedience from such insubordinate conduct
on the part of one of their masters? (Hear, hear.) That
had happened to Mr. Taafe now which he (Mr. B.) told some
of the parties who lent themselves to the present factious op-
position would assuredly happen. He called it " factious
opposition," because the council had to go over the same
subject every day they assembled. (Hear, hear.) It was
the case of a small minority against a large majority, and
that majority carrying out the wishes of the inhabitants.
(Hear, hear.) The radicals stood as 13 to 35 in the council.
After alluding to the large majority by which Mr. Brassey
had been returned for St. Anne's Ward, on this very ques-
tion, Mr. Birkett concluded by again denouncing the con-
duct of the minority.
Mr. PARKER expressed his belief that Mr. Aikin would be
the first to stand up for order, decorum, and subordination
in every department with which he stood connected. If any
of his servants showed anything like the insubordination
evinced by Mr. Taaffe, or if any of the officersunderthe
Dock Committee were to be guilty of it, the consequence
would be instant dismissal. (Hear, hear.) In the hope of
putting a stop to the present system of opposition, he moved,
as a second amendment, a vote of confidence in the Education
Committee.
Mr. Tot Lmis seconded the amendment.
Mr. BULLET believed the proceedings of the committee
were as illegal as they were unjust and unrighteous, and en-
tered his protest against them.
Mr. BOLTON contended that when the party with which
he stood connected were in power, they invariably acted
upon the principle of "do unto others as you would wish
others to do unto you. He referred to the late debate in
the House of Commons, and said that the government were
going to send out Catholic clergy to give instruction to the
Catholic soldiers in India. He wished to contrast the liberal
conduct of the government in this respect with the puny,
and petty conduct of a few tyrannical bigots in Liverpool.
He was strongly reminded of a period in history,—
Mr. GLAnsroNE.—I rise to order, Mr. Mayor. I, for one,
will not submit to be called a tyrannical bigot by any man.
If that language is addressed to me as a member of the
Education Committee, I ask the mayor whether it is, or is
not, to be retracted? Am Ito be called a tyrannical bigot
because, as a member of the Education Committee, I do
what I conscientiously believe to be right? (Hear, hear.)
Is that language to be applied to me? I shall not ask the
question again.
Mr. BOLTON.—I did not apply it to individuals, but to
L the committee as a body. (Cries of "Oh !")
Mr. HODGSON.—If that language is not immediately
! retracted, I shall move a vote of censure. (Great applause.)

Mr. BOLTOIsT.—It my opinion that the conduct pursued
by the committee in those schools is tyrannical and unjust.—
(Great uproar.)
Mr. GLADSTONE.—
Mr. P •—I

uestion