Brbates ant Wroctoings in giariinnwnt. •

EDUCATION.

That on the " orders " of the House of Commons fbr Monday, stood the application of Lord John Russell for the Educational grant, to be pre- faced by a statement. An immense number of petitions, many in favour, still more against the Government measure, were presented by various Members.

Sir BENJAMIN Harz noticed a rumour, that a compromise had been en- tered into between the Government and the Wesleyan body, at the expense of the Roman Catholics; and he asked whether that report was correct?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied by a statement of the facts. The negotia- tion was not begun by any person authorized on the part of Government. His noble friend Lord Ashley understood, from some members of the Wes- leyan body, that they were about to enter into resolutions characterizing the minutes in a manner which he thought inapplicable; and he asked them to wait while he communicated with Lord Lansdowne on the subject, hi order to an explanation on the points in question. The Secretary to the Committee of Council accordingly came to Lord Lansdowne and Lord John and asked for directions. They said, they should have no hesitation in answering any questions the Wesleyan body chose to put, in order to a COT- rect understanding of the Minutes. One question was, whether persons holders of ecclesiastical functions would be eligible to the office of pupil- teachers; and the answer was in the negative. Another question was, whether the authorized version of the Scriptures must be used in the schools to which aid should be given? On this subject the querists were referred to the resolution of the Committee of Council in December 1839, which required in the schools receiving assistance "the daily reading of a portion of the Scriptures": and it was always understood that "the Scriptures" meant the authorized version of the Scriptures. In 1839 another plan had been proposed by the Com- mittee of Council, in which it was intended to allow the use of the Donay version of the Bible; and therefore, if the Committee had intended the same thing in December 1839, they would have so stated. The Wesleyan body asked whether their own Committee of Education would be recog- nized and their concurrence asked on the appointment of an Inspector of their schools? They were told that such a plan would not be objected to. Lord John believed he had stated the rule laid down in 1839, as it had been followed ever since; and he did not know that there ever bad been grants to Roman Catholic schools exclusively such. They had made no alteration in that respect-

" When it shall have been brought before us—when the Roman Catholic Bishops shall have expressed their views on the subject—then will be the time to consider in what manner we can give the advantage of any of the public grants to Roman Catholic schools. I think there are considerable difficulties m the question, arising from the fact that many of these schools being conducted by persons in holy orders, and Protestant children attending them, the Roman Ca- tholic version of the Acriptures only being read, it might be used as a means of proselytism. Them are other difficulties attending the subject: for my own part, I trust that when those difficulties come to be considered, we shall be able to pro- pose grants to Roman Catholic schools as well as others. But with respect to the grant of the present year, we do not propose that any part of the 100,000L we shall now proceed to ask from the House should be applied to these Roman Catholic schools."

Lord Joan RUSSELL then e4tered upon his general statement. He began by bespeaking the judgment and fairness of the House, without re- gard to the attempts which had been made to overawe their deliberations by resolutions passed elsewhere-

" That has been done by those who endeavour to show that the body which is to have the management of this grant is unconstitutional, and that a grant made from year to year—made by the House of Commons, placed in the hands of Ministers of the Crown removeable at the pleasure of the Sovereign, and who can- not hold office any longer than they have the support of this House—as a means of devoting money to the education of the people, is an unconstitutional mode of proceeding. Talk of responsibility indeed! How much more must we be responsible, holding this power on such a tenure, than those who have col- lected together from various parts of the country, who are not responsible to any one, and who have told Members of this House that they will raise such oppo- sition at future elections that they shall no longer have the honour of seats in this House if they decide according to their fair and impartial judgment upon the question that is now to be brought before them? " (Cheers.) Lord John reviewed the history of the subject— Until late years, the whole task of education has been left to voluntary efforts. En 1784, an individual—Mr. Raikes—first raised subscriptions to establish some schools. In the beginning of the century, when Mr. Lancaster first came into this country, individuals established the British and Foreign School Society; and the clergy established National Schools on the plan of Dr. Id& In 1832 or 1833, a small vote was proposed to aid the education of the working classes; and 10,000/ or 20,0001. was placed by the Treasury at the disposal of the National Society and the British and Foreign Society. In that shape the matter continued till 1839, when it was proposed to establish the Committee of Council to admi- nister the funds hitherto granted to the different societies. The Committee of Council is nominated by the Queen; and the Lord President of the Council for the time being is placed at the head of the Committee. The appointment of that Committee gave nse to vehement discussions in both Houses: the Archbishop of Canterbury protested against its formation, and against any scheme of education that was not made the sab,ject of a bill before Parliament. It was evident that both the Committee and the Church would be weakened by those differences of opinion. Accordingly, when it was proposed to appoint Inspectors of Educatien, it was suggested that an Inspector should be appointed with the concurrence of the two Archbishops within their respective provinces; and that the Inspectors should report to the Committee of Council, not only as to the secular education in the schools, but also as to the nature of the religious education given in the schools according to the liturgy of the Church of England; duplicates of those reports as to the religious instructions to be sent to the Archbishops. Such was the state of the question in 1841, when Sir Robert Peel came into office. No change was then made in the appointment of the Committee; though the persons of course, being Ministers of the Crown, vacated their seats. Sir James Graham and Lord Stanley became members of the Committee, Lord Wharncliffe its head. Lord Wharncliffe adopted the rule for appointing Inspectors. The Inspectors of Schools connected with the British and Foreign Society did not conduct any ex- amination as to the religious instruction given in those schools, but only took the declaration of the managers of the schools that the Scriptures were duly read. The grants continued to be made under that plan and also various grants for normal schools; until, last year, the amount increased to 100,0001. When the present Ministers came into office, they found that a great number of schools had been built, and that there was no longer such a demand as there had been for money to build schools. On the other hand, there were various deficien-

cies In the management and conduct of the schools, and it was proposed to be in- boys in the better-managed schools, so as to enable t to remain at school for a crease the number of Ins tors. It was also pro to pay for some of the longer time. The system of monitors under the plan of Lancaster and Bell had not answered satisfactorily, because the boys left school at too early an age to be efficient teachers. It was therefore intended to induce the boys to remain some years in the schools, in order to become assistant teachers; and a money allowance became requisite for the purpose. It was also proposed to augment the salaries of masters who had been trained and had certificate of efficiency: for Lord John had

always considered that you never could effectually, raise education in this country till you have raised the condition and prospects of the schoolmaster—that consti-

tutes all the difference between the alertness or listlessness of the pupils, in their backwardness or progress. With a similar object it was proposed to provide the retiring pensions for schoolmasters. No money would be required on that account for the present year, but it would be required in future years. Lord John must say, that these propositions did not seem to him to merit those denunciations and threats which had been poured so plenti-

fully on the heads of Ministers. On the contrary, the most natural ob- servation would have been, "Is this all? are you doing nothing more? Your plan is good so far as it goes, but not equal to the immensity of the evil." Whatever might be the answer to that observation, he would no- title the more prominent of the opposite objections— The Dissenters of various denominations applauded the Government in 1839 for entrusting the subject of education to the Committee of Council: now, an ob-

jection is raised to that Committee I It is said to be altogether a mistake for the State to give any assistance whatever in support of education: the State, it is averred, has only to punish crime. That argument would go far, not only to

overthrow this particular grant, but also the grant for education in Ireland, the Regium Donum, the assistance to ministers of the Church of Scotland, and any money granted for the purpose of teaching, or assisting schools in connexion with churches and chapels. It is also said that there is no need for further education; that the people of England are already educated, or on the way to be so. With- out going into minute statistics, he was sure that Members would see in their own neighbourhoods that education is lamentably deficient. Dr. Vaughan, one of the opponents of the measure, calculates, in the British and Foreign Quarter% Review, that of children between four and fourteen years of age there are 3,600,000; that less than a third of this number are found in day-schools, much less than a third in Sunday-schools only, and nearly a million and a half in no school whatever. Lord John quoted the further statistics furnished by the Registrar-General, by the Reverend Mr. Clay of the Preston House of Correction, &c., to show the excessive ignorance of the poorer classes. In gaol the prisoners receive education: is it not desirable to give it them before they reach that place? —or, in the words of a written question handed to the Reverend Mr. Burnett at a public meeting, "Is it not better ;to put a guide-post at the beginning of a man's life tnan a gibbet at the end of it?" Mr. Burnett replied, " What if the guide- post should lead to the gibbet ?"—a quick answer, no doubt, and one that would be well received by a public meeting. Another objection taken by Mr. Baines amounts to this, that there are large classes in towns irretrievably doomed to great ignorance, brutal sensuality, to vice and crime•, and that education cannot be made to reach them. Lord John was astonished at such a proposition: it only showed the straits for arguments to which men were obliged to have recourse. No doubt, there are men who will never be redeemed from sensual indulgence and riotous excesses; but their numbers may be diminished. There are also more specific objections to the plan, and some that Lord John thought had great force. If Ministers have not done better, it is in consideration that the ground is in a great part filled by the various so- cieties which have established systems of education for themselves—

He could not but think it desirable, that at the commencement of the present century the various religious_ parties should have united Churchmen and Dis- senters in the same schools. He did not say that it could have been done, but it would have led to a united education. Others thought that Dissenters had been too scrupulous as to the teaching of the Liturgy and Catechism. Whatever the opinions upon these points, the fact is, that Ministers have to deal with a great amount of schools existing, and the great amount of money annually granted to these schools. The National Society professed that in their schools, connected with the Church of England, there are more than 900,000 pupils. With regard to the other schools, it was laid down in 1839 that Ministers would not make any inquiry at all as to the religious instruction, though they required Inspectors to report upon the efficiency of the secular part of instruction. The rule which was adopted in 1839 with respect to the building of schools was now to be adopted for the education of the pupil-teachers and stipendiary monitors. The parties who consented to the rules applied to the building of schools in 1839 now object to the application of the same rules to tuition; a distinction which Lord John could not comprehend. There is no question now of the Church of England arrogating to herself the teaching of the whole people. If, indeed, the subscriptions of the Church very much exceed the subscriptions of the Dissenters, then a larger proportion of

grant would go to the Church: but that is not a difference of principle—it is a dif- ference of amount and as equality of principle. The plan laid down in the re- cent minutes has been carefully represented as a system of State education. It is not so; it is only a system which comes in aid of voluntary subscriptions. It has also been said that some other scheme of education would have been better; that the Government ought to have confined itself to secular education, taking ne cognizance whatever of religious instruction. Dr. Vaughan and others have no objection to aid being given to the different Church and Dissenters Societies, but they would have the State take no cognizance whatever of the religions instruction given in the schools. This is very much what Government is now doing; because there can be no doubt that the several societies will continue to use their own catechisms and formularies, as they now do. Others who speak of secular edu cation have a different meaning: they hold that religion is a matter with which the schoolmaster has no concern. A scheme of that kind was brought forward by Mr. Roebuck some years ago. " To such a scheme I have the most decided objection. Under such a system, the State would take cognizance, in schools set up by itself, of one half only, and that not the most important half, of the in- struction to be given to the children therein educated. I think myself, that to omit any inculcation of the duties of religion—to omit instructing the children in the principles of love to God and love to their neighbour—would be a grave, a serious, and an irreparable fault. I think myself, that no advantage that could be gained from uniting different sects could compensate for such an apparent de- claration by the State, that they thought secular knowledge and secular learning alone was that with which they had any concern, or in which they took any in- terest. I think, besides, that practically—supposing the objections which stand in front of such a schema to be overruled—considering how the time of the work- ing classes of this country and of their children must be occupied, and consider- ing also how the time of the teaehers of religion is and must be occupied, you could not obtain, in this way, a sufficient amount of religious instruction. I think, therefore, that both in principle and in practice such a scheme would be objectionable. But I believe, moreover, even if such a scheme had in my eyes greater advantages, that it is one which would not be acceptable to Parliament, and far less acceptable to the people of this country; for they would confound the omission of religious instruction, and the declaration that such instruction was to be left to the ministers of different persuasions, with irreligion. They certainly would be wrong in their interpretation of the intention; but still I think that feeling would be entertained; and I believe it would be so strong as to overbear, and at once put an end to, any scheme proposed on such n basis.', He had already stated that the authorized version of the Scriptures is the one to be used: he believed that thus far no practical inconvenience had arisen from this restriction, and he saw no necessity for discussing it at the present moment. As applications had been received for the whole of the 100,0001., it would not be desirable to expend any part of that 100,0001. upon Roman Catholic schools— "I believe that about half a million of money has already been spent for educe- Lionel purposes, under the direction of the Lords of the Treasury and the Com- mittee of Council on Education; and of that sum, I do not think a single shilling has been given for the establishment or assistance of purely Roman Catholic schools; and I do not see the advantage of coming to an immediate decision on this subject, which seems to have been brought forward merely for the sake of placing a stumblingbloek in our way."

Alluding to Mr. Duncombe's contemplated motion, Lord John said, he thought he had shown that the scheme would not interfere with the con- stitutional function of Parliament, with the religious convictions or civil rights of the subject-

" I am aware of what I think is a very great hardship in many of the Church schools in this country—the existence of a rale disallowing children to come to them unless they learn the Church Catechism and attend the church on the Sab- bath. With respect to this rale, we neither promote nor encourage it by this scheme. If we had made it a condition of these grants that the fundamental rules of these schools should be departed from, we should thereby have lost the advantage of any of these schools which are properly conducted. But, for my own part, I cannot but think that the Church itself would gain a great advan- tage-by allowing parents to send their children to these schools without insisting on their learning the Church Catechism or attending at church on the Sab- bath. I believe that the rale of the Wesleyan body, which allows parente, to act on their own religious convictions in this respect, is much wiser, and more charitable, and has not, I believe, any tendency to effect a diminution in the Wes- leyan community. I should see with great pleasure any improvement in the rules of Church schools on this point. I cannot, however, force any change on them. I cannot believe that this grant of 100,0001, part of which is to go to them, would entitle the Ministers of the Crown to impme terms on these volun- tary schools which of themselves they are not willing to iewpt. But I say again, that I shall be glad to see a change in this respect: and I say further, that if in any place there should be some small body of Dissenters willing to send their children to the Church school, but shut out from doing so by the rule I have mentioned, that would form an additional reason for granting aid to the locality, so that a school might be opened where all the children of the place might go." Lord John read a passage from Dr. Vaughan, showing the small impres- sion that has been made by educational efforts, and the immense want of popular instruction—

Reading this passage, impressed with this truth, seeing that the evil is so great, he was not disposed to wait for the tune until he could advance a general and more perfect scheme: he was disposed rather to feel his way, at least to begin the task of dispelling that ignorance, and of promoting religion and virtue among the great mass of the population; and, be the opposition to his measure what it might, he should at least have the consolation that he had made an attempt to diminish the empire of ignorance, and to raise the people of this country in the scale of religion and virtue among the nations of the globe.

Lord John concluded by moving the order of the day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply.

Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE opposed the motion with an amendment: and he had received several communications from Churchmen as well as Dis- senters assuring him that if he had given longer notice of his amendment, they would have afforded it every support by means of petitions. He maintained that the Government scheme is dangerous to civil and religious liberty; is calculated to increase the power of the Crown; invades the func- tions of Parliament; is unjust to the tax-payer who receives no benefit from it; is a scheme which cannot attain the objects sought to be accom- plished, while it will carry discord and dissension into every locality where it is intruded.

He appealed to the petitions to show the want of any general concurrence. To show how petitions were obtained in favour of the scheme, he read a circular from the Reverend Henry Hughes, Honorary Secretary to the Central Com- mittee for Promoting the Government Scheme of Education, of which Lord Ashley is chairman. The letter contained the form of a petition; suggested that petitions should be forwarded to Borough or County Members, or to Lord Ashley, or to "The Right Honourable Lord John Russell, M.P., 32 Chesham Place, Lon- don "—(Laughter)—who has kindly promised to take charge of them "; and the writer added in a postscript--" I have authority to state, that under the exiating Minutes, the authorized version of the Scriptures must be read daily in all schools, aided by the Government." So that the Roman Catholics were to be excluded

from all participation in this grant. Mr. Duncombe read a statement by

• correspondent of his own, narrating the compromise which had been effected with the Wesleyans. According to the account, these concessions were made to the deputation,—" that all Church schools taking Government aid should be required to receive the children of Wesleyan parents, without such children having to learn the Church Catechism or attend on Sunday the Church service; and that no person in holy orders should have the office of master in any school aided by the Government; the latter rale being intended to defeat a proposal of the Bishop of Exeter, to invest masters of such schools with Deacons' orders. These points having been conceded to the deputation, they met on Friday last, and the decision they came to was in favour of the Government scheme. Such was this history. LMr. MACAULAT—" It is mere romance."] Mere ro- mance! Then, perhaps, the Roman Catholics were not to be excluded. Was that mere romance?

He had that morning received a communication from Leeds. It enclosed a re- solution passed by a Committee meeting of Roman Catholics, in which they say they " cannot refrain from expressing their contempt and abhorrence of a Minis- try desirous of creating a new disability upon her Majesty's Roman Catholic sub- jects." There is no " romance " in that. Did Mr. Macaulay, when he opposed Lord Stanley's attempt to revoke the minute of 1839, understand that Roman Catholics should be excluded ? Let Lord Morpeth, too, answer that question; who then said that " as long as the State thought proper to employ Roman Catho- lic sinews and to Seger Unitarian gold, it could not refuse to extend to those by whom it so profited the blessings of education." That opinion of Lord Morpeth was warmly defended by Lord John Russell, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Hawes, and others; and they ridiculed the attempt to get up a "No Popery" cry. Who would have expected that the same Ministers, returning to power, would be the first to exclude the Roman Catholics from participating in the grant? They stood up fur perfect equality then—why not now? What would be said by Mr. Shell and others, who in voting usually go into the same lobby with Ministers? If such honourable and right honourable gentlemen should cast that reproach upon their own religion, or should adopt the more cowardly course of running away and flying from the battle, there might still be a sufficient number who would refuse to vote a shilling of the public money until all who contributed to it should share equally in the distribution of the grant. To show that the scheme is " unconstitutional," Mr. Duncombe quoted the statement made by Lord Lansdowne in the House of Lords, that the Minutes might be laid on the table without any prefatory remark, seeing that they did not contain anything which required the sanction of either House. He ridiculed the Minutes as quackery: people might talk of Dr. Eady, or of Dr. Morison's pills; but Dr. Kay Shuttleworth 's Minutes beat everything of the kind. The proposed workshops in schools are the laughingstock of the country. A parcel of girls- kitchen-maids, and chamber-maids that are to be—will be crammed with • com- pound proportion"; therochial clergyman assisting. There is to be " vocal -music," and " drawing from models." He had presented a petition from working men complaining that the workshops would inflict a serious injury on the honest and hard-working artisan, by increasing the competition which has already brought the body of trades down to the mere subsistence level. The experiment of industrial schools has always failed. Men cannot be taught a trade in a day; they must serve an apprenticeship. But there is this dilemma—either young persons will be taught trades imperfectly, or a serious injury to the working classes.

To show the absence of impartiality in the official administration, Mr. Duncombe mentioned two cases— In 1844, some friends of religion and education in Manchester resolved to build a school for girls, and laid out 3501. Dr. Shuttleworth promised that the Council .would grant 1001.; but when the money was asked for, only 501. was granted. A gentleman in the same town laid out 8001. to build a school in connexion with the Church of England. The Council granted hitn 8001.

Mr. Duncombe also addressed himself to the task of replying to passages in the pamphlet attributed to Mr. Kay Shuttleworth. He spoke of the in- creasing patronage of Government—the Local Courts Bill and its Judges, the intended Board of Health and its Inspectors, the four new Bishops, &c. In conclusion, he moved that before any money be granted,

. . . . a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the justice and expe- diency of such a scheme, and its probable annual cost; also to inquire whether the regulations attached thereto do not unduly increase the influence of the Crown, invade the constitutional functions of Parliament, and interfere with the religious convictions and the civil rights of her Majesty's subjects." Viscount DUNCAN seconded the amendment; repeating several objections to the measure; but especially objecting to the irresponsible power which it proposed to give to the Educational Committee of the Privy Council.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS retained the objection which he originally had to the scheme of education sanctioned by the Committee of the Council; but at the same time, he felt that it was perfectly vain to hope at the present mo- ment to create a different organization for the diffusion of education. He accepted the plan, he would not say cheerfully, but thankfully. Setting aside the fundamental defect, it was greatly superior to anything which could be expected from any other combination of parties in that House. It introduced a series of very great improvements. Sir Robert claimed for the Church the office of being the great educatrix of the people: going back a hundred years before the time of Bell and Lancaster, almost all the gram- mar schools were founded by members of the Church of England.

Mr. Mscatmar, as a member of the Council whose conduct had been called in question, defended the Minutes. He declined to follow Mr. Duncombe's discursive speech. He was unable to discover from that speech what Mr. Duncombe's opinion was even on the great fundamental princi- ple at issue—whether the education of the common people is, or is not, something to which it is the duty of the State to attend. Mr. Macaulay held that it is the right and duty of the State to provide for the education of the common people; citing the authority of Adam Smith— What is the alternative? "Take away education, and what are your means? Military force, prisons, solitary cells, penal colonies, gibbets; all the other appa- ratus of penal laws. If then, there be an end which a government is bound to at- tain—if there are two ways only of attaining it—if one of those ways is by ele- vating the moral and intellectual character of the people, and if the other way is by inflicting pain—who can doubt which way every government ought to take?' Look et the first report presented to the Committee of Education on the dis- trict ,d Newport, just after the frantic insurrection at that place. " According to that report, it appeared there were about 11,000 children in that district at an age when they ought to have been receiving education; but that of those about 8,000 attended no school, and that a great many of those who did might as well have staid away for anything useful that they were taught; that the apparatus of instruction was most faulty—that the masters were some of them ruined trades- men, some of them discarded miners, &c., men whose sole qualification for tuition

t:

was that were utterly disqualified for any other pursuit."

In the opinion that education is the province of the State, Mr. Macaulay was fortified by the opinion of the wisest legislators and philosophers of aliages, by the most illustrious advocates of civil and religious liberty- " 'I o those men who, with unconquerable principles, in the days of Archbishop tatni, left this country for the wilderness, where they might enjoy a pure liberty

and a free worship—to those great and religious men who were the founders of the State of Massachusetts, it appeared to be nothing so sinful, nothing so con- trary to civil and religious liberty, that the State should take charge of the educa- tion of the common people. One of the ordinances passed in that country in 1641, in its preamble, recites that the education of the people was a matter of the deepest interest to the community; and it places the education of youth under the care of the State. Educate the people by means of State interference,' was the last legacy of Washington to the people of the United States. Educate the peo- ple,' was the constant language of Jefferson. I put his testimony very high, be- cause of all the eminent men who ever appeared in this world, he was the one whose inclination most tended to tear down the functions of government to the lowest point, and to prevent it as much as possible from interfering with the peo- ple; and yet the latter part of his life was passed in a constant struggle to intro- duce a system of popular education, conducted under Government superintend- ence, into the State of Virginia."

Such is the testimony of all ages, excepting a clamour which dates from 1846—

" Sir, this new theory of government, if it have no other merit, may claim that of originality. It seems to me to run this,—all men have hitherto mistaken the functions of government; government is the great hangman of the age; the business of government is to do nothing for the repression of crime among its subjects, except by harsh and degrading means ; and from the employ- ment of all means towards that end which operate by elevating the intel- lectual and moral nature of man, government is excluded." This new theory Mr. Macaulay could only explain on the principle of reaction. " There has been a great contest with the Government on matters of trade; men's pas- sions have been much excited, and it is said by the advocates of noninterfe- rence and of free competition, and by men of great ability and of excellent inten- tions, that as they have driven the Government from the contest in a province which did not belong to it, they will continue the contest till they have driven the Government from a province which is its legitimate domain; and, because the beneficial operation of the principle of noninterference and of free competition in matters of trade has succeeded, they say, Recollect what that principle has done, and let us trust to it.' The argument is, that if free competition is excel- lent in matters of trade, the same principle mast be excellent also in the educa- tion of the people. If it be a sound principle for the supply of corn, it must be a sound principle also for the supply of schools. But, Sir, I must say that no one analogy could possibly be more false. . . . . What class of men have the same strong and pressing interest in supplying the people with good schools as i the grocer has to supply the people with good sugar? True it is that there are some benevolent persons who contribute, some their money and some their time, to the education of the people; and in many places it is said that the existing competition does great good. But do not be deceived by words. Do not think that this competition is anything like the fierce competition which is evoked by the desire of wealth or by the dread of ruin. Is it not a great error to suppose that the competition of men for the good of others can have the strength and po- tency of the competition to secure wealth for themselves? You world not say that the state of competition among benevolent persons for the relief of the poor of England is so great in various ways that you would abolish the poor-rates because this benevolent competition would give more to the poor than the poor- rates ?"

"If the principle of free competition were in reality a principle of the same potency in education as we all admit it to be in matters of trade, we ought to see education as prosperous under this system of free competition as trade itself is. If we could by possibility have had the principle of free competition fairly tried in any country, it would be in our own. It has been tried for a long time with perfect liberty in the richest country under the heavens, and where the people are not unfriendly to it. If the principle of free competition could show itself suffi- cient, it ought to be here: our schools ought to be the models of common schools; the people who have been educated in them ought to show the most perfect in- telligence; every school ought to have its excellent little library, and its mecha- nical apparatus; and, instead of there being such a thing as a grown person being unable to read or to write, such an individual ought to be one at whom the people would stare, and who should be noted in the newspapers; whilst the schoolmaster ought to be as well acquainted with his important duties as the cutler with knives or the engineer with machinery; moreover, he ought to be amply remunerated, and the highest respect of the public ought to be extended to him. Now, is this the truth?"

He referred to the charges of Judges, resolutions of Grand Juries, reports of Prison-Inspectors, to gaol statistics, reports of the Registrar-General of marriages, to show the miserable ignorance that prevails. One third of the men and one half of the women in the prime of life, who are destined to be the parents of the next generation, cannot sign their names. " How many of the day-schools are nothing more than a dirty room, with a heap of fuel on one side and a brood of chickens on the other; where the only instruments for instruction are a dogs-eared spelling-book and a broken slate? And as for the masters, bow many of these men are now the refuse of other callings,—discarded servants or ruined trades- men; who cannot do a sum of three, who would not be able to write a common letter, who do not know whether the earth is a cube or a sphere, and cannot tell whether Jerusalem is in Asia or America; whom no gentleman would trust with the key of his cellar. and no tradesmen would send of a message? Yet, such are the men to whom you trust the mind of the rising generation, on whom the pros- perity and the future eminence of this great country will depend." He quoted a passage from Mr. Edward Baines junior—no mean opinion—referring to these evidences of " neglected cultivation, lost mental power, and spiritual degrada- tion." " It is said that if we only wait with patience, the principle of free com- petition will do all that is necessary for education. We have been waiting with patience for years: how long are we to wait?—are we to wait till 2,847, or till 3,847? "

He devoted some pains to show that a corrupt use of the Government patronage under the Minutes would be practically impossible: any one ap- plying to make So-and-so an exciseman, for instance, would be answered, " So we will, but before we do so, you must contribute double the amount of the exciseman's salary." We are told in the same breath, that the plan will cost 2,000,0001., and that it will destroy voluntary exertions. The two arguments refute each other. By the arrangement under which Govern- ment contributes only in the proportion of one third, if voluntary exertion be destroyed the plan will not cost a penny; if it cost 2,000,0001., the vo- luntary principle will have been stimulated to such a degree, and the country so animated in the cause, as to have laid down 4,000,0001. The

Minutes arrogate for the Crown no power which it does not already possess. It did not require an act of Parliament to establish the Military Asylum at Chelsea, or girls schools in regiments. All that the Crown re- quires is the money. If the Crown, indeed, were to ask money for a pur- pose which is illegal, then an ant of Parliament would be required to sanc- tion its appropriation. Mr. Macaulay maintained that no scheme had ever been more strictly impartial. He had shown that all classes are interested in education, because it conduces to the common security and prosperity; and in his peroration he insisted that such a measure could not be made an instrument of mere political antagonism- " That statesman must follow a most shortsighted policy, who supposes him- self justified in making the question of an improved system of education the means of carrying on the war against his adversaries in politics or religion. He is not a friend to the common people who would give them no efficient education concurrently with the enlargement of their franchises. To leave them in igno- rance, and at the same time to augment their political power, is to do that for them which can be of no use either to themselves or to the state. From those who would thus treat the people of England, I venture with confidence to appeal to the men of the present age. I venture with still greater confidence to appeal to a future age, which, when it sees the people of England enjoying the blessings of a just and efficient state of education, will look back with astonishment to the fact that the attempt to establish such a system had been resisted for years in the name of civil and religious freedom." (Much cheering.) Mr. ROEBUCK agreed with Mr. Macaulay, that it is the duty of Govern- ment to educate the people: but Ministers ought not to throw obstacles in the way of carrying out their own plan; and that he charged them with doing. It did not suffice to cram the House with undisputed and indisputable pre- mises in order to slide in a fallacious conclusion. What is the principle that interferes with the progress of education? It is religions animosity; and, knowing that, the Government gives preference to one religious sect. They said to the Roman Catholics, "Never mind; let us get the money; let the general election go on; and then we will see what we can do for you." It was, after all, but a poor attempt to reconcile interests which are utterly irreconcilable. It is said that education is not complete without religious instruction, and Sir Robert Inglis says that the Church of Eng- land is the great educatrix of the people: granting for the sake of argu- ment that it were so, what is all the machinery of the Established Church for—its hierarchy, its ministers, and its enormous wealth—if not to teach the religion of the Church of England? An education at the expense of the State should be a secular education, excluding every peculiar religious dogma. Lord John Russell said that to give education without religious in- struction would be to perform but half his duty: it had never entered his head that he performed only half his duty when he so fashioned his schools that they could educate only half the people. Here is a large sum of mo- ney to be voted: in the case of other grants it is stated specifically what the money is for: here it is to be voted in the lump, and given over to an irresponsible administration. He believed that Ministers had a large mi- nority against them: they had inflamed religions animosity, and handed the Dissenters over to visionary terrors— The number of petitions upon the table in favour of the scheme was no sign of strength. If the Government had stepped boldly forward, as they ought to have done, and, standing upon the broad principle of religions liberty, had said, "We cannot countenance any narrow views; we believe all sects to be entitled to aid; we think that it is not man's duty or province tojudge his neighbour, and we will so endeavour to fashion our schools as that each sect shall be led to love his neighbour, without dogmatic teaching in any religion,"—if the Government bad said that, the people of this country would have been of one united feeling in respect to the measure, and the Government would have bad a united popu- lation; whereas, at the present moment, the people were split into as many mu- tually hating sects as there were denominations of religion in the country. Though Mr. Roebuck did not pretend to be a prophet, he might be found uttering the language of prophecy when he ventured to say that some one would venture to step before the so-called Liberal Administration on this question- " Some one coming after them, and seeing the great fault they had committed, Would do that deed in the execution of which they had faltered, and sweep away all the feeling, of the people towards the Liberal Administration, which had pro- mised so much but fulfilled so little in regard to this matter. He fancied that the time was not far distant when that prophecy would be fulfilled; and, as the past was a sort of directing index to the future, perhaps the same hand that struck down the Corn-law might possibly erect a real liberal system of education in this country. (Cheers.) And then the present Ministry would have to say, as they had been compelled to do before, that they mistook the temper of the times; that they mistook the clamours of the discontented and the interested for the feeling of the national will; and that they were afraid to do what they knew and felt to be their duty, till some more sagacious and courageous men occupied the position they now filled, and discharged the duty they would have attempted, but which they were unable to perform."

About midnight, the debate was adjourned.

Mr. Eviairr opened the debate on Tuesday. He was struck with the immaturity and want of' comprehensiveness in the Government proposition. Any scheme to be called national should be founded on the representative system. The country should be divided into districts, and there should be a general education-rate. Such is the system in America; France, Hol- land, and Germany, have pursued a course based on the same principle. Government ought not to interfere with matters of opinion, least of all in matters of religious opinion. At the same time, he thought many of the charges brought against the Government scheme unjust. He fully approved of some parts, especially the part relating to pupil-teachers and stipendiary monitors. Adverting to the general subject of secular or religious instruc- tion, he observed that religious teaching by schoolmasters is a system that has been tried in Holland, and with proved want of success. In the schools belonging to the Corporation of Liverpool, the masters are confined to their proper province of giving secular and moral instruction, while religions or rather theological instruction is left to the minister of the particular sect to which the pupil belongs. Owing to the particular form in which the matter has been brought before Parliament, there appears to be no oppor- tunity of moving an amendment on the Government plan, otherwise he should certainly do so. Taking it, however, as a step towards something better, under all the circumstances he should vote in favour of the motion.

Sir CHARLES Narrert felt disinclined to meddle with a subject which he did not understand; but as the representative of a large constituency, he was bound to express his opinions. What he wished to see was a general system of secular education, allowing the clergy of the different denomina- tions to give religious education to the children of their different sects. On the whole, he supported the Government plan. The Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY confined himself to the subject of the Roman Catholic exclusion. He thought that the Roman Catholics were entitled to complain of their exclusion, as an infraction of the rule laid down in the correspondence of the Committee of Council, that the rights of conscience should be respected. He would not, however, act on the prin- ciple of refusing to others because others had refused him; and, suppressing his indignation, he would support the Government measure. Mr. Sams advocated the measure; citing proofs from the rural dis- tricts of defective education— Had any gentlemen opposite seen a labouring man in the rural districts sign his name? First he looks at the pen, then at the paper, then at the ink; and then, with much difficulty, and after a world of groans and sighs, he manages to make a hieroglyphic that even Champollion or Sr Gardner Wilkinson would be puzzled o decipher. Mr. Seymer wished to see boys in rural districts kept !eager at school. A boy is generally taken from school and employed in frightening away birds: be sits a great part of the day under a hedge in a dreamy state, occasion- ally wakening up to apostrophize a rook as a " black blackguard," or be passes the time, like an American Senator, in whittling with his knife. Schoolmasters in country parishes are appointed on any score but that of fitness. If a man is disabled by any accident, the first thing he looks out for is a turnpike-gate; and. that failing, the next thing is the office of village schoolmaster; which be very often gets because he is thereby prevented from becoming chargeable to the pariah.. Mr. Seymer quoted from a former document the admission made by the mist-rear of a dame-school—" It's little as they pays us, and it's little as we teaches them."

He protested against the doctrine of political economy as applied to re- ligious and moral questions; because, in those questions, the greater the want the less also is the demand.

Mr. AGLIONBY could not vote for the scheme; as he was in favour of secular education, guarded against all interference for religious instruc- tion on the part of the schoolmasters.

Lord SANDON repeated several arguments in favour of the measure; con- tending that religion ought to be interwoven with every part of education.

Mr. GISBORNE ventured to express opinions which Mr. Macaulay has described as being such that they could hardly be maintained by any rea- sonable being. [About this time Mr. Roebuck moved that the House be counted; but forty Members showing themselves to the Speaker, the de- bate was continued.] Mr. Gisborne proceeded with some amusing stric- tures on the effect of education in other countries, which did not tell very happily in his account— In Prussia, female chastity is at a discount. In educated Scotland, which be visits twice a year, the people are certainly less civilized than in England. With a less regard to habits of cleanliness in their dwellings and persons, they are less sober, though they may be better controversialists. Of a Highland glen which he visits, the local minister said to him, that " so long as their money lasts it is not this man that is drunk or that man that is drunk; the glen is drunk alto.. Donald, Mr. Gisborne said once to his personal attendant there—" I am afraid, Donald, you are a sad fellow: I hear that when I am away you are perpetually drunk." The man answered—" No, Sir, I am seldom drank, except on sabbath, and perhaps a bit at Yule or the New Year." These educated Highlanders are good arithmeticians, but in every other respect perfect barbarians. Mr. Gisborne taunted Mr. Macaulay with his ingratitude in speaking against the Bristol and Nottingham riots, which carried the Reform Bill. [Mr. Pao- THEROE dissented.] Perhaps the honourable gentleman meant to deny that there were any riots at Bristol ? Reverting to the bill, Mr. Gisborne observed that, in consequence of the diversity of sects, Government dares not propose to educate all the people; but in order to have any chance of carrying the measure, is obliged to leave out two classes—the Roman Catholics and the Jews. In fact, State education is impracticable, and he relied on the voluntary principle.

Mr. Boarnwicx supported the measure.

Lord MORPETH replied to Mr. Gisborne; assuring him that the majority of writers on Prussia give a favourable impression of the people, and Prussia is now relieved from the stigma that it is wanting in the chimeter of a free country. The Scotch he could not defend, as he had never been. North of the Tweed; but they are not usually backward in defending themselves. Lord Morpeth went on to describe the difficulties under which Government acted— There were, as usual, "three courses" open to them: an exclusive system, teaching solely by the Church; a uniform scheme' without any special methast of religious instruction,—neither of which would have met with the consent of Parliament or the people; and thirdly, the cooperative plan, which builds on what it finds, and associates itself with the voluntary efforts of the people. He could not hear without emotion the speech of his noble friend and kinsman the Earl of Arundel: but what is the position of the Privy Council? When he entered it,. he found certain principles of proceeding laid down; the present Minutes in some degree enlarged and filled tip the framework; and if any further change were in- tended, he thought it would be right to give notice to Parliament. "But, having. said all this, I must, in justice to myself and in candour to others, add, that of- no Committee which refused on principle to admit Catholic applications because they are Catholics could I continue a member." (Loud cries of "Hear, hear!") He cited statistics respecting education and crime in Bradford; which he wound up with this remark— There are now in the borough about 35,140 houses, which gave the annual cosh per house of the punishment of crime within the borough at 10s. 8d.; and his cor- respondent asked, would it cost the borough 10s. 8d per house in direct taxation to educate their people rather than punish them? and if it coat as much, how great a tax of tears would it save! A good deal had been said on the opposite side about putting the national mind into a groove— Now, when he had been considering the variety of persuasion and differences of opinion which had appeared in the world since Christianity was introduced, whether of Arians or Athanaaians, Augustinians or Pelagians, or, coming down to later times, Catholics or Protestants, Jesuits or Jansenists, ealvinists or Luther- ans, Evangelicals or Puseyites, High Church or Low Church, he could not refrain occasionally from wishing that the world could see the experiment of a boy or girl of fair intellect, and otherwise well instructed, growing up to mature age, without any doctrines of religion having been instilled into its mind, and without its hav- ing been made acquainted with any form of religious worship; and then one would be able to observe to what form of religion its unbiassed judgment would give the preference. This might be a curious speculation; but there were too many evil influences operating on the human heart for parents to wish for such a state of things for their offspring: and no community would prescribe it for its subjects: but he had yet to learn that the infant population of this country would not be liable to be put into precisely the same kind of groove under the Independents, the Baptists, or the Wesleyan, as it would be by the state drill of Prussia itself. He regretted that the Dissenters should have committed themselves to the course in which they were now engaged— He regretted it, because he believed that the cause they now refused to sanction and were so resolute in opposing was emphatically the cause of the working men and the working women of this country; and because he believed that they were in the main disposed to take a full share in largely contributing to the education of the poor. Lie regretted it on his own account, because he should miss the en- couragement and the companionship which he had now enjoyed through apoliti- cal connexion of some duration, and to which he had become accustomed. lie re- gretted it for their sakes, because be sincerely, and he hoped not arrogantly, thought them in the wrong; and therefore, however their opposition might em- bitter the struggle, he believed they would in the end most assuredly fail. (Cheers.) Mr. BRIGHT copiously quoted statistics to show the successful operation of the voluntary principle; which must not be dated, as Mr. Macaulay dated it, from the Heptarchy, but only since 1830— The number of Sunday scholars has increased from 477,800 in 1818, to 1,500,000 in 184 and much more since. In the course of three or four yew?, the Free Church of Scotland had raised 4,000,000L, and established schools III 800 or 700 parishes, &c. Mr. Bright stated the main Dissenting objection to the scheme; winch he said had been misrepresented. It was not because the Church

of England received a part of the grant that the Nonconformists objected to that grant; but it was because the Nonconformists could not consistently with their

principle:4as Nonconformists receive any of the money of the State for their schools, and therefore they objected to the State giving the money to which they con- tributed exclusively to the Church of England schools, and thereby damaging the Dissenting schools. He concluded with a personal remark; apologizing for any warmth that he might have used in alluding to the measure or the Established Church—

The House would remember, that he had avowed himself to be a member of the Nonconformist body. His forefathers had languished in prison under the di- rection of that Church which the House was now asked to aggrandize. Within the last two years, the place of worship he attended had been stripped of its furniture to pay the salaries of the ministers of the Church: and, looking back to the his- tory of this country, and remembering how that Church and its political institu- tions had been hostile to the progress of liberty, he protested in the strongest manner against the outrage about to be committed by the Government upon the Nonconformist body of this country, by increasing the power of mischief of that Churoh and her political institutions.

Sir GEORGE GRET, in replying to the opponents of the measure, taunted Mr. Bright with not having read the common history of his country, or he would have known that the great Nonconformists of past times—such as Howe, Baxter, and Owen—were in favour of endowments. One or two Scotch Presbyteries had declared against the Government plan, on special grounds; but they had equally declared against the principle advocated by Mr. Bright. Of the measure Sir George said—

"I do not defend it as a perfect plan; but I defend it as the best plan that, under all the circumstances, could be now offered for the acceptance of Parlia- ment. I defend it as a plan embodying all those principles of popular education which in the present age and in this country are likely to be successful."

Be thought that there was a just ground of complaint on the part of the Roman Catholics— It was a hardship that they should be excluded from Government grants for education; and, after the speech which he had heard with pleasure from his

noble friend Lord Arundel, he was ready •to remove as far as he was able that

hardship. He rejoiced at the feeling exhibited by the House: he had not heard one gentleman in the House rise to say that Roman Catholics ought to be ex- cluded. On'the other hand, he remarked that objections to the measure are raised out of the House, not within it. He hoped the general opinion of the ifouse would have weight with the country, and that the conscientious opponents of the scheme world reflect before they committed themselves to a continuance of their opposition.

" I hope that they will modify their opinions, and see that the danger which is to spring from the scheme has no existence except in their own imagination. I warn them of the responsibility they incur by opposing this measure without sug-

gesting any practicable alternative. I speak not of the suggestions which the honourable and learned Member for Bath and another honourable Member have proposed as alternatives, believing them tube quite impracticable. I refer to .per- Sena out of the House. I ask them to ponder upon the subject: I ask them whe- ther they are prepared to condemn the thousands who are training -up in 'habits Of trice, to become the victims of crime, who might by timely education be made useful members of society." Mr. HIM:11.1M admitted that the Dissenters had not taken the most -pru- dent course on this occasion— At one time he was sanguine that the voluntary effort would suffice to educate the country; and he had done what he could to promote it. He had been at the head of the body by whim 120,0091. had been raised for the establishment of

schools: yet if he were asked whether he thought that the voluntary principle was sufficient for the education of the people, he must in honesty declare his be- lief mat It was not. He could give the House many examples of the interest taken in this question by the people—especially by the lower orders. He could mention one instance where, at a Metropolitan meeting over which he presided, a was .subscribed by-a:person, and 5k from his wife; and on inquiry it turned out that he was a gentleman's coachman. When told that it •was too much to take from his earnings, his answer was, " Why, I live over the stables, and per-

haps the money might be taken from me." Mr. Hindley regretted that so-short a time had been allowed to elapse since the commencement of the voluntary ex- periment. It was only four years ago that the last education scheme was pro- pounded; and he certainly thought that another year or more might fairly have been allowed to see hotv 'far it would be effective. As, however, the Government bad brought forward the measurerit was necessary to see how far it was possible nome to an agreement upon it. He quoted a passage from the late Mr. Foster's essay on Popular Ignorance; in which the writer says, it is better to have a people who can understand the sys- tem of government and measures, than one which bends in stupid ignorance, or in an over- fermenting ignorance which always believes the Government to be wrong; and that the time would come when it would not be a philanthropic ripe- natation alone which pointed out how much difference there must be between the enormous expenseof repressing crime and what might be effected with half the ex- penditure in preventing it. That passage of Foster's was written a quarter of a century ago; but the advice was as sound now as it was then; and although a new light seemed to have come into the minds of some of his friends, he must admit that it had not yet dawned on his mind—his intellect was too opaque to let in the dight of the Mercury of Leeds.

,Me thought it unwise in the Government and Church to retain the Ca- techism. Did Lord John Russell believe it himself ? and if not, why make the children in a great number of schools be taught what he did not him- self believe?

Be touched upon some points of detail—

Nothing could be more unbusiness-like than to offer pensions when 'they had no authority from the House to vote the money. By what authority could they as- sume that 1,700,0001. would be granted by the House? He urged Government and the House to view the present scheme as an experiment only. It is a new question: an older and larger question cannot for ever be put off—the connexion

of •Church and State. Meanwhile, let all parties be exceedingly moderate, and the time may come when Churchmen and Dissenters will cordially meet on the same platform, and in the same sphere of usefulness.

The debate was again adjourned, at midnight, till Thursday.

On Thursday, Sir WiLLIAM CLAY took up the discourse. The scheme is really a great change in the extent of the application, in the preference

given to the Church of England. He desired to see the State provide se- cular instruction, leaving the religious instruction to the parents of the Children. For these reasons be should vote with Mr. Duncombe.

Sir Joust PAR1NOTON tendered Government his thanks for the coarse they had taken; though he regretted that the measure was not more com- prehensive. He read a letter describing King Edward's School at Bir- mingham, where the regulations were modified in a way to admit Dissen- ters of every creed, as well as Churchmen. This example he recommended to the National School Society.

Mr. IIDME was disappointed at the want of comprehensiveness in the measures he was ashamed to vote 7,000,0001. for the Army, and only 100,0001. for Education. He was not for " toleration," but for entire li-

berty of conscience; and he emphatically censured the exclusion of Roman Catholics. Where was Lord John Russell's boasted moral courage? Ile

had been skulking—skulking in fear of the Bishops. Mr. Hume would give not 100,0001. but 500,00111.: no price could be too great for the ines- timable advantages of education. He should vote with Mr. Duncombe, not to cast any reflection on Ministers, but to obtain inquiry late the pro- per mode of extending education. Sir WALTER JAMES supported the measure, not as being perfect, but as being on the whole the best that could be obtained. It was only too vo- luntary ; for the voluntary system fails in the poorest districts, where edu- cation is most wanted. The exclusion of the Roman Catholics, however, was a stigma on the Ministerial proceedings. Sir Joins EASTHOPE could not -vote against any plan for diminishing ignorance and crime; but be voted with pain for a scheme that excliad.ed Roman Catholics.

Mr. Susumast CRAWFORD 'must vote with Mr. Duncombe; because he thought the form of the Ministerial measure an infringement -Of the consti- tution; and be resented the exclusion of the 'Roman Catholics. Sir WILL AM MOLESWORTH also condemned the exclusion Of the 'Ro- man Catholics. He should prefer that the State should limit its inter- ference to secular instruction; but he believed that such a plan -would he

impracticable at present. He could not vote for inquiry, as no further in- formation is needed; but, arguing at some length that it is the duty of the State to prevent crime by education, and observing the total inefficiency df voluntary efforts, be supported this measure, whicih, with all its imperfec- tions, is a movement in advance. He insisted that the poor man who ac- cepts State education for his child does not violate his independence, as the acceptor of education by charity does. 'The working classes had a right to complain of the State, which has left their ignorance to the exer- tions of casual charity. He did not blame Ministers for the neglect, nor Parliament, nor Whig, nor Tory; but the electoral body, many of whom descry in every measure of education some concealed project for the pre- dominance of some sect. Sir William commented on the Official cone- spondence with the Wesleyan Committee and the Roman Catholic Insti- tute; and exposed the procrastinating and disingenuous way in which the representative of the Catholics, Mr.'Charles Langdale, had been put off. On the proper occasion he should move a resolution to include Roman Catholics in the application of any public grant ofmoney, and to declare that the minute to the contrary ought to be rescinded.

Viscount Mattost argued for extended education, but thought that se- cular apart from religious instruction would be worse than nothing; sad supported the measure as a step in the right direction. Sir JAMES GRAHAM supported the Ministerial plan, though it •might not be free from errors. He argued againet a purely secular -education; citing

Scotland as a successful example of a countryin which, the people being ori- ginally unanimous in one faith, education had always been allied with the Church. lle.glancestat the past history of the official attempts to promote education; touching upon the difficulties which be had experienced. When the' Educational 'Committee began to consider "special cases," he foresaw the demands of the present time, that the strict rules should be relaxed. He did not regret that the Wesleyan had obtained aid for educational pur- poses; but he could not with satisfaction see so large a portion of their fellow. subjects as the Roman Catholics still -excluded. He cited the au-

thority of Mr. Langdale—whom he had known from his earliest years as a

most honourable man--for the description of west masses of Irish do the great towns distant from all the wealthy 'of their countrymen and -faith, and debarred from the advantages of education. Sir James quoted an or- der in Council of 1838, Which pledged the Council "to provide aid wherever "proof is givenof a great deficiency of education among the poorer classes";

and he contended that 'the rule requiring the daily-use of the Scriptures

did not exclude the Douay version—the version whence Fenelon and Pas- cal drew their thoughts. It was a fallacy to say that it was only the an- nual vote of 100,0001. that the House was asked to sanction: it was -really asked to adopt the Orders in Council, and to sanction contingent expenses, which would probably amount to 2,000,0001. It was therefore very neces- sary to define the principles of action. Except as to the exclusion of the Roman Catholics, he did not blame the Government course: with the pre- sent state of religious feeling, he did not object to the proceeding by order

in Council; he thought the course prudent and judicious; but he could not consent to purchase a good at the expense of 'injustice to their Roman 'Ca= tholic fellow subjects.

Lord JOHN Russean replied, and explained. He began in a trenchant style, answering assailants. He -likened Mr. Bright to Jack Cade's follow- ers, who banged the Clerk of Chatham for " setting of •boys' copies"; quizzed Mr. Duncombe, as the organ of the Congregationalists and Blip- Lists„ and alluded to his own.services in repealing the Test and Corpora- tion Acts, to prove his sincerity. He quoted the following passage from a letter by Mr. Kay -Shuttleworth, in reply to the inquiries of the Wes- Ivens, in order to show that Ministers really contemplated the framing of minutes to admit Roman Catholics--

"Their Lordships have hitherto made no provision for the extension of aid to Roman Catholic schools; but they have not, by their recent nor by any preceding minutes, precluded themselves from presenting to Parliament 'further minutes, by which, upon a fall consideration of the wants of the-population and the con- stitution of the school, they may be enabled to grant such assistance. These further minutes, when presented, mill make a separate provision for Roman'Catho- lie schools, and will in no degree. unsettle the basis on which aid is now granted to ether schools. Full opportumty will be given for the -consideration and dis- cussion of such minutes, 'before Parliament is called upon to carry them into execution; and no one who agrees to accept aid under the present minutes will be thereby in any degree pledged to approve these future minutes, or precluded from offering to them such opposition as he may think expedient.' This entirely swept away the imputation of a compromise with the Wes- leyans. In 1839 he contemplated permission for the use of the Douay version of the Testament; but abandoned it ascaloulated to excite alarm, and intro- duced the provision for " special cases" instead. The Minutes were much qp:- posed,—among others by Sir James Graliam,—mainly because Lord John was suspected of not having abandoned the idea of allowing the Douay version. That opposition made a great impression on his mind; and he thought that; perhaps for many years, he must abandon the wish to aid the Roman Ca- &holies, unless he would abandon the hope of assisting education at all. A school established by the Corporation of Liverpool, in which the Roman Catholic children were admitted to the secular instruction, their religions instruction being carried on in a separate part of the -building, led the rate- payers to oust the members:of the Town-Council who supported that plan; and the school was given up. However, it could not be said that Ministers had specially excluded the Roman Catholics. He believed that if the scheme had been extended to them, it would have failed; but, after what had passed in the debate, it would be very possible to frame minutes which should. include Roman Catholics in the next grant. No one connected with the (overnment—certainly not Lord Morpeth, nor Sir George Grey, nor Lord John himself—had concealed his opinions on the subject. They only said that they would not force the House to an immediate decision. The accusation of deliberate exclusion took him by surprise. Ho did not think that the Catholics ought to be included in this vote: it was far more likely that if they were included in the next vote, or in some other vote upon this subject, the House and the country would agree to the terms on which such a grant would be proposed. The framing of the minutes would require great care. Should they be framed to grant aid to schools on the ground of their being Roman Catholic, with Roman Catholic Inspectors, many would no doubt object. Should aid be offered as it is in Ireland, the Roman Catholic Bishops might object. Therefore, that raider must be postponed. The present measure must not be regarded as a permanent, still less as a complete measure. He thought, however, Ministers were not wrong in not introducing a bill on the subject: opinion is not yet ripe for such a step. Meanwhile, the introduction of the vote this year had brought out many opinions, many useful opinions on the subject; and it had received the support of the majority of those who had spoken.

Colonel SIBTHOR.P now understood that this was not a permanent or complete measure! He bad thought as much: ulterior measures were coming! " Timeo Danaos et dons ferentes ": when Members went to vote he should walk out of the House.

Sir Ronuar PEEL could not permit the House to go to the vote without stating the grounds on which he supported the measure. In 1839 he ob- jected to considering the subject on a single vote: he still objected; he saw great inconvenience in withholding the regulations from the full consideration of Parliament—from the House of Lords, who must now adopt or reject the measure wholly. But such was his view as to the ne- cessity of making some progress in reducing the monstrous evil of leaving the country without any means of education, that--foreseeing the probable consequences of insisting upon the opposition of 1839—looking to Sir James Graham's failure when he proceeded by bill in 1842—he had re- solved to support this proposition. Should he incur the responsibility of exposing it to the chances of failure? All had agreed that some remedy ought to be afforded for the monstrous evil. The Dissenters do not deny the importance of popular education: they object to the interference of the State as less efficacious for its purpose. If he could believe it so, be should say it were much better to avoid the exercise of State authority. But all evidence goes to show that voluntary effort has failed; and no consideration would induce them to withhold Government aid if they did but know the extent of the evil. He glanced at evidences of it: in one district only 100,000 out of 300,000 or 400,000 children receiving any education, and that 100,000 receiving such a kind, that if the House were shocked at the disproportion it would be still more painfully affected at ' the nature of it—boys of fifteen attending Sunday schools for five years and unable to write or even to read; voluntary schools failing, as at Old- ham, for want of support, the schoolmasters left unpaid.

Adverting to the present plan, he regarded that as the most important part which tends to elevate the condition of the schoolmaster; and as to the objection that it would extend the patronage of the Government, it was really too futile to require serious answer. The Minutes do not over- tan, they adopt the voluntary principle, and render it more effectual. As' to the Church, if she derived larger advantages, it would be by offering larger exertions; and he rejoiced to see that by reawakened activity the' Church is advancing in strength and influence.

A question had arisen respecting the Roman Catholic population-

" I am of opinion that no establishment of general education, even in Eng- land, could be deemed complete which excluded the Roman Catholic population. (Great cheering.) The noble Lord says, that there is no alteration made in the principle of the Minutes of 1839: but in that respect I differ from the noble Lord. I think you are about, practically at least, to make a material difference in the principles on which you have hitherto acted. You are about to admit to a participation of the advantages of this vote members of the Dissenting community who have hitherto been excluded. Hitherto, the Wesleyan body has not, prac- tically at least, had any participation in this vote. They were not in connexion either with the National Society or the British and Foreign School Society ; and therefore, the rule which excluded from the participation of the Parliamentary vote any society not in connexion with those institutions excluded the Wesleyan from any pecuniary advantage from the vote. You are about to alter the principle of the Minutes in that respect. You have given assurances to the Wesleyans, that the rule which has hitherto prevailed shall not be applicable to them—that their schools, although they are not in connexion with either of the present so- cieties, shall be entitled to aid, and that the authorities of the Wesleyan body shall be consulted in respect to the inspection of their schools. So far as the condition of the Roman Catholics is concerned, that is a material difference—a difference in point of feeling as well as in point of practice. Yon are going to widen the sphere of the measure, and the more wide that sphere is the more marked is the . exclusion. Therefore, I think the time is come,—and I am the more anxious to avow it because the avowal of opinions in this respect may be unpopular,—I think the time is come when justice and good policy will require from you the mature consideration of the position of the Roman Catholic population?' Look at the question by itself, on its own merits, without reference to particu- lar _minutes or particular phrases about "the Scriptures," and see whether our Boman Catholic fellow subjects can be excluded. " I know, as his been said try a right honourable friend, that it may be expedient to postpone the consideration of this question for some months. ("Hear, hear!" and laughter.) I am not disposed to urge the hasty adoption of any measure of this nature; but I am not disposed, on the other hand, that there shall be any doubt as to the opinions which / hold. (Cheers.) I will take the population of Manchester, in which there hos district called the 'Irish town,' in consequence of the great numbers of Irish re- sident there, amounting to from 60,000 to 70,000. Now, what class of people are these? They come over there distinguished by their industry, and they bargain for their labour. They have no natural protectors; there are few wealthy Catholics immediately connected with Manchester to care for their interests; and there is no one probably to superintend their education. There are 60,000 or 70,000 of them; and how is their education to be attended to? They have the priest, no doubt: but I apprehend the means of the priest to provide a system of education are too scanty for such a purpose. Is it for the advantage of the state that the children of these 60,000 or 70,000 people should be brought up in igno- rance and vice? (Cheers.) I confess I cannot conceive a more urgent case, not so far merely as the intellectual advantage of these Roman Catholics is con- cerned, but, if there is any virtue in our principle—if the true remedy against baibarism and crime and degradation of character instruction—if this prim- ciple is applicable (and it is on this principle we are all agreed)—it is not for the advantage of the Protestant community that these Roman Catholic children should be immersed in ignorance. So far as their position is concerned, I cart conceive no stronger claim on the part of a provident and paternal Government than attention to their concerns. " I will not be tempted in the least spirit of party to consider this question; I will not be induced by the observations of the noble Lord to refer to the absence, for the last five or six years, of any provision being made for those Roman Catho- lics. It may be there has not been earlier attention to this subject; but that is just the reason why the evil should now be remedied. I believe that the prevail- ing opinion in this House is, that it will be both just and politic to make some provision for the education of Roman Catholics. I do not deny that the subject is one of great importance, or that it presents great difficulties; but they are difficulties which, I think, may easily be solved." " I shall not be inclined to take the risk of prejudicing the consideration of the general measure by any com- pulsion on the Government with regard to their not having proposed a scheme of education for Roman Catholics. But, having made the change they have, I do entreat them not to receive the support of any body towards their pre- sent measure under the erroneous impression that the Boman Catholics are to be excluded. There ought to be no such exclusion. And if there be a probability of an early election, it may be more important that there should be no misunder- standing on that subject. If the Government recognize the principle which I understand them to recognize, and fairly to aver that they recognize, then they have given fair notice to all parties, that although seine delay may take place in the preparation of the additional minutes, yet that the principle is recognized, that you must not doom one class of her Majesty's subjects to perpetual exclusion from the benefit of the public grants for education, on account of the objections of other classes to their being allowed to participate."

He called on religious persons of all persuasions to remember what it was that had been the cause of delay in education—our religious dissensions- " We are all anxious for a system of education; yet we are all afraid to agree to any measure that is proposed, because we fear that some other body from whom we dissent will gain some advantage. One day the Dissenters refuse their assent, because they are afraid the Church will derive some advantage; on the next oc-

casion the Church is opposed to any measure, for fear of some recognition of the principle of Dissent. opposed

in the mean time, while all these disputes go on, it is

for us to ask ourselves what is to become of the 800 children who are born every day? what is to become of the 300,000 persons who are every year added to the population?"

He was for religious as well as secular instruction; and he concluded his speech, which had been greatly cheered, with an earnest but simple pero- ration on the advantage of popular education to " that religion which meet courts inquiry, which most desires self-judgment, and which rests upon the basis of intellectual strength."

Mr. Plarateran said that the "difficulty" alluded to by Lord John *nor Sir Robert was, that the people of this country is a religious people. The' Protestant party is neither small nor uninfluential; and it knows that it cart no longer place confidence in its leaders on either side of the House.

Mr. NEWDEGATE WOUld vote for the present measure.

Mr. BUNCOMBE withdrew half of his resolution; not wishing to convey a censure on Government. The House divided on the other half of the amendment; which was negatived, by 372 to 47. The main question was postponed till Friday evening; and the House adjourned at one o'clock in the morning.

The Education controversy was alluded to in the House of Lords on Monday evening. Questions were put by Lord BROUGHAM, Lord BEATY- moNT, and the Earl of RADNOR; and the Marquis of Lartsnownz replied to filt- h had never been intended that any other than the authorized version of the Scriptures should be used in the schools; and, whenever application should be made by Roman Catholic schools, they would be told that the applications would be open to consideration with respect to the regulations at the !schools. He had no authority to assume that the Government inspection of schools would in all cases be accepted; he had no reason to assume that it would be accepted by Ro- man Catholics. In all cases of applications, it is impossible to say whether they will come within the rules of the Minutes, without considering iu each case the regulations of the particular school. But he did not think that Government had a right to depart from general rules without a special application to Parliament for its sanction. " The Scriptures" no doubt meant the authorised Scriptures; and he was not prepared to say that the term might include the Donny as well as the authorized version, without referring the mincer to Parliament. When the subject came before Parliament year after year, and the Government asked for a grant of money for the purposes of education, the principles on which the money was to be expended would be fully explained; so that Parliament would be in a position every year to give or to withhold its sanction.

SHORT TIME.

The report on the Factory Bill was brought up on Wednesday; and sm the motion that it be agreed to, Mr. TRELAWNEY renewed his opposition.

The measure was a mockery, unless they could also fix the prices of pro- Visions and the rate of wages. Mr. HUME followed up this resistance, by moving that the report be agreed to that day six months; and several other Members briefly reiterated their objections to the bill,—Mr. Blioww, Mr. Manx. PHILIPS, Mr. PHILIP HOWARD, Mr. Bierman Escorr, and Mr.

Tap:coma Mr. Escorr pointed out the altered circumstances in which the bill stood,—Lord John Russell and Sir George Grey having originally supported it with a view to the limit of time being fixed at eleven hours; and he presumed that Lord Jan could not sanction a ten-hours bill.

The motion was supported still mere briefly by Mr. SHARMAN CRAW- Porco, Mr. PERILAND, (who hoped that when it was once carried all irri- tation would cease, and all parties would cooperate to give it a fair trial,) by Mr. MIINTZ; and Sir Ds LACY EVANS.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL agreed with Mr. Escott, that he was quite at liberty to oppose the bill; but he should not do so—

Ile might say that the tee-hours clause had imparted too dangerous a character to the measure; and he admitted that be considered it less safe. He should have

preferred eleven hours as the limit of time: there has been a good deal of expe- nente in Yorkshire as to a practice of eleven hours. With a ten-burrs clause, he had not the same confidence in the success of the measure; but he could not say that that should deter him from giving it his support. The eleven-hours arrange

meat might have given satisfaction to the working chime, and might have been received by the manufacturers: there is no reason to know that a ten-hours

clause would be satisfactory to all parties; and therefore it might be tweeesery that the measure should in a future session be revised. But though it might be thought that the proposed change would have the effect of diminishing the amount of wages received by the working classes, those classes themselves cer- tainly did not seem to entertain any apprehensions upon that scare; fur not only had there been no protest or petition from the majority of them, but no consider- able number of the working el....es had remonstrated against the bill. Although he regarded the proposition, then, with less confidence, that constituted no suffi- cient reason why he should withhold the vote which he intended togive in favour of the bill.

TRANSPORTATION AND LEGISLATION.

A conversation took place in the House of Lords on Tuesday—the third reading of the Mutiny Bill being before the House—on the joint subject of transportation and the right of Ministers to legislate by orders in Council without reference to Parliament. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH began by inquiring whether the law of transportation for soldier convicts in India was to be altered; at the same time suggesting difficulties.

Earl GREY answered, that there was to be no change; and briefly ex- 1pained the change which was to take place in England.

Lord BROUGHAM rose to protest against the new doctrine, now promul- gated for the first time by the present Government, that it was in the power of any Secretary of State, or of the Crown, or of an order in Council, to alter the criminal law of tile land— Judges had the option of sentencing a convict to be imprisoned for a period not exceeding two years, or transported for a term not exceeding fourteen years: but was it to be endured that the Crown should convert a period of transportation for fourteen years into an imprisonment for fourteen years? The judges and the people are to look, where their rights and penalties are concerned, not to orders in Council, nor to Secretaries of State, nor to speeches in Parliament, but to the statute law of the land. In a document which he should soon present to their Lordships, the report of the Criminal Law Commissioners, it would be seen that all the thirty-four Judges, all the Recorders who have eteen examined, all, the Governors of Gaols, all the Chaplains, and all professional persons, were unani- mous on the subject of transportation. Earl GREY said that Loth Brougham had raised a most visionary and fantastic chimera; as he had not said one word about altering the criminal law; and it would have been better if the noble and learned Lord had ab- stained from remarking on a mass of important evidence of which he alone had possession—

His remarks had no reference whatever to the bill before their Lordships; and his speech could only be accounted for from the extreme anxiety of the noble and learned Lord, in season and out of season, with reason or without reason, whether worth their Lordships' attention or not worth it, under all circumstances and on all occasions, to hear his own voice in that House. Lord BROUGHAM said, that if he were desirous of doing what the noble Earl, with his peculiar felicity of manner and such extraordinary good taste, had described, he should labour under one great mortification, namely, that he was now speaking in a place where it was not very easy to hear.

The Earl of SUFFOLK rose to order. But Lord BROUGHAM said, that if the Earl attended more to the course of proceedings in the House, he would see that there was no one thing which was so little attended to as order. The Earl of SUFFOLK rose again, and was inaudible. Lord BROUGHAM continued the lesson— Nothing is more clear, according to the orders of the House, than that no Peer should speak when there is no question before the House; but there is no one thing more certain than this, that the constant course pursued by all noble Lords is that of speaking, not only once, but half a dozen times, where there is no ques- tion before the House. He excepted himself, of coarse. (Laughter.)

Lord Brougham then continued his reply to Earl Grey. He had been told that he had misunderstood the object and intention of Government on the subject of transportation; and he had ban told so with a sneer—no, he would not term it a sneer; for a sneer implied something pointed, something clever, something that sank deep, and embalmed itself in the memory, by having an epigrammatic sting attached. He repeated his protest. The bill was read a third time, and passed.

WILFUL WASTE OF LAND me IRELAND. In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, the Marquis of WESTMEATH moved the second reading of his bill to restrain un- lawful waste of lands or premises in Ireland. It was taken almost verbatim from an act passed in the 9th of George the Fourth, cap. 56, which related to England and Scotland, but the provisions of which had never been extended to Ireland. In Ireland the tenant might drive a plough through a field on leav- ing his holding, and there is no protection for the owner. The LORD CHAN- CELLOR hoped the second reading would not be passed; as, by referring to the actjust cited, the 9th George 1V: C. 56, he found that it applied not to Eng- land and Scotland, but exclusively to Ireland: it was expressly enacted that it should extend to Ireland, but not to England or to Scotland. (Laughter.) Several Peers concurred in the necessity of such a measure, though they objected to details in the Marquis's bill. The Marquis of WESTMEATH complained of the manner in which his proposal had been received. The evil, however, had been acknowledged; and he left to others the responsibility of providing a remedy. The bill was withdrawn.

On Thursday, the Marquis of WESTMEATH complained of a breach of privilege en the part of the Times and Sun; which had wilfully misreported his speech, erroneously making him complain that he was " ridiculed," &c. He moved that the printers of the two papers be called to the bar. Lord BROUGHAM admitted the necessity of accuracy in the reports, but bore testimony to their general abi- lity, and counselled Lord Westmeath not to press his motion. No good had ever arisen from any contest with the press. He had suffered from misrepresentation, Mr. ROEBUCK made some cutting remarks on the Premier's extraordinary position. The House divided; the amendment was negatived by 104 to 46; and the report was received. Mr. BROWN moved a clause to enable lessees and occupiers to deduct a proportion of rent for premises in which the restriction of time was en- forced. Sir GEORGE GREY found no objection to the clause, except that doubts might arise as to its interpretation. Mr. TAYrox EGERTON ob- jected that it would give local Magistrates too much power. Mr. Anuots- BY urged the insuperable difficulty of proving consequential loss; and Sir GEORGE GREY admitted that such proof would be necessary. Sir R,o- BERT PEEL also objected to the clause, as being without precedent: if such a provision were added to this measure, it ought to be made to apply re- trospectively to all similar measures. On the view of these difficulties, Mr. Bnowis withdrew the clause.

In the course of this discussion, Mr. ROEBUCK stated, that one of the gentlemen on the Opposition aide had said of this bill, " As the Corn-law repeal has passed, now we will put a blister on the manufacturers." Mr. NEWDEGATE asked who had said so? Mr. ROEBUCK gave a reference to Lord John Manners. Lord Joust MANNERS declared that he had not the slighest recollection that he had ever, in public or private, used such an expression. Mr. ROEBUCK thought he had gathered from Lord John's speeches something very like the sentiment, if not the expression.

Some other amendments were proposed, but without result. Then there was a discussion as to the day for the third reading; and Friday was named provisionally. Sir ANDREW LEITH HAY thought that the House should come to an understanding, if this bill were fixed for Friday, that it should positively not come on upon that day. (Loud laughter.) Ultimately it was set down for Friday; it being understood that another day should then be appointed.

but contradiction only made it worse. For instance, he once said that the press might be the best possible instructor—meaning the whole literary press generally, not the daily newspapers: but he happened to say it on the trial of a newspaper for slander, and he was reported to have said it of the newspaper press; and although he corrected the mistake, Mr. Cobbett persisted in calling newspapers "Henry Brougham's best possible instructors." The Marquis of Lawsnowrin suggested that the erroneous reporting might not have been wilful. Eventually, the Marquis of WESTMEATH withdrew his motion.

RAILWAY LEGISLATION. In the House of Commons, on Thursday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM proposed the following as a standing order—" That no decision. be made on the preamble of any railway bill, by any Committee thereon, until a report from the Railway Commissioners shall have been submitted to their con- sideration,"—in lieu of an order carried by Mr. Ellice on the 23d February. This was agreed to.

Ptasumatrans iar THE NAVY. The Committee on the Naval Prisons Bfft having been moved on Wednesday, Mr. WILLIAMS objected, that the present Board of Admiralty had not ameliorated the condition of that most oppressed and cruelly-used class the seamen of the Navy; and that the present bill legalized severe punishments. He compared the punishments in the Army with the much severer punishments in the Navy; where the flogging is cruel, and commanders can inflict solitary confinement for twenty-eight days without the intervention of a court-martial. Mr. WARD defended the bill, as kindly meant, and calculated to improve the condition of the seaman. It left punishment where it was; but enabled commanders to substitute imprisonment for flogging. As to corporal punishments, improvement originated in the Navy; but he could not undertake the responsibility of abolishing corporal chastisement in a service where discipline is imperatively necessary. After a brief but very desultory conversation, the House went into Committee, and the bill passed that stage.

MEDICAL REFORM. On Tuesday, Mr. WAKLEY obtained leave to bring in a bill for the registration of legally-qualified practitioners in medicine, and the amendment of the law relating to the practice of medicine in Great Britain and Ireland. Sir GEORGE GREY did not oppose the motion; but threatened to resist the bill.

SPANISH BONDHOLDERS. Lord George Bentinek had given notice of motion for correspondence respecting the arrears of military pensions and pay due to the Duke of Wellington, Viscount Beresford, and the British Legion, with the view of founding a case for intervention on behalf of British holders of Spanish Bonds. But on Wednesday, Lord GEORGE BENTINCK stated that his noble friend Lord' Palmerston had suggested to him, that as the Spanish and Portuguese Govern- ments had been brought to reason by the representations of the British Govern- ment in the cases referred to, it might appear ungracious to have the correspond- ence published; and therefore proposed to supply himprivately with such memo- randa as would enable him to enforce the claims of the Spanish bondholders. Under these circumstances, Lord George withdrew his notice of motion.

PROGRESS OF RAILWAY BILLS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

BILL READ A in= TINE. April 23.—Derbyshire-Staffordshire-and-Worcester- shire Junction.

RILLS READ A SECOND Tura AND Com/arra!). April 20.—Ambergate-NottIngham- and-Boston, and Eastern-Junction (alteration of line and branches to Nottingham).

PREAMBLE PROVED IN COMMITTEE. April 19.—London-and-South-western (widen- ing thereof).

April 22.— Glasgow-Paisley-Kilmarnock-and-Ayr, and Glasgow-and-Belfast Union. (No. 1). Glasgow-Dumfries-and-Casuste, and Glasgow-Paisley-Kilmarnock-and-Ayr.' (No. 1).