10 JANUARY 1852, Page 12

GOOD TITTLEBAT FISHING IN DOWNING STREET. IN the next edition

of All Religions and Ceremonies, the editor -should notice the modern English custom of " going up in deputa- tion" to a Minister. We have lately seen instances of the prac- tice, in the Islington-Finsbury deputation to Lord Palmerston, and in the Customs deputation to Lord John Russell ; and this week we have the National Public School deputation to the Premier—each different from the others in subject, all alike in the principal traits. A number of gentlemen collect together, go in a body to the official residence, tell the Minister that which he has already perused in the newspapers, and listen while he in turn tells them nothing particular : and it is a remarkable characteristic of the Englishman, that the deputation is almost always delighted with what it has acquired—delighted, though it would find some difficulty in defining what it has acquired. Yet there is a sort of value in these experiences. It is, for ex- ample, instructive in the science of anthropology to witness the -evolution of the Ministerial mind. The speculative propositions --evolved by Lord John Russell on Tuesday were especially curious and interesting. He expressly stated, that Ministers had not come to any decision on the subject of public education, and that anything which he had to say would be subject to further pon- dering ; a caveat which is cautiously made to override " remarks " consisting almost entirely of negatives. He thinks the state of education in this country is not such as to be proud of—in- deed it is such that we ought to be almost [not quite] ashamed of it ; and therefore gentlemen who combine for the purpose of im- proving it deserve [assistance ?—no] credit, whether they succeed or fail in the attempt. Lord Melbourne's Government carried their proposition by a majority of only two ; Sir James Graham failtd: Lord John thinks the question is advancing to a solution ; but, like the pear, it is not yet ripe for the Government to under- take it. He hopes the Public School Association will persevere in their scheme. The British and Foreign School Society, he observes, think it neoessary that instruction in the Bible should be given ; the National School Society demand not only the Bible but the Church Catechism and Liturgy ; the Wesleyans and others demand the whole Bible. Lord John thinks secular education a good pre- parative for religious; but, he says, "I have for a very long period belonged to the British and Foreign School Society, and I have very much adopted their views upon the subject : that may be a prejudice on my part." Now which is his opinion—what is it ?

The Manchester people do not object to a rate; "a very en- couraging circumstance." " I hope you will go on with your scheme ; without, of course, pledging myself to any course with respect to it"; but "I hope you will go on," because "I think even failure in schemes of this kind produces very great good." Go on and prosper is the usual aspiration ; go on and fall is Lord John's formula. It seems that he relies much on the resources of Failure ; which accounts for a good deal in the history of the Whig Government. No doubt, they have still considerable resources of that kind to fall back upon. One argument is remarkable. Mr. Fox said that the scheme with which Lord John wished them to go on was identical with the scheme of education in Ireland, which is highly successful ; and Mr. Fox demanded " justice for England !" The scheme is successful in Ireland, replies Lord John ; but " it hardly follows that though it is the best scheme for Ireland it would be the best scheme for this country." True ; but what are the differences that would establish the nonsequitur ? Is it that Popery is para- mount among the Irish, Protestantism in England ? Is it that Ireland can afford a rate, and England not ? Is it that the Irish have a prescriptive right to " justice," which is not recognized for Englund ?—Because, in the absence of some practical differences, it does follow that the scheme which would be best for Ireland would be good for England.

However, in spite of his long connexion with the British and Foreign School Society, Lord John does not share the opinions of those who think that there is any hostility between secular and re- ligious instruction ; and ho begs to say as much "in making ob- jections, if I do make them." Does be, or does he not ? It seems that he does not know himself ! It is a curious question, which we

should like to hear discussed by the members of the deputation. We incline to conjecture that he does not make objections—has none to make. But there is the rub, the difficulty.

The deputation retired, to communicate to its constituents what it had learned. What was that ? Especially is it difficult to an- swer the question, since in stating both sides of each position Lord John premised that he might reconsider his non-conclusion. Lord John is not of this opinion, and he is not of that ; and in making objections, if ho does make them, he does not think so ; and the deputation is authorized to tell the country as much. So the As- sociation may go on and fail ; he hopes it wilL All of which is very encouraging, and worth coming to London to find out. But of course we must maintain our national customs; • among which are the passing of bad laws in Parliament, and the keeping of good laws to discuss in deputations, for the credit of all whom it may concern.