New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-15
EDUCATION IN ENGLAND.
John BRIGHT,s POSITION.

MINISTRY uJ~REQUIrED, .-L-.
lvRoM TIL. REGULAR coaREsPosDEsr or THE rHfBcshS
LONDON Oct 30.-Mr Brghgs speech has pro-
duced certain degree of irritation among sect'oA
of bis own party. The circumstances we're such a
10 make IL impossible not to offend somebody. On
no question has there been feeling than on thn
Education Act, for the plain that the points
in dispute bear religion. and enlist the most vio
lent ecclesiastical preudices Of one side and thd
other To conciate the Birmingham League and
the Manchester Union wa task that not even By.
Fright could undertake hopefully. Idon't know thas
be undertook it at all He had quite enoughto 90 I'm
attemptinQ to reconcile his birmingham frlenas
70 his Ministerial friends 10 restore the shaen ee
glance of the Nonconformists to the exlsuhs Uos-
eminent. and to do this without estrangine ies
Church of England supporters. 10 haa se'
more delicate, if not diffcnltb to critciSe ao
10 sacrifice great measure-great In intention ~'.
soope-of the Ministry which he had lust IeIoih'e'
without offending his colleagues. especially that col
,easue. to whom be once stood nearest and VINO
was the responsible author, and all throug.
last session still the apologist OF tnas
,reasnre Mr.. Forster. II was impossipies
"a the result has proved Mr.. Forster has plenty OF
friend, in the press and elsewhere sufficiently AZ
toched To him to resent his being thrown over.
Tbev have commented as freely On Dir. Bright 90
NJ Rrght himself commented on DIR. Forster, or On
Mr. Forsters Act The evidences OF embittered feef
ing are 40 numerous that doubt whether the Cao-
;nat forms at this moment precisely that Happy
Family of middle-aged gentlemen OF which Mr.
Lowe drew US not long since pleasing picture
Mr. BRIGHT stroye 10 relieve himself of all respon-
sbi,ity for she obnoxious act, by stating thst nc
WAS not present at the Cabinet meetings az "h'o
II WAS agreed on. But q writer who signs hiinse"
"d,nicus Ve,itdHs," alleges in The Times tha' h'r.
Bright attended Cabinet meetings IN NoVenioei io.
| the month in which he says Cabinet seoren
x,,oro made up-snd down to February 4
| 1870. Parliament meeting on the stn, an an
Mr. Forster introducing the Educaton III. u
| on the nth of that month. And ne asks Iatnch
perty whether Mr.. Bright means inc puguc " uos
Serstand that tho PRINCIPLES of the bill were nos
settled in 1859 and It's chief details before FEB :.
1s70 and whether the bill itself had not Deeh ossn
hv every member of the Cabinet before Feb. D. Ws
ny 20 ybcb it was an nounced that Mr. Bright had
been Obliged to leave town. Unless ne can ans b
each of these questions in the negalve, nc sasuo -
is told can be attached TO his disclaimer Oh reopon
| bilty for tle bill roh;,..
or that letter, the author Is said to be Csolpes
| Minister or Cabinet Minister'S secretary. %IIgh ht
! tho same thng-and that fact may account Tor wnas
think Mr.. Bright's extraordinary ana lil-ludge s
course in replying it, 1t Is the reply when glv
weight to the attack heard one ~ afier tiat
| Vas tran and that the facts were 90 well KNOWN
"a To- make il impossible for Mr. Bright TO fa INTO u
needless, that IS Ior nm OF rn ns that tho
the e.sol AZ as nof settled in Cabinet Council
except in the most general way - that inc Sei ~
| nr;ncinJe was stated, but the working OF u
ont left TO Mr. Forster and the preparation OIL tue
hill "a usual to tue Parliamentary craftsman. Is
consequences were foreseen BY nobody; mucn isss
| debated by the Ministry in advance, ana met YIN
Decentralization of the opposition to be encountered
| remember perfectly well that Mr. Forsters OH
was at first haed-ke that unhappy ifsm Lad
sity act last session-even by NOncOnfornlst i9s
| er; as embodylDg unexpected CONCESSIONS nov
| il would work was not anticipatea Gum" ~
! hv those in whose favor 1t WORKED, %
AZ 6rst by those against whom 1t wofke9-
The strength OF the Church was scarcely suspe.IHs
Now il is that any bill promoting or tos ta a
denominational schools must be bill for the ~.
vantage of the Church of England ana the uetlnens
| of opposing sects. But at that time the Noncon-
formists fanced themselves in some respects no I'M
onai match for the State Church. norwere the Secu-
iar,sts in position TO state their demands iniy OK
to enforce concessions which their chief alhes Do-
! lieved unnecessary In wnOIe OF III paiV' ANN ~
| chief showed itself later. 49,,
| If any answer were needed therefore. to letter
so offensive in tone that of Amtcas IeT1tn,sS, u
| would have been than sufficient TO publish IN
some other journal that which have given above
or for some freud of Mr. Bright TO address u 70 -
Times. From his retirement at Rochdae, ana WIN
ont either the means of refreshing hlS recolieebon
! or of consulting with his friends Mr. bright SENT
forth reply in his name. think any reply IN nn
| own name would have been mistake MT Dr,gus
| position is not such as to be much snaKen py a
anonymous assault even IN the largest type OF Ias
| Times. and nysteriously whispered to come from
% f tbe comcarave weakness or at any
rate VISITATION of his defense. though his complete
| frankness and readiness to admit he may have Desn
| only document he read was the draft bill
| dated Jan. 22 to which he gave little at
tention, being then harassed by the iris I
| Land bill and by increasing feebleness lie
remembers no discussion as either principles or
| details but has recollection OF converssion
to whether It was desirable to proceed Tsn s.e
bill. He adds that he now thinks lie must DC niis
taken as to what took place in 69 and 70 though 70
what the mistake applies l am wholly uns Dhs 20
pily STILL he goes to say that 1t was not the org
inal bill but the changes and concessions during tPo
| esson Of 1870 that alone he seriously condemns.
| Elated with his triumph IN enclting Response
from Mr. Bright and with the fresh errors into
| which the latter falls, "Amicas le1tdhs returns
to the charge this morning ana ser Sfs ont tbas
| all the changes referred to ana conqenheu py nr'
Bright were in favor of the party whose cause MI.
asserto mV is true or not To ascertain how far
it Is true would require an examination ot
all the debates on the bill dur ing wt thss
has only proved that Mr. Bright ought not 10 nave
entered upon a discussion of what took place durlng
his qesf q which 20 kasy a9.nss sf or v hi%
self about when he wrote. / dwell upon this. ndS
merely because it an important episode "a me
great Education controversy but because IL aDectH
no matter how slightly, Mr.. Bright's authority: IL
| is. at this moment, most desirable that nothing
should occur to weaken that authority Inc
return nSRH Gt to s o councils fho League has proclaimed
its satisfaction with his speech his position, and
the policy. or the modification of policy, which the
| Nonconformists and Secuarsts now think them
selves entitled to expect from the Governments: no
party once more gives signs of courage. OF faith IN
It's mssion and Of continued triumph IN the immedi-
ate future don't wau to see sprospect darkened
| Let Mr. Forster be ever much annoyed NJ Mr.
Brizht's outsp0ken criticism, he, like the rest az
them, must feel that it has given the Ministry new
| strength when new strength was very greatly
tneedei As for the Wing nObodies in the Cabinet.
IL they are angry, they might resign without doing
very irreparabe damage TO the prospects OF tue
party to which the love OF office has attached tnem