HC Deb 15 July 1861 vol 164 cc903-24

House in Committee,

MR. MASSEY in the Chair.

(In the Committee.)

(1.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £185,377, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge for Public Education in Ireland, under the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, to the 31st day of March, 1862.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, that there were various items in the Vote, for which the public ought not to pay. He particularly referred to the sums asked for music-masters and agriculture schools. There were more than two agricultural schools in every county in Ireland, seventy-four in all. Now, he admitted that agricultural schools would be of great advantage in England, but it was unjust to apply the money of the English ratepayers for the maintenance of such schools in Ireland. He should, therefore, move the omission of the item (£13,000), not that he would grudge it to give education to the Irish people, but he should not assent to such a Vote to spare the pockets of the Irish landlords, who were the persons who would be advantaged by the improvement of agriculture, and ought to pay for it.

MR. MONSELL

said, the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary had stated that there was the same amount of Go- vernment control over the model schools in England that existed in Ireland. In opposition to that statement he would refer to the evidence of Dr. Lingen, who affirmed that a "central office which undertook to educate the people, appointing and dismissing the schoolmasters and managing the schools by its own officers, would be an intolerable system in England." Yet that was the system followed in Ireland.

MR. MAGUIRE

I rise in pursuance of a notice which I placed some months ago on the paper—namely, to call attention to the inadequacy of the payments to national teachers in Ireland, and to the necessity of making provision for teachers incapacitated through age or ill-health. I shall confine myself strictly to the scope of my notice, and not refer to the broader subject of the particular system of education which now exists, or the principles on which it is based or carried on. At the close of last Session I entered fully into the questions of the mixed and denominational systems of education. To what I said on that occasion I have nothing to add, and nothing has occurred since then to alter or modify the opinions which I then expressed. I cannot, however, avoid congratulating the friends of the denominational system upon the extraordinary advance which their course has made, as evidenced conclusively by the almost unanimous testimony borne to it this night by Irish Members at both sides of the House. The immediate subject to which I now solicit the attention of the Committee is one of the very greatest importance. It does not merely concern the interests of the national teachers of Ireland, although there are 5,636 in number, but it involves the well working of the entire institution. Whatever the nature of an educational system may be, all will admit that it cannot prosper unless the teachers, those who love to bear the heat and burden of the day, are comfortable and contented with their position. Unless the teachers are of a superior character, and able to devote all their energies to the prosecution of their work, it is impossible that any system can be effectually carried out. It is not to the able or wise management of a central department that a great educational institution owes its success—it is to those whose duty, whose exalted duty, it is to impart instruction to the youth of the country. If the National System does ever take root in Ireland, and lays hold of the affections of the people of that country, the result will not be owing to the Commissioners or to the inspectors, but to the village teachers. In Ireland the village teachers are divided into three classes, and each class is further divided into different grades. I now speak of the male teachers, who number 3,141 in all. The first class consists of 423, the second, of 972, and the third of 1,746. The first class, consisting of 423, are paid, on the average, from all sources, the sum of 18s. 9d. per week. The second class, consisting of 972, are paid, from all sources, an average of 14s. a week. But the third class, which consists of 1,746, are only paid an average of 10s 3d. a week. That is the average; but of this 1,746, there are 812 who receive only £18 a year from the State, and about £5 a year from all sources; and those two sums put together make but £23, or a fraction over 9s. a week. Now 9s. a week is the average rate of wages paid to an ordinary labouring man in the neighbourhood of any large town or city in Ireland; and yet this is the payment which is awarded to the teacher, to whom is entrusted the duty of instructing the youth of country. I need scarcely add that the condition of the vast majority of the national teachers of Ireland is and must be one of constant humiliation, and that so far from being happy and contented, they suffer galling poverty and bitter privation. The remuneration of teachers in England is quite different. The average payment of the Irish male teacher, from all sources, is about £31 11s. 4d., and of the Irish female teacher £27 12s. But in England the average salary of male teacher is £94 3s. 7d., and of an English female teacher £62 13s. 10d. More than 60 per cent of the English male teachers enjoy free residences, and the English female teachers have over 50 per cent of the same. By the Scotch Parochial and Burgh Schools Bill, now before the House, it is provided that the minimum salary given to schoolmasters is to be £35, and the maximum £70. This payment is not to include fees; and I have been informed that the average salary of the Scotch schoolmaster will be about £80. Not more than 6 per cent of the Irish teachers possess a dwelling rent-free, while, as I have said, the majority of English teachers enjoy that important privilege; and in Scotland the rule is that every teacher shall have a house with three rooms, besides a piece of land. Out of their mise- rable pittance the Irish teachers have to provide themselves with a house, in most instances a cabin, or hovel, while I could mention cases where they are compelled to repair to the school-house. I have shown the rate of payment in England and Scotland, and I shall now quote a passage from the admirable work of Mr. Arnold on Popular Education, which has been published by the Royal Commissioners in their Report, showing how teachers are dealt with in Holland—a country which can bear no comparison with this, whether in population, wealth, or importance. Mr. Arnold says— M. Cuvier justly thought one of the grand causes of the success of the Dutch schools was the advantageous position of the schoolmasters. Municipalities and parents were alike favourable to them, and held them and their profession in an honour which then probably fell to their lot nowhere else. Hardly a village schoolmaster was to be found with a salary of less than £40 a year; in the towns many had from £120 to £160, and even more than that sum; all had, besides, a house and garden. The fruits of this comfort and consideration were to seen—as they are remarkably to be seen even at the present day—in the good manners, the good address, the self-respect, without presumption, of the Dutch teachers; they are never servile, and never offensive. The Royal Commissioners, in their valuable Report, thus describe their idea of a teacher's natural qualifications for his task— It is a life which requires a quiet, even temper, patience, sympathy, fondness for children, and habitual cheerfulness. If the Irish national schoolmaster were so fortunate as to possess "a quiet, even temper, patience, sympathy, and fondness for children," is it possible that he could preserve "habitual cheerfulness" upon nine shillings a week? More than 50 per cent of the national teachers are married, and it is to be presumed that many have large families; and it need scarcely be said that the burden of a family adds much to the privations caused by an insufficient income and false position. For the teacher is compelled to keep up a certain appearance. He is generally about the third person in importance in the country village; and while, in many instances, his pay is little above that of the day labourer, he cannot dress as the labourer does—he cannot afford to wear a broken shoe, or a tattered coat, or to appear in the same coarse garb of which the working man is not ashamed. Indeed, it is a fact that were they to dress in what might be considered an unbecoming manner, they would be remonstrated with. I may give a case in illus- tion of what I state. A teacher—one of those, I may mention, whom I had the honour of introducing to the noble Lord at the head of the Government—informed me that he was engaged on one occasion, after school hours, in giving instruction to some of his pupils in elementary horticulture; and previously to going into his little garden he prepared himself for its mud and clay by putting on a pair of old shoes and an old coat. One of the head inspectors, Mr. Kavanagh, happened to be passing by, when his attention was called to the manner in which the teacher was employed. Mr. Kavanagh justly complimented him upon the manner in which he was thus engaged, but remonstrated with him in private upon his appearance. The head inspector told him that if he dressed in that way he would run the risk of losing the respect of the children, and thus impair his authority, and that he in his own person ought to set an example of neatness for his pupils to follow. Now this teacher happened to be placed in an exceptional position, for he was in the receipt of something like 16s. from all sources; but what an insulting, heartless mockery such a reproof, however kindly meant it was in the case of my informant, would have been had it been addressed to one of the 812 teachers who, from all sources, are only in receipt of 9s. a week. Before going further, I may say, in referring to Mr. Kavanagh, whose name has been referred to before this evening, that the Board never possessed an abler or a more zealous servant than this gentleman; and that in all that he has done since the hour when he surrendered his lucrative office, for motives that did him honour, nothing has ever occurred in any way unworthy of him as a man of upright and independent character, or inconsistent with the duty which he owed to himself, his religion, and his country. The same teacher informed me of a fact which helps to exhibit the rate of wages now given to labour, even of the rudest kind, especially in the neighbourhood of towns. Attached to his school, he had a piece of ground, given to him, I believe, by the patron. This ground he could not cultivate himself, and he employed a common labouring man to plant it with potatoes, and for that task he had to pay his labourer at the rate of 10s. a week. But suppose, instead of having 16s. a week, this teacher had only 10s. or 9s. a week, only imagine the educated, cultivated, and trained teacher of youth paying for this rude and unskilled labour more than he received for the discharge of the most important and responsible duty with which a man can well be entrusted. There is evidently something wrong in the whole system, as proved by the small percentage of attendances as compared with the number of children on the rolls. Why is this? Because the heart of the teacher is not, in many instances, in his work—because he cannot be contented with his position—and because in some instances he is not of the class to be able to acquire influence over the children, and secure their punctual attendance. I wish to add to the just authority and influence of the village teacher; and I cannot do that more effectually than by raising his condition, and making him contented with his lot, which he cannot be so long as he receives the wretched remuneration to which I have described. Now, the cost of management is proportionately greater in Ireland than in England; and instead of the sums granted by Parliament going to the teachers, whose condition ought to be improved, they are wasted and frittered away on most questionable objects. I have been assured that the estimate now before the Committee is not the estimate which was prepared by the Commissioners, and sent by them to the Treasury—which department, I am happy to say, does exercise a salutary control over this expenditure. The right hon. Gentleman the Irish Secretary can set me right if I state what is incorrect; but I have been given to understand that the Commissioners asked for a much larger sum. This increase was for the purpose of adding something like 30 or 40 per cent to the salary and other charges for the inspectors; but these 66 gentlemen are largely and liberally paid at present, and I certainly will not consent to add one farthing either to their salaries or travelling expenses until full justice is done to the teachers, who from a more important body than any other under the Board. I must admit that the cost of a management is much greater relatively in Ireland than it is in England, as I shall proceed to show. In England the expense of inspection is £43,164, and of the central administration £16,776, making a total of £60,000, within a fraction. This on the whole sum just voted by Parliament for education in England—namely, £724,000 —is 8 1/2 per cent, or one-twelfth of the whole. Let us now turn to Ireland. The expense of inspection there is £22,840, and of central administration £14,319, or a total of £37,159. Thus, on a gross sum of £285,376, is 13 per cent, or one-eighth of the whole—showing that the expense of management in Ireland is not very far from double what it is in England, and I am sorry to say the result of this system of education, which is managed at such cost, is not by any means so flourishing as the right hon. Gentleman has represented it to be. Nearly half the children on the roll have not got beyond this book (the hon. Member here held up a little primer). This is the First Book of Lessons; and I shall read one or two exercises or questions from it—about the deepest problems it contains. One of these grave questions is, "Do pigs chew the cud?" Another is, "Can a foal pull a coach?" These, no doubt, are interesting enquiries, and calculated to develop youthful intelligence; but this is the maximum amount of intellectual acquirement that nearly 50 per cent of the children in daily attendance arrive at, and this certainly is no splendid result. Such a state of things is not to be found in the schools of the Christian Brothers, which schools, happily for the cause of education, are not scattered through the country. This grant result contrasts most unfavourably with the proficiency of the pupils in the schools I allude to, in which I venture to say scarcely one-tenth of their pupils would be found so backward. My remedy for this is to raise the condition of the teacher, to give more interest in his work, and to enable him to exercise more control over the attendance of his pupils. There is one fact in connection with this subject to which I desire to draw special attention, and that is the great proportion of teachers who, having been trained at the cost of the State, have left the profession, and either emigrated or sought more remunerative employments. The number of teachers who have been trained is about equal to the number now on the roll—that is, 5,636. These include 1,151 who are classed as "probationers." The number of trained teachers not employed under the Board is 2,791, whereas the number of teachers not trained is 2,845. Where have the rest gone? A small percentage of them have died, and a few perhaps may have found their way to the workhouses; but the great majority have emigrated, or have found other avocations. The State has lost, or expended, something like £100 by the training of each of these teachers with no possible advantage to the public, though it was certainly of great advantage to the individual to have received such a training. The remedy for this is obvious. If they are better paid they will have the best inducement to remain in the service; but now they are ready to yield to every temptation to leave, and to carry their education and intelligence to other countries. I have referred to the payment which the Irish teacher receives from other sources as being an average of £5 a year in each case. I am quite aware that the State grants to the Irish teacher a larger sum in proportion to his gross income than it does in the case of the English teacher, and that the amount given from school fees and other sources in England is vastly greater than it is in Ireland. This I must frankly admit. But I must, in explanation, take the marked distinction between the circumstances of the two countries—the one a rich country, with abundant employment for its labouring population—the other a poor country, whose population are mostly dependent on agriculture for their means of existence. Now, though an average of £5 or £6 from all local sources, as supplementing the payment given by the State, may seem a small sum in English eyes, it is not so in Ireland. It may be asked, why should not the funds from local sources be increased? My answer is that any attempt to increase them in many instances might be attended with great inconvenience, and only defeat the object which all would have in view—that is, to increase the attendance of the children. Let hon. Gentlemen remember that the education thus offered by the State is not intended for the children of those who are able to pay, but for those who are but little raised above the rank of actual poverty. Thus, for instance, the larger number of the children who attend the village school are the children of the cottiers and day labourers —men whose ordinary pay is about a shilling a day. Now, it is not at all times that the labourer is employed. It is true his labour is in requisition when the sun shines, and when the weather is dry; but there are weeks and months when, from the severity of the season, there is no demand for his rude labour. I ask, supposing a poor man of this class have three children of an age to be sent to the National School, could he afford to pay 3d. a week for their schooling? It would be a cruel and wicked rule which would attempt to exact it. In the schools of the Christian Brothers, and in the schools of the Presentation Monks not a farthing is asked from the children; and yet while the daily attendance in the National Schools is not more than 45 per cent of the number on the roll, the difference between the number of children on the roll and in daily attendance in the schools of the Christian Brothers is a mere trifle—nothing like 10 per cent of the whole. I should myself like to see the teachers better supported by the locality; but I must be content to wait for a much greater improvement in the condition of the country before I can expect any marked increase to the local contribution towards the salary of the teacher. But what is the teacher to do in the mean time. Is he to starve on a miserable pittance?—is his mind to be distracted with the mean and sordid cares which want and misery bring in their train?—is he to be kept in his present position of galling humiliation and hourly privation? With the increasing cost of the necessaries of life, and the inexorable law of gentility which compels him to wear a better coat than his neighbour, how is it possible that the teacher can exist on 9s., 10s., or even 12s. a week. In most countries of Europe, a teacher is required to pass only one examination to qualify him for his position; but for every grade an Irish teacher rises he has to pass a fresh examination. I do not object to this if the teacher is well paid. But if he is compelled to undergo new examinations he must have time and leisure for self-improvement, or he can never rise above his first position; and how, after having spent his day in the hard drudgery of his school, can this poor man, whose mind is distracted by the constant presence and pressure of want, be expected to devote himself with energy to the task of self-improvement? or if his life is to be one continued exercise of his intellect, in his school and out of his school, surely he is entitled to something better than his present wretched remuneration? I have shown how numbers of teachers have quitted the profession after having been trained at the expense of the public. In France I find that the same course is producing the same result. But in France more honour is paid to the teacher than in Ireland. In France the Government gives the teachers crosses and decorations and braided coats; yet I mistake not if the French teacher would not prefer a little less honour and a little more pay. In Ire- land the teacher has no honour whatever and a very miserable pay, so that his fate is far worse than that of his French brother. Mr. Arnold, in page 150 of his Report has this most important passage— At present the lay teachers in France tend to quit the profession as soon as they can for some more profitable career; if it were not for the inducement offered by the exemption from military service, it would be difficult to recruit their ranks. It is in vain that the State offers to them the lure of honourable mentions, medals of bronze and of silver, and even the rank of academic officer, with the privilege of wearing an official coat, with a palm embroidered on the collar; these public distinctions to the teachers are excellent but they are of no avail so long as he is utterly underpaid. Poor Irish teachers get no decoration. They wear no crosses on the breast. In this case, such decorations would be a bitter mockery. The only cross bestowed upon them is the heavy cross of poverty— and that cross they have too long borne. The only other point to which I shall now refer is the necessity for some adequate provision for the teacher when incapacitated by old age or ill-health. There is provision made for the worn-out horse, but none for the worn-out teacher in Ireland. The gentleman sends his old horse to spend the rest of his days in a rich paddock, but the teacher has no resource save the charity of his friends or the workhouse. The only provision for the national teacher consists in this—that in some instances a sum is given equal to one or two years' salary; but when that is eaten out, as it must be in two years, there is not resource left but starvation or the workhouse. Now I have a case painfully in point. There is a teacher who, with his wife and six children, is now an inmate of the Manorhamilton Workhouse, in Ireland. This unhappy man was a teacher for thirty-seven years of his life, seventeen of which were spent in the service of the Board. In 1858 the Commissioners granted him a sum of £51. That was equal to about two years' salary; but when that was consumed, which it necessarily was in that time, he was compelled to betake himself to the last refuge of the destitute—the workhouse. Now, that is a said conclusion to a life of labour in the public service. No class in the community is entitled to greater sympathy than the worn-out teachers. They cannot become mechanics in their old age, and their avocations have utterly unsuited them for rude labour; so that they positively have no other resource save that of the workhouse, if they are not to rot on the road side. I do not ask, in the name of the teachers of Ireland, that anything shall be done for them this year more than whatever is proposed in the present Estimates; they are quite willing to wait one year more, confident in the justice and compassion of Parliament, and in the belief that Commissioners will be emboldened to make such a fair demand in their behalf, in the Estimates of next Session, as will help to place them in a position in which they may be able to prosecute their onerous duties with out the pressure of the same cares and anxieties which now harrass their minds and depress their spirits. For my part, I have no apprehension whatever of increased Votes for education. £50,000 or £100,000 more, whether for England or Ireland, is a matter of no possible moment, and ought not to cause the slightest objection in the mind of any hon. Gentleman. We never hesitate to grant one million, or two millions, or three millions, for warlike purposes, to build new ships of war, or, as the phrase is, to remodel the navy; and yet we must admit that from such an outlay very little advantage results to the country. But every shilling expended in education brings its own fruit in the greater intelligence of the people. On the score of the strictest economy, as well as for the best interests of education, it is absolutely necessary that the teachers, upon whom success of any system rests, should be better paid than they are. I now only ask for an expression of sympathy in the object of my notice from the Committee; and I shall only say, in conclusion, that nothing would tend more to render an educational system useful to the Irish people than by enlisting the earnest energies of its teachers, and giving to them that legitimate influence and control which will always be exercised by men whose heart is in their work; and I do not believe that the Government will next year have any difficulty in obtaining from Parliament whatever additional sum may be necessary to enable them to do justice to so meritorious a class of public servants as the National Teachers of Ireland.

MR. DAWSON

said, the whole vitality of the system of education was involved in the character and condition of the teachers. He had listened carefully to the observations of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, and from his local knowledge he was able to say that there was nothing in his able statement which was at all overcoloured or exaggerated. It had been shown that the average pay of a school-master was only about 10s. a week, and there was no ground to expect any increase in the amount now supplemented by private liberality. Where the national system was accepted it was considered that public education was the duty of the State, and the duty of providing funds, therefore, devolved upon Parliament. He believed that if they could instil feelings of satisfaction into the minds of the teachers they would do more to establish public confidence in the system than by any reconstruction or expensive alterations that could be devised. He admitted that the right hon. Gentleman had done much to improve the condition of this deserving class, and if he went further in that direction he would be repaid tenfold by the additional proficiency which the teachers would exhibit.

CAPTAIN JERVIS

said, he agreed that the system of promoting teachers by removing them to another school in a more important district was the bane of the national system. He maintained that the cleverest teacher was wanted in the most barbarous districts. In 1858 the Commissioners reported that in Donegal there were seven teachers in places where the whole amount of local contribution was 7s. to each teacher. One teacher on Tory Island was almost starving. The Commissioners reported that some teachers were wholly incompetent, and the people of the district, although anxious to learn English, could not obtain instruction. A schoolmistress who had given great satisfaction was removed from the place where she was useful to Belfast, where there was no want of experienced and able teachers. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider that point.

MR. LONGFIELD

said, he felt considerable reluctance in pressing upon the Government the necessity of increasing the education grant, not because he did not think the teachers were well deserving of an increase of pay, but because it appeared to him that if the amount annually voted by Parliament were properly applied there would be no need for an increased demand. There was lavish extravagance in the application of the funds. A sum of £500 or £600 a year was voted for drainage and permanent improvements of a farm of 170 acres, and yet after seventeen years the only return was the "probable pro- duce of £1,600," which had been held out for the last ten years. He could not help thinking that the system had been mal-administered, the proof being that while they had multiplied the number of schools the number of scholars had been diminished. The result was that they had only multiplied the number of pauper school-masters, and that the best men were leaving the Irish National Schools. They had been recommended to make a provision for their old age by the aid or deferred annuities; but how could schoolmasters in the receipt of these miserable pittances spare any money for the purpose? He thought the Commissioners had put into their book of extracts the sketch of an Irish clergyman who was "passing rich on £40 a year." So struck did they seem to be with the picture that they had strenuously resolved that the pittance of Irish school masters should never exceed £40 a year, though a century had elapsed since Goldsmith wrote The Deserted Village.

MR. MORE O'FERRALL

said, he agreed that there were items in which a saving might be effected. For instance, he found a vote of £100 for a classical teacher to instruct the teachers. But what did they want with classics? They surely formed no part of the scheme. It appeared to him that there were many items in which they might make reductions, and thus obtain funds to increase the salaries of the teachers who needed it so much. If, after they had introduced all the economies they could, any thing more was needed, he felt certain that Parliament would vote the balance with the greatest readiness.

MR. SEYMOUR FITZGERALD

said, it was clear that the contentment and efficiency of the masters were the conditions of the success of the system. It appeared that there were on the Normal establishment two professors employed as training masters, who lectured on the "English language and literature, history, geography, mathematics, political economy, and natural philosophy." When the teachers were educated in these high branches of knowledge Parliament gave them on an average the sum of 11s.9 d. per week. It was clear that if the teachers learned all these things they were worth more than 11s. 9d. per week, and that if they did not the professors were not necessary in order to teach them. He agreed with hon. Members who thought that if the Vote were wisely administered the teachers might obtain an increase of salaries.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he sympathized with the hon. Member for Dungarvan in the appeal he had made in behalf of the schoolmasters; and he believed there were abundant means of bringing about reductions by which their salaries might be increased, without calling on the House to augment the gross amount of its grant for Irish education. He begged to move, therefore, that £13,000, the item for the agricultural schools, be omitted; and if he carried that Amendment, he would hereafter propose a Resolution affirming that the Vote for masters ought to be increased to that extent. He also had to complain that the amounts asked for building schools were put under the head of the Board of Works, when, in fact, they were an addition to the educational Vote.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, he thought that the same was the case with regard to the grant for the reformatory and industrial schools. It appeared under another head. With regard to the payment to the Irish teachers, it should be remembered that all they received came out of the public purse; whereas in England a large proportion of the salary was raised by voluntary effort. He desired to call the attention of the Committee to the great increase which had taken place in that Vote. In 1848 it was just £120,000, while now it was over £285,000. That seemed to him to be an enormous increase. One feature of the increase was the great additional cost of management, which in a few years had more than doubled. With regard to the district model schools, he was afraid they were doing in Ireland what had been done to a considerable extent in England—namely, that they were giving education to classes for whom it was never intended, and who were fully able to pay for their won education. He understood that very few of the students in the model schools were of the poorer classes. Indeed, he had been informed that the children of magistrates were pupils in some of them.

MR. CARDWELL

said, that the office in Dublin had been the subject of inquiry by a Commission from the Treasury four or five years ago, and the amount of salaries paid was the result of that inquiry. The Votes for reformatory schools in both England and Ireland were taken separately from the education Vote, because they were considered to come under the category of crime. The reason why the amount for building schools was not in that Vote was that that work was under the direction of the Board of Works, and, therefore, was considered to come properly into the Vote for the expenses of that Department. He would now pass on to the main subjects—namely, the expenditure on model schools, the expenditure upon district agricultural schools, the expenditure upon the school at Glasnevin, and the small remuneration afforded to the school-masters. It was contended that the expenditure on model schools should not be increased. If that were the proper opportunity, he should be most ready to add his humble tribute to the admiration which such schools as those in Marlborough Street and Belfast elicited from all visitors; but, as the expenditure on the model schools had grown very considerably, he thought it would be much more satisfactory that no further engagements should be made by the Commissioners with respect to the model schools in any district in Ireland without first obtaining the sanction of the Government, so that they might have the opportunity of submitting the matter to that House before any decision was come to. With respect to the agricultural schools, the Government acknowledged that the opinion of the House had been expressed to the effect that the expenditure of those schools had gone be yond a proper amount in Ireland, but the benefit they had conferred on the country ought not to be forgotten. Immediately after the famine there was a very great desire to extend agricultural improvement in Ireland, and every one was desirous of taking advantage of the favourable opportunity to establish agricultural schools to teach the people improved agriculture. He believed that great benefit had been the result. But, again, he had the satisfaction of saying that Government had anticipated the feeling expressed to-night in desiring to reduce the expenditure on agricultural schools, and there was a decrease of four model and four ordinary schools since last year. Then, with regard to Glasnevin, he drew the attention of the Commissioners of Education to the importance of giving rewards as an incentive to education through the whole 5,000 schools in Ireland, and accordingly a system of prizes had been adopted, by which the best pupils were brought up to Dublin for rewards, and a great stimulous was given to education through the whole country. He now came to the question of the salary of the schoolmasters. He cordially sympathized with every word which had fallen from the hon. Member for Dungarvan and others, and it would be seen that already something had been done to promote the comfort of the school-masters, for in the present Estimates there was a considerable increase for their benefit. Their position had been contrasted with that of the schoolmasters in England, but it must not be forgotten that when the system in Ireland was originally commenced, it was laid down in Lord Stanley's letter that the amount intended for the salaries should be locally secured, That principle, however, had been entirely departed from, and the House was now asked to vote no less than £180,000 for the salaries of schoolmasters. If it were attempted to contrast the salaries of teachers in Ireland with those in England, it must be borne in mind how large a part of the salaries of English teachers was derived from local sources. It could not be supposed that the whole of the £90 which they received was derived from the State; it was largely composed of the fees from scholars and contributions given by landed proprietors in aid of the schools. And if the hon. Gentleman called in aid of his argument the Scotch Parochial Schools Bill, under which each schoolmaster was to have a minimum of £35 and a maximum of £70 yearly, he must remember that those were payments mainly to be made from a charge upon land voluntarily imposed, and not form money obtained by a Vote of that House. He was sure the Board of Commissioners would be most anxious to ameliorate the condition of the teachers to any extent which they believed would receive the sanction of the Government and of the House of Commons. They had already shown their interest in the subject in a practical manner, but in preparing the Estimates they were obliged to bear in mind their growing magnitude, and not to extend them more rapidly than they believed the liberality of Parliament would warrant.

MR. BUTT

said, one of the principal objections to the present system was that the Commissioners were doing all they could to get the whole management into their own hands. They were asked to Vote £280,000, and there was another vote of £60,000 making £340,000 in the hands of the Commissioners, which was nearly equal to the whole parochial income of the clergy of the Established Church. He felt that upon careful revi- sion an abundance of items could be pruned away, which would in the aggregate yield an amount sufficient to meet the legitimate claims of the masters. He referred to various items, especially in connection with agricultural schools and the cost of inspection, which he regarded as excessive, and said that the lavish expenditure under these heads and the special gratuities given to particular pupils looked as if the object which the Government had in view was to bribe individuals into supporting a system which was alien to the feeling and spirit of the country. He asked for an explanation of the item of £10,000 introduced into the Estimates this year for the first time for "navigation schools;" as he believed that demand was a further step to wards extending the control of the Commissioners to purposes of education with which it was not originally contemplated they should have anything to do.

MR. MONSELL

said, he believed no Member on either side of the House had any intention of demanding an increase of the Vote for the purpose of augmenting the salaries of teachers; but many, no doubt, thought the salaries might be increased by a redistribution of the present Vote. The expenditure on model schools, for instance, was excessive. They had been established in towns where ample educational qualities already existed, or would have been provided without Parliamentary assistance. He could corroborate the statement, that persons by no means in the poorest classes availed themselves of the advantages afforded by these Government establishments, and he wished to express his belief that the real object of the system, which was to provide for the education of the humbler Irish, had in many cases been lost sight of. Local contributions, where they could be obtained, he regarded as of the utmost value, because they interested the donors in the school, and led to their exercising a watchfulness over it which other inducements would fail in inducing them to do. The Christian Brothers' and the nuns' schools were the best in Ireland, because religion was an important point with those bodies, and it would be well to see if the same principle could not be brought to bear upon the model schools.

MR. CARDWELL

explained that the increase of £600 upon the item for navigation schools was caused by increased facilities being afforded for learning navigation.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he must persist in his Motion to reduce the Vote by £13,000—the sum asked for agricultural schools.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, that if there were any species of instruction which more than another was useful to the people of Ireland it was training in the principles of agriculture. He hoped, therefore, his hon. Friend would not object to Vote the sum necessary for the purpose. Even if the whole of the £13,000 was distributed, as some were preferred to advocate, in increasing the salaries of the schoolmasters, very little would, after all, have been effected in that direction, inasmuch as according to the statement which the hon. Member for Dungarvan had made to him, when he waited on him at his own house, a sum of £50,000 would give those schoolmasters an average increase of salary of only 14s. a week.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

contended that the £13,000 would not in the slightest degree benefit the people of this country, or, in fact, anybody else, except the landlords of Ireland.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, he must remind his hon. Friend that the promotion of the wealth and prosperity of the people of Ireland ought not to be a matter of indifference to the English people.

Motion made, and Question put, That a sum, not exceeding £172,377, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge for Public Education in Ireland, under the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, to the 31st day of March, 1862.

The committee divided:—Ayes 9; Noes 98: Majority 89.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(2.) £155,000, Redemption of the Stade Toll.

MR. PEEL

said, he had to propose a Vote of £155,000 for the redemption of the Stade Dues. A treaty had been entered into with Hanover under which that country extinguished these tolls, and was to receive the capitalized value, calculated according to a certain basis of the revenue which she derived form them, and the sum so to be paid to her was to be divided in certain proportions between this country, Hamburg, and other countries trading up the Elbe. It was not necessary to enter into a lengthened explanation as to those tolls, as the whole subject was carefully inquired into by a Select Committee of the House so lately as 1858. The toll was one of a very ancient character, having been levied by Hanover since 1720, and this country had recognized the right of Hanover to levy it by entering, in 1844, into a treaty with Hanover on the subject. Under that treaty it was agreed that the toll to be levied on all ships passing up the Elbe should be at the rate of 5s. for every £100 value of freight. In the year 1858 a Committee of the House of Commons which inquired into the subject reported that the toll was injurious to the trade and commerce of this country, and pointed out that certain articles produced in England were exposed to disadvantageous competition with similar articles the production of other countries, in consequence of the latter finding their way to Germany by other channels than the Elbe. The Committee further showed that our shipping was, by the operation of these tolls, subject to an unfair competition with the vessels of Hamburg, and they recommended that the Treaty of 1844 should be put an end to. That could be done by notice, but the legal authorities whom the Government consulted were of opinion that if they terminated the treaty they would not exempt themselves from liability to the toll. Under these circumstances the only course to arrive at a friendly solution of the question was to redeem the tax in the same way as the Sound dues, which was an analogous case, had been redeemed. If the Committee agreed to the principle of redemption there would be little question as to the details. Hanover proposed that a sum equal to 25 years' purchase should be given for the redemption of the revenue derived from the tolls. But that was objected to, and it was ultimately agreed to accept 15 1/2 years' purchase. With regard to the contribution to be made by this country, the Hanoverian Government received £30,000 from the tolls, and this country paid between 50 and 60 per cent of that sum. The next largest contributor was Hamburg. If Hanover received £30,000 a year, that multiplied by 15 1/2 years gave a sum of £465,000. If England were to pay in the proportion of her contribution to the annual revenue derived from the tolls she would pay £250,000. But the interest which Hamburg had in the abolition of the tolls was more than measured by the amount of her contribution, for the tolls prevented ships from going to Hamburg, and diverted trade to other quarters. This country was, there- fore, to pay only one-third of the entire amount, Hamburg was to pay another third, and the remaining third was to be divided proportionally amongst the other countries that traded to the Elbe. The treaty which had been concluded provided that no pecuniary obligation was to be fixed on this country except with the concurrence of Parliament. There had been an Act of Parliament in the case of the purchase of the Sound dues, but in the present instance it was thought that a Vote in Committee of Supply would be sufficient for all practical purposes. He hoped the Committee would agree to the Vote, as interest would have to be paid upon any instalments that remained due after the 1st of October, and as by the treaty the compensation was to be paid in thalers, the sooner the operation of purchasing them began the better as they might, otherwise, be losers by a rise in the rate of exchange. He trusted that the grounds he had given for the Vote would be satisfactory to the Committee.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, he was not at all satisfied with the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman. He thought the proportion fixed for England was high. On whom did the duty fall? On the owner of the ship? On the owner of the merchandize? Did it not rather, according to the principles of political economy, fall on the consumers of the goods? It had been considered that such duties fell on the consumers. Then the Stade dues had been regarded in the light of passing tolls. If so, Hanover took the dues, and did nothing for them. In this country when relieving foreign countries from our passing tolls we did not call on them to buy up their liabilities. Again, the duties were really abolished by the Treaty of Vienna. But whenever that treaty operated in favour of the general European public it had been set aside. Another reason why he thought the share of this country too large was because cargoes from foreign ports which came to the Isle of Wight, or some point on the English coast, and were there purchased to go to Hamburg, were reckoned improperly as a portion of our trade. Moreover, these dues being levied by the pound, this country had been subjected to overcharge on account of the English pound being less than the foreign one. Under all the circumstances he thought the hon. Gentleman had not given a good reason for fixing England with so large a proportion of the commu- tation money for the Stade dues; and he should say "no" to the Vote.

Vote agreed to, as were also

(3.) £1,257, Commissioners of Education, Ireland.

(4.) £4,995, University of London.

(5.) £16,285, Grant to Scottish Universities.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, the Vote was upwards of £8,000 more than the Vote of last year. He wished to know what was the cause?

MR. PEEL

said, the reason of the increase was the recent legislation on the subject of the Scotch Universities.

Vote agreed to, as was also

(6.) £2,336, Queen's University, Ireland.

(7.) £3,300, Queen's Colleges, Ireland.

MR. DAWSON

said, he thought the claims of the inspectors of these colleges ought not to be further postponed.

MR. CARDWELL

said, it was proposed to redistribute the £7,000 appropriated to the professors, so as to meet the claims referred to.

Vote agreed to, as was also

(8.) £500, Royal Irish Academy.

(9.) £1,500, Theological Professors, Belfast.

MR. HADFIELD

said, there was a growing feeling in Ireland as to the impolicy of the allowance. That class of rich Dissenters had no right to come upon the public funds. It was the only class of Protestant Dissenters in the kingdom that received such a grant. He should, therefore, move the reduction of the grant by £2,050, which would leave only the amount of retired allowances.

MR. CARDWELL

said, that considering the great importance of the Presbyterian body in the north of Ireland, the nature of the institution, and the long period that the grant had been in existence, he trusted the hon. Gentleman would not persist in his Motion.

MR. DAWSON

said, the institution had done a vast amount of good in the north of Ireland.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

expressed his disapproval of the Vote.

Motion made, and Question put, That a sum, not exceeding £1,500, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to pay the Salaries of the Theological Professors and the Incidental Expenses of the General Assembly's College at Belfast, and Retired Allowances to Professors of the Belfast Academical Institution, to the 31st day of March, 1862.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 120; Noes 20: Majority 100.

House resumed.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow.