§ MR. HARDCASTLEasked the Vice President of the Committee of Council, Whether his attention has been drawn to the report in the "Times" of May 5th, of a meeting of the Birmingham School Board, at which a resolution was carried "that systematic moral instruction should be given in all the Birming- 126 ham Board Schools," and the chairman proposed that special times should be set apart for moral instruction, the character of which he indicated in these words—
That the children should be taught that there were moral laws, and that those laws should be enforced, and that if in the course of the instruction the name of God was mentioned he saw no harm in it;whether the setting apart special times for teaching this vague morality would come within the power given by the Act to set apart special times for religious teaching; and, whether, under the Conscience Clause, the children of parents who objected to the kind of instruction likely to be deduced from such materials by teachers prohibited from alluding to religion in any way, would be allowed to withdraw during the time set apart for this systematic moral teaching?
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONSir, the only information which we have concerning the proposed arrangement is derived from the public Press; and from that it appears that a discussion did take place at the Birmingham School Board, and that, in the opinion of the majority of the Board, the moral condition of the children in the Board Schools was not altogether satisfactory. There was very considerable divergence of opinion as to the remedy to be adopted. As regards the second part of the Question, I am afraid that until we are in possession of the code of moral ethics which it is proposed to teach, it would not be possible for me to give an answer, especially as the only information we have is the opinion of the chairman that the elder children should be put through a slight course of Acts of Parliament. In regard to the last part of the Question, the Education Act of 1870 did not contemplate the contingency of any School Board substituting moral for the religious instruction generally received; and I am sure my hon. Friend will not ask me to give an opinion on any complication which may ensue from the adoption of such a proposal until it comes before us in due form.
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINWill the noble Lord allow me to ask him, Whether he is not mistaken in saying that anything has appeared in the public Press or elsewhere which would justify the statement that the majority of the Birmingham School Board are dissatis- 127 fied with the present moral condition of the children under their charge?
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONI have here the report of the discussion at a meeting of the Birmingham School Board. The motion which was brought forward by the chairman, which was ultimately carried, was met by an amendment that such moral instruction was not necessary. That amendment was lost by four votes to nine. The next amendment was that instruction should be given based on the Bible, and it was lost by five votes to seven. The original motion, which was to the effect that moral instruction might be given, was carried, there being 11 votes for and nine against.
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINThe noble Lord has not answered the Question that I ventured to put to him—namely, what authority he has for the statement that the majority of the Birmingham School Board are of opinion that the moral condition of the children under their charge is at the present time unsatisfactory?
§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONThe statement which I made, and the only information I possessed, was derived from the public Press, from which it appeared that, in the opinion of the majority of the Board, the moral condition of the children in their schools was not altogether satisfactory. If the moral condition of the children in the Birmingham schools be thoroughly satisfactory, I cannot understand why the chairman made the motion which he did.