The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1906-05-01

Or. Chadwick VINO is q Wesleyan
preacher and therefore known as q
"Non-conformist.' said that the
school question contributed largely 70
the result. ~ is well known, IL 1902
the Conservative party. which is the
traditional protector Of church estab-
Ii-hmcnt in England. passed an act
authorizing the appropriation of
money raised by public taxation lor
AFOREMENTIONED schools controlled by
the established church in which the
crccds Of that church we're taught. 1t
gave the established church public
money but provided no public control
Of such >hooIs by public officials. 1t
was. in effect. taxing all denominations
to supper the chooIs Of one church.
The fact that the church so favored
was the established church made no
difference. The principle OF taxing
Mcthodists. Baptists. Presbyterians,
ouakcrs. Catholics, Hebrews, and per
sons of no faith for schools Of the
Episcopal church is So Fundamentally
wrong that the law raised such 1t
storm Of protests rs had not been
heard in England for years. Many
people refused To pay the tax, some
even going to jail in order To show
their hostility to such legislation, and
many parents kept their children out
of the schools because they did not
wish them taught by teachers Who
gave dcnominational instruction con-
trarv to their convictions. The Lib
craI party naturally received the
hearty support of all who felt outraged
because ii great princi.Ee mad been
violatcd-"thc principle that public
control should march with the eNpen-
diture of public funds, OF, in other
words. a school supported by the
state should be controlled by the
state" The issue was cicar-cut. The
Conservative party had passed the
law co~ntrayening the principle that
state funds could not be used to sup
port church schools. From 1879 to
1902 in England, church and state, in
a sense. competed in the field of popu-
lar education by maintaining rival
school systems. Commanding far less
financial resources, the church found
llStll Uildblt " StdIid bli' -
conservative party, which is the ira
ditional political protector of the
Church of England, was induced OF
driven to pass the act of 1892, which
enabled the churc schools to draw
upon public funds in all urban and
county areas for their support. But
in thus placing the church schools
,,,n, tho to<-aS tho late UnNrpTnmpnt /
did not provide for actual public con
troll OF them. While the Kenyon
S!aney amendment 10 the act Of 1902
did introduce, in a theoretical way,
the principle of the States right to
he represented on the managing
boards of church schools supported
by public funds, the working ma
Jcrity of those boards continued to be
persons representing not public but
private educational interests"
There is no need for Parliament to
lcgislate with reference to Mr.. Joseph
Chambcrlain's proposition To adopt
protection instead OF free trade as
England's national policy. for the de-
feat of Chamberlain prevents any
change. The matter of first import
ancc in Parliament, therefore, IS the
change in the school law embodied
in a bill reported by MI. Birrell, |
Minister of Education The London
Times. always representing the views
OF the established church and the
Conservative party. accepts these two
main principles in the proposed Dir
rCll act. tu-Wit.
and after january /. 1908. the
dual system of schools is to disappear. |
All schools will become what is known
as provided schools. Public contro
will be complete. |
"Tcachers viii! be subject to no re-
lipious test. and they viii all be ap-
pointed by the local educational au-
tllority." i
The Times also says:
They (the Liberals) may be right
in thinking that they have a mandate
to unity the schools under complete
public control. The disappearance of
UNCONVENTIONAL management and of
religious tests for teachers is Il consc-
Guence of this step. and tn" CountrN
has shown that it is prepared for it in
consideration of d larger settlement
This, of course, means that the Con
sentative party. accepting the inevita-
bic, will lie down or these propo-
sitions. r~eserving its fight pom mat
tors of detail upon which the Liberals
are not 50 fully agreed as upon the
fundamental principle involved. They
will make their stan to Try to keep
the privilege of having dcnominational
crcedS i'll the schools. In England no.
body has objected seriously to the un-
0enOminational instruction in the
Bible impaired to all the children. eN-
ccpt those whose parents objected, and
the problem with the new ministry is
whether to permit such continuance.
and if SO how to arrange it SO as to
avoid any instruction in creeds. In
America we solved this long ago. and
one we'll established policy is that
there shall be no denominational
teaching in the schools In this Coun-
try such Il law as the Conservative