A DEFENCE OF DUNCEDOltf.
- York, 27th April.
Sta.—In the cause of Duncedom, permit me to say a word to your positive and peremptory correspondent " A Cheshire Parson," who, from preach- ing against the selling of milk from the pump, comes, to school us on the principles of education, and defends the late abortive scheme of Lord John Russell. At the risk of incurring the Cheshire Poison's denunciation of "sublime ignorance," I profess to be one of those who opposed Lord John Russell's resolutions. I did so neither as an " off-hand politician," (what- ever that maybe,) nor as one from the " conventicle," but as one of the un- distinguished and illiterate herd who don't read Augustine nor are privileged to preach on milk-and-water. Aspiring to be no leas an ardent friend of education than my reverend friend front Cheshire, I saw nothing in Lord John Russell's scheme which inspired me with any lively faith in its efficacy as a provision against national ignorance. I objected to it as a crude,
confused, and complicated attempt to satisfy all possible conditions,
and to reconcile all existing denomination's, which 'would assuredly end in an universal war of spleen, bigotry, and prejudice, throughout every parish in England. I objected to it, not because I deeemed the present system or no-system of education to be perfect, but because I had no faith in the substitute, as a remedy. I objected to it, as I object to all half-measures which, founded on a compromise of prin- ciples and a mixture of prejudices, are not less immoral than illogical and can never be productive of good. Above all, I objected to the imposition of an universal rate for the support of 'denominational teaching, as an en- croachment upon the liberty of the minority, and as a source of tyranny, jealousy, wrangling, and bad blood. I admit that the present education of the people is inadequate and defective ; but of the two evils I prefer even voluntary ignorance to compulsory religious teaching. I am for State edu- cation, if the schoolmaster be not also the religious catechist; but to such a consummation neither Church nor Conventicle will let us come. Between the two, they have kept the people in that state of ignorance which they now go about deploring with so many tears ; and they quarrel with one an- other and with the people because it will not eat of the. food they have pro- vided—with the accompanying sauce. Let the food be simple and natural, and free from stimulating condiments, and we may all sit down to table to- gether.
The of State education, at present, is not between the Volun-
taries and the Centralizers, but between the Denominationalists and Secu- larists. Lord John Russell's scheme, intended to contain something to please everybody, possessed the singular distinction of giving offence to every principle, Clvland religious. It offended the Voluntaries, because it
ed local action ; it offended the Centralizers, because it gave power
superseded
ratepayers ; it offended the Denominationalists, because it provided only the rudiments of religious teaching ; and it offended the Secularists, because it introduced doctrinal religion into the schools, and interfered with the mental freedom of the subject.
I will not follow the Cheshire Batson through his "eight considera- tions" ; as apart from its details, the main principle of Lord John's measure was sufficiently absurd to insure its rejection. That the Commons, in pitching it out of doors so unceremoniously, have acted in accordance with the popular feeling on the subject, I firmly believe; and I find consolation in the thought that there are so many dunces beyond the limits of Cheshire.
Previous page
