Lord Brougham, who was last week accused of stealing a

Criminal Court, has this week been on his trial on a charge preferred by Mr.

Robert Owen, of having pilfered from him the credit of originally establishing Infant Schools. This charge is founded upon the fol- lowing extract from the Chancellor's evidence before the House Of Commons Committee on Education.

" I have observed (said the Chancellor) the same disposition to follow our footsteps in other instances as in that of Infant Schools, which were be:gin in 1818 by myself and a few friends (John Smith, John Mill, and the Marquis

of Lansdowne were of the number), and they were afterwards taken up by the Established Church. I observe Mr. Wilson, in speaking of his excellent Infant School at Walthamstow (the best anywhere to be seen), says his brother had previously established one in Spitalfields, and that he believed there had been another. No doubt there had ; and his brother having belonged to our original

Committee, had taken the plan of our first school, established in Brewer's

Green, Westminster, the year before, and formed the admirable one in Quaker Street. Ours was under James Buchanan, whom we obtained from Robert Owen's great manufactory at New Lanark. Mr. Wilson's was under Mr. Wilderspin, whose very able works on the subject have been of great use in promoting these useful establishments, but the first Infant School in this island

(I believe in the world) was the one in Brewer's Green. Robert Owen's and Mr. Fellenberg's, which gave the idea, having both been formed in connexion with an establishment, manufacturing or agricultural, and so necessarily confined in their application ; ours tiring every-day schools, where the children are neither fed nor in any way helped, except by instruction and training.".

Mr. Robert Owen is not the man to hide his candle under a :

or tamely to submit to this scurvy treatment ; and lie has accordingly addressed a letter to the Chancellor, which appeared in Monday's Times, correcting his inaccuracies, and making good his own title' to the praise, which that all-grasping personage would claim for himself, of having first established Infant Schools. He states, that for many years pre- vious to 1815, he bad designed his plan of education, commencing with children of two years old : but circumstances connected with business prevented his putting it into execution. In that year, however, he was enabled to erect the necessary building : and be goes on to say in his letter- " On the first day of the next year—that is January 1816—the institution was formally opened amidst the assemblage of :al the adult villagers, now, with their children, exceeding 2000, and attended also by the principal nobility and gentry in the neighbourhood, and sonic of the clergy of various denutuivatioes. This was a day never to be forgotten; for upon this occasion I delivered an ad- dress explanatory of all the objects of the institution, which astounded all who werepresent. I stated iu full the cause why I built the Infant Schools the principles on which I founded them, and the various objects to be obtained by them in practice, in great detail. I then called upon all the parents to send their children of two years of age and upwards the next morning to the Infant School ; and great was their surprise at such an unheard-of request. It was upon this occasion I first denounced the fundamental errors of the whole system of the word!, and declared the new principles which in due time would supersede those errors. It was a day which I am sure those who were present capable of re- flection will never forget. The first Infant School in the world was thus fotuided on the 1st of January 1816, and was the first practical measure ever adopted to prepare society for the destruction of moral evil, and the establishment of moral good. There was no schoolmaster or other person who then understood any of my ideas, or how to carry them into execution; and I took a simple-minded weaver who knew nothing of a school, but he had a great love for children and an untiring patience with them. . . . . . It was during this period, my Lord, that Henry Brougham twice visited the establishment, and expressed his wonder and admiration at the fairy-like scene and new world which he saw around him ; and it was the positive good and great advance which Henry Brougham saw was effected here in practice that induced you, my Lord, to ask me if I would supply a master, provided you and some of your and my friends would advance the funds, arid build a school upon a similar scale in London. I was too happy to see the plan likely to be so extended to decline your request; and immediately consented that you should have James Buchanan, whom we could then the best spare, because 1 had been training some youths in the school to understand the principles and superior practices which I desired the children to Obtain ; and your school in Brewer's Green, Westminster, was opened the latt of February 1819,—of course more than three years after the first was opened at New lareark. Your I.ordship has also been misinformed ou another part of this interesting subject, or the report of your evidence is incorrect." Mr. Owen then informs the Chancellor, that Mr. Fellenberg knew nothing about Infant Schools, until he (Mr. Owen) visited him in 1818, and strongly recommended him to undertake them; which he did seve- ral years afterwards; end Mr. Owen sent two of his'sons to instruct him how to manage them. He therefore says that "he gave Henry Brougham' both the idea, and the master, and Mr. Fel/enberg the idea, when he left his two sons with him." Mr. Owen adds- " But, my Lord, you and Mr. Wilderspin hese aseorned that the Brewer's Green school, and other schools in London and elsewhere were superior to the New Lanark Infant School; yet I need only refer you to your friend Mr. John Smith, to be convinced thar no one of these schools ever equalled in practice the New Lanark Infant Schools, while they remained under my direction ; nor has any one school as yet formed in the world approached near in principle and practice to my first development, published by me in the Third Essay on the, New Views of Society, under the sanction of the Government, early in 181:3; or to the more extended explanation in my address on opening the first infant school, on the 1st of January 1816. Now, the Government has the origiuel manuscript of this address, or ought to have it, for I sent it in a day or two after it was delivered to Lord Sidmouth, the then Secretary for the Hume Depart- ment. But both the essay and address were circulated through five large eili. tions, and some copies are now in existence to be referred to. I believe, my Lord, I have been extremely accurate in my statement ; bat if I have erred in any particular, I shall be glad to see it publicly so stated, that I may admit the truth, and that justice may be done Weal parties."

The statements in this letter seemed to be conclusive as to the point at issue; but yesterday's Times contained a reply from the Chancellor, and a rather submissive rejoinder from Mr. Owen. First, the Chan, cam's letter, which commences as follows-

" My dear Sir—I have not the least hesitation in stating, that the Infant School system never would, in all probability, hafe been established but for your Lanark Schools and James Buchanan. BUt my evidence appears to rue to admit that the idea was taken from thence and from Hoferyl. You will ob. serve, that the only step in the invention claimed for the founders of the Brewer's Green School, in my evidence, is the applying it to day-schools.

Your schools and Mr. Fellenberg's are in connexion with and parts of establishments—the one manufacturing, the other agricultural. The West.

minster School was an extension of the plan to a town population, and without any other establishment in fact, by making a day-school of it. I most dis- tinctly recollect Mr. Mill and Sir C. Grey (afterwards Chief Justice of Cal- cutta), and myself, discussing for sonic weeks what name we should give these new school's, which we hoped would be established in England on this plan, as soon as we had shown one in Westaliuster ; and after rejecting various names, we fixed upon that of " Infant Schools." Though the thing as well as the isume was equally unknown till then in England, and I may add, anywhere out of connexion with some French concern, yet it is clear, that 611 we could show how it could exist independent of such connexion, the plan never could spread generally. This is really all that seems to me to be claimed for, or rather rel Aed of; the Westminster experiment in my evidence. I had not the least intention of depriving you of your great and principal share in this very important measure for the unprovenn at of society ; but I could not, in fairness to Messrs. Smith arid Mill, and Lord Lansdowne, suppress the mention of what we had done towards making it universally applicable, and any account of the system which passed over the step made then and there, would have been im- perfect and untrue. We began in December 1818, and opened in February 1819. Whoever knows the nature of the " Poor School" at Hofwyl, which' saw in 1816, must know that that school, sometimes called " Vehrli's chil dren," is, strictly speaking, as Infant School, but it is agricultural—yours nemufactur Mg."

Lord Brougham then states, that from the year 1808 to 1819, he had not visited Scotland at all ; and that the first time he_wits at New Lanark was in 1822. He admits that Mr. Owen's "sending James Buchanan was essential to the success of the school." Heals° reminds Mr. Owen, that when be afterwards called the attention of the House of Commons to the subject, he expressly mentioned his kindness and the importance of the assistance he had given. Mr. kindness, having received this letter, sends it to the Times, with

the following remarks-

" Sir—I have no doubt of the correctness of the Lord Chancellor's memory relative to his two visits to New Lanark being after the Brewer's Green Infant School was opened by him and his friends. In a subsequent letter to me, the Lord Chancellor states that his first visit was in 1822, and the second with Loud Denman in 1823. But my publications, developing the principles and detailing the practice to be adopted, were widely circulated between 1812 and 1819; and in all those years 1 had frequent personal communications with the ever active-minded HenryBroughano, especially on all new plans and measures con- nected with, or having reference to, education. It is, however, due to him thus publicly to state, that no individual, to my own knowledge, being also deeply engaged in the same pursuit, could have taken a more lively interest than he did at that period, in promoting in all ways, on all occasions, the education of the poor and industrious classes. I trust and hope that the present Lord Chancellor will yet greatly surpass Henry Brougham in this great and glorious measure, the only one that ever can emancipate society without a tremendous conflict of opinions and dreadful revolution."

To this twaddling epistle, which might have been concocted under the superintendence of Mr. Le Merchant, or any other of Lord Brougham's staff of Secretaries, the following postscript is appended.

P.S. Verldi's school was an ordinary employment school for boys from eight to sixteen years of age who were all engaged the greater part of each day in ago- culture. Mr. Felledberg, in 1818, when I spent three days with him at Hofwyl, had not heard of an Infant School such as originated at New Lanark, and he certainly had not one for several years afterwards. Our Want School, on the contrary, opened on the 1st of January 1816; was composed of infants from fourteen months to five or six years of age, who were not employed; and it was a town day-school, for all the children of the village were in the school, and all went home to their parents at meal-times and to sleep ; not oue of them was ever boarded by time establishment. But Verhli's children, and all Mr. Fellenberg's pupils, were boarded and lodged by him, as the master of a great boarding-school seminary. His Lordship has therefore mistaken the chantter of Verhli'e school, and confounded two very different establishments as one. It appears, then, that Mr. Owen was altogether deceived as to the date of Lord Brougham's visit to New Lanark. In other particulars, his first letter was correct. But what a heap of confused stuff the Chancellor has put forth, in order to bolster up his claim to something like original design in establishing Infant Schools! He admits that be took his idea of them from New Lanark; and then says that the thing, as well as the name, was equally unknown till then (that is, the establishment of the Brewer's Green School), and I may add, anr• where out of connexion with some French concern." Was Mr. Gwea's a French concern, or Mr. Fellenberg's even ? In another part of his letter, Lord Brougham says that the only step in the invention whit he claimed was "the applying it to day-schools." But he has no po claim even to this "step in the insentiOn." For what says Mr. Owen? "Our Infant School, opened twee 1st January 1816, was compc'sed W.411.4143 from fourteen montim.to twe Or Six Pam of an.,ez 'who were not em- ployed, awl it was a town day-school; for all the children in the village were in the sebool, and all went home to their parents at meal-times and to sleep." The real difference between Mr. Owens and Lord Brougham's school was this, that one was in Westminster and the other in New Lanark. The merit of the idea, the plan, and the execution of the plan, all belong in the first place to Mr. Owen. In this, as in so many other instances, Lord Brougham has only been stripped of bor- rowed plumes.