PUBLIC SCHOOLS BILL.—PETITIONS. (Hansard, 4 April 1865)

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY,
in presenting a petition from the Inhabitants of Harrow-on-the-Hill, praying to be heard 745 by counsel against the Bill, said, he desired to remind their Lordships that Harrow School was founded in the time of Elizabeth, by John Lyon, who left certain portions of estates to be invested under the patronage of the Crown for the purpose of educating the sons of poor and respectable inhabitants of Harrow, and other portions for the repairs of the roads in the neighbourhood. The School flourished for a long time, but at last the trustees seemed suddenly to have gone to sleep, for they allowed an Act of Parliament to be passed which alienated a considerable portion of the proceeds of the estates from their original objects. The part which now remained to Harrow amounted to the sum of about £1,600 a year, and he was informed that its value was rapidly increasing with the spread of the metropolis. The foundationers, though always kept up to an average number, had not of late derived all the advantages to which they were entitled under the will of John Lyon. But though they had not received the full benefit which they had a right to expect, yet the natural result of the endowment was to induce many people to reside at Harrow for the purpose of educating their children. Now, however, it appeared that the Commissioners thought it desirable that there should be but one class of boys educated in the School; but the petitioners were anxious that poor parents should still have the same opportunity of educating their children as before. This Bill contained a most extraordinary clause by virtue of which at the end of ten years the foundationers should altogether cease, and thus the intention of John Lyon would be entirely disregarded. The clause to which he referred was the 20th, by which it was provided that the privilege of free education at Harrow School, and the right of preference in elections to John Lyon's scholarships, which were given by the statutes of the founder to children of the inhabitants of the parish of Harrow, should cease, except in cases of persons residing in the parish at the time of the passing of the Act, in which case the children of such parents born within ten years after the passing of the Act should be entitled in the same manner as if the Act had not passed. As there was an apparent discrepancy between the figures quoted by the noble Earl (the Earl of Clarendon) and those supplied to himself by a deputation from Harrow, he would read an extract from a letter which he had received in explanation— 746 The Founder's property consists of the buildings immediately connected with the school, consisting of the two schoolhouses, chapel, library, master's house, racket and five courts, cricket ground, &c, and £1,100 per annum derived from the rental of real estate. All the school buildings are appropriated to the use of the whole school, boarders as well as foundationers. The £1,100 a year is expended in keeping in repair, lighting, warming, and otherwise maintaining the buildings, and providing other necessaries for school purposes, and in exhibitions to the Universities. These matters provided for (some of the particulars of which appear in the Report of the Commissioners), there would probably remain not more than the surplus mentioned by Lord Clarendon. The petitioners prayed that their Lordships would refer the Bill to a Select Committee; and the case of Harrow seemed to him so strong that he trusted the noble Earl would consent to this course, and give the parties interested the fullest opportunity of showing the injustice that was about to be perpetrated by the measure.

§ THE EARL OF CLARENDON
said, that Her Majesty's Government had no objection to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. He could not give the noble Earl opposite an answer last night without consulting his Colleagues. It would, however, he trusted, be understood that the Select Committee was to be appointed with the bonâ fide intention of examining the Bill, and not with the design of delaying its progress.

§ THE EARL OF MALMESBURY,
after expressing his gratification at the announcement of the noble Earl, said, that so far as he knew, there was no desire to delay the progress of the Bill in Select Committee.

§ THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH
said, he had a petition to present from the inhabitants of Rugby, of a similar nature to that presented by the noble Marquess, but it asked not only that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee, but also that they may be heard before that Select Committee by their counsel. Nor did he see how, on considerations of justice, their Lordships could refuse the prayer of the petition. The injuries that the petitioners would suffer from the operation of the Bill would be very great, and those injuries not being of a general (which was usually the reason given for not hearing counsel against a public Bill), but of a private nature, they were entitled to be heard by counsel. These petitioners were the inhabitants of Rugby and the adjacent parts, and they had a special interest in the Rugby School. That School was founded by Lawrence Shirreff, in 1576. It was founded as a 747 free grammar school, and the direction of Lawrence Shirreff was that it was to be built in a convenient locality and placed under the direction of a Master of Arts, "an honest, discreet, and learned man, for ever." For the purpose of maintaining this School, he left property in London, which has become very valuable, and some property in Rugby. In 1777 an Act of Parliament was passed which defined the limits within which the inhabitants should be entitled to the privileges of the School, those limits being a distance of five measured miles of Rugby. By a decree of the Court of Chancery, in 1780, those limits were extended to ten miles on the side of Warwickshire. The School prospered greatly, and the privilege of sending a boy to the School had become of great value. The School extended itself under trustees practically similar to those created in the first instance in the year 1602—namely, a dozen country gentlemen residing in Rugby and the neighbourhood. These gentlemen had so well executed the trusts confided to them, that the School of Rugby was now considered almost as the model School of this country. It had been in advance of others, and for a number of years it had been placed under a succession of distinguished men as Head Masters. The management of these country gentlemen had been such as not to interfere with the action of the Head Masters, and consequently that had been done at Rugby by a succession of good Head Masters which was effected in States under a succession of good Governors. The School had prospered, and had become what it is. It had, he believed, at the present moment, nearly 500 boys. By four Acts of Parliament, or some of them, and the decrees of the Court of Chancery resting on those Acts of Parliament, the trustees had sufficient power to rectify anything which might appear wrong, and thus the School had within itself the means of reform, so that the value of the privilege of sending boys to the School was very great. He saw that one gentleman, Mr. Caldecott, whom be recollected as one of the most distinguished civil officers of the East India Company, stated at a meeting that was held on this Bill, that he and five brothers had enjoyed the benefit of this School, that he was there nine years, and that when he left his father told him that the charge of his education, so far as the School was concerned, did not exceed £100. He saw that another gentleman, of the name of 748 Sale, stated that he had had seven sons at the School. The benefit to each of these gentlemen in the education of their sons sent gratuitously to the School at Rugby could not be less than from £500 to £600. This privilege of sending their sons to the School was, therefore, a valuable property; and the inhabitants of Rugby held that property by a deed of great antiquity; they had possessed it undisturbed for very nearly 300 years. It had been recognized by successive Acts of Parliament, and regulated by successive decrees of the Court of Chancery under these Acts of Parliament, yet valuable as it was, it was now proposed by this Bill, without their being heard, to take it at once from some, and in a few years from all, and that without the slightest compensation. It was proposed by the Bill at once to disfranchise all who were beyond the limits of five miles from Rugby, and all within these limits who were born after ten years from the passing of the Act. He knew not what property could be held to be secure if a property resting on deed, on antiquity of possession, on successive Acts of Parliament and decrees of the Court of Chancery for 300 years, was yet to be violated by an Act of Parliament without hearing the persons interested, in order to carry out some fanciful scheme. He trusted that their Lordships would take a very different view of the rights of these persons from that which was taken by those who had promoted this Bill. He was quite aware that there were persons who, for the purpose of obtaining the benefit of this privilege, had established themselves as sojourners within the limits of the foundation; but their right was as good in law as the right of those who were born to the privilege. Lord Langdale had distinctly declared that the children residing within the boundary were to be considered as children of Rugby, and that they had as good right to all the privileges of the school as any person born within the privileged limits. The right existed, and whatever right they might have by law, the law would preserve to them. He confessed that he felt very deeply interested in this measure. His father had his education at the foundation of the Charterhouse; at that time his grandfather was a clergyman with very limited means indeed, and it would have been perfectly impossible for him to give to his sons that education through which, or at least assisted by which, one rose to be 749 Chief Justice, two to be Bishops, and the others to take important positions in their respective professions, unless he had been able to avail himself of the advantages which that foundation afforded. His grandfather, the Bishop of Carlisle, had himself been educated in the same way in a free school. He (the Earl of Ellenborough) considered his family to be the creatures of free education, and he was resolved as far as he could to retain for others the benefits to which his family owed their prosperity. If it should be necessary—but he trusted it would not—he should move that the petitioners be heard by counsel against the Bill.

THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
said, he was afraid that some observations he made upon that subject the other evening had been misunderstood. In the statement he had made with respect to Harrow he had not intended to give expression to the opinions of the inhabitants of that town, but had merely declared what were his own impressions in reference to that question.

§ THE EARL OF POWIS
presented a petition from the Master, Fellows, and Scholars of St. John's College, Cambridge, against those provisions of the Bill by which their connection with certain public schools would cease, and praying to be heard by counsel against the Bill.

§ LORD LYTTELTON
said, he hoped the prayer of the petitioners would be heard by counsel and would be granted. It was clear to him that a Select Committee was inevitable; but, looking to the state of business in the other House of Parliament, he felt great doubt whether the effect would not be to postpone the Bill for another year. When Bills affected the rights of individuals, and they desired to be heard by counsel, it was very seldom that such an application was refused. If the Commissioners had in any instance omitted to give a due hearing to interested parties, those parties would naturally be the more anxious to make their case known to Parliament. He desired to point out on the part of the Commissioners that they recommended that the privileges enjoyed by those who had a vested interest should be retained for a longer time than that set forth in the Bill, and he thought a longer period should be adopted.