THE EDUCATION QUESTION.
[TO THE EDITOR OF TRH "SPECTATOR,"]
am unwilling to believe that it is your deliberate intention
to be unjust ; nevertheless, you can be hardly be surprised if the persistent misrepresentation in the Spectator of the objects and statements of those who differ from you upon the above question, is such as to deprive many people of all hope of obtaining justice at your hands. It is my persuasion, however, that you are merely misled by the warmth of religions feeling, and that you would not knowingly act unjustly.
I therefore venture to ask you not to evade (by replying to a
minor contention) the direct question put to you by Mr. Crosskey in his letter upon the subject of your misrepresentation of Mr. Morley's object as expressed in his articles in the Fortnightly Review, but—in the interest of fair-play, justice, and above all, in the interest of a couple of million helpless children, whose fate depends upon the issue of the controversy we are engaged in—to give him and all of us a straightforward reply. His question was as follows :—" Is the object of those who would give every oppor- tunity for religious instruction for those who desire it for their children, 'only at their own charge, and not at the charge of the State, adequately or justly described as the 'clearing-away' of religious rubbish "?
• Perhaps you will permit me to add, in reply to your editorial note, that when Mr. Crosskey said the Ultramontanes approved your views upon education, he was clearly referring to your views upon "primary" education ; his illustration was therefore per-
Member of Executive Committee, National Education League.
[Our correspondent is angry, and as a consequence, unfair. We never said, or thought, or dreamt of saying, that the League's or the Nonconformists' object was to clear away " religious rubbish." We said that that was evidently Mr. John Morley's chief object, and that the Dissenters insist so much more on agreements with him as to the means to be adopted, than on their agreement with us and others as to the end, that they jump at the notion of acting with the one, and do not even feel any desire to act with the other. It is not true in the least that the Ultramontanes agree with us as to primary education. We wish it were. We wish for ansectarian religious education, though not to prohibit sectarian religious education for those whose parents conscientiously prefer it. The Ultramontanes are for the strictest sectarian education.— En. Spectator.]