Commons Sitting of 1 July 1875

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—General Carriers Act,1830 [No. 295].
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES—Class IV.—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Poor Law Amendment [217], debate adjourned; Bridges (Ireland)* [226]; General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Provisional Order Confirmation* [227]; Gas and Water Orders Confirmation* [228].
Committee—Report—Police Constables (Scotland)* [213]; Infanticide* [43].
Considered as amended—Summary Prosecutions Appeals (Scotland)* [191].
Withdrawn—Intoxicating Liquors (Ireland)* [71].

MERCHANT SHIPPING ACTS AMENDMENT BILL—THE SIXTH CLAUSE.

  QUESTION.
  LORD ESLINGTONasked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether, since the passing of Clause 6 of the merchant Shipping Bill in Committee, he has received a protest from agents of foreign shipowners at Liverpool, Newcastle, Cardiff, Leith, and London against interference with foreign shipping; and, whether he intends to propose, on Report, any alteration of Clause 6, so as to meet the objections of the memorialists?
  SIR CHARLES ADDERLEY, in reply, said, that no such protest had been received by the Board of Trade. The 6th clause had not passed, nor been debated, but was postponed. It proposed no interference with foreign shipping; but, on the contrary, its object was the prevention of British ships from assuming falsely a foreign character, which was as much in accordance with applications now being made by foreign Powers to us as it was in the interest of all honest British shipowners, and for this purpose the clause would enable the public officer to demand the production of papers showing the ship's assumed nationality. Some memorials were received in May, but were based upon an entire misconception of the meaning of the 6th clause. He proposed to amend the postponed clauses in their wording before they were brought up again, but not in their substance.

CRIMINAL LAW (IRELAND)—CASE OF MARY M'MAHON.—QUESTION.
MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYasked Mr. Solicitor General for Ireland, Whether it is true that one Mary M'Mahon was lately convicted in Cork of a murder committed in Limerick; that the Court of Queen's Bench in Dublin was equally divided as to the validity of the verdict; that the verdict was set aside, the junior Justice withdrawing his judgment; and that the gentlemen advising the Crown on the occasion decline to ask the decision of the Court of Appeal on the question of procedure as to whether the court was divided, notwithstanding expressions from the bench suggesting the propriety of appealing; and, whether it is intended that the prisoner shall have immunity from all penal consequences of the murder; and, if not, what course the Crown intends to pursue?
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. PLUNKET), in reply, said, that Mary M'Mahon was recently convicted at Cork of a murder committed at Limerick, the cause having been removed into the Queen's Bench, and the venue changed from Limerick to Cork. It was true that the Court of Queen's Bench in Dublin was equally divided as to the validity of the verdict, and the junior Judge having withdrawn his judgment pro formâ, judgment was arrested. He believed
784
also that some expressions fell from some members of the Court in favour of speeding a Writ of Error; but the Attorney General for Ireland having carefully considered all the circumstances, and having consulted with the Law Officers of the Crown in England, had decided that this was not a case in which a Writ of Error should be brought. He might add that it was intended to prosecute the woman for a robbery committed at the same time as the murder.

IRISH CHURCH ACT—CLAUSE 25—PRESERVATION OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS.—QUESTION.
MR. MITCHELL HENRYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, If he would state to the House who has been appointed by the Board of Works to superintend the preservation of the National Monuments in Ireland; what has been his profession, and whether he has made the ancient architecture of Ireland a subject of previous study; and, whether the Chief Secretary will lay upon the Table of the House a Copy of the Instruction under which the officer is to act?
SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, in reply, said, that the hon. Gentleman was probably not aware that this matter was under the control of the Treasury, and not of the Irish Government. An architect by profession had been appointed to superintend the preservation of national monuments in Ireland. He could not say whether a copy of the instruction given to this officer had been laid on the Table; but his duty would be to preserve the national monuments, and not to restore them.

IRISH FISHERIES—GALWAY.

  QUESTION.
  MR. MITCHELL HENRYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether it is true, as stated in "The Galway Vindicator," that the inspectors of fisheries have long ago made their recommendations as to the distribution of the portion of the Reproductive Loan Fund set apart for the fishermen on the coast of Galway; and, whether the fund will be made available in time for the autumn fishing?
  SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, in reply, said, the Inspectors of Irish Fisheries began to make recommendations in May last, and had continued to do so

  785
  till the present time. The remainder of their recommendations would soon be forwarded to the Office of Public Works. He was informed by the Office of Public Works that a Circular would shortly be issued with reference to the distribution of the fund, and that upon the necessary forms being filled up, money would be advanced to the fishermen in a month.

CRIMINAL LAW (IRELAND)—CASE OF JOHN SLATOR.—QUESTION.
MR. R. POWERasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the case of John Slator, recently acquitted at the Commission Court in Dublin of a criminal assault on his own daughter, and to the reported remarks, as reported in "The Freeman's Journal," of one of the jurors and of the Judges:—
"Mr. Justice Barry said, He could not characterize the proceeding but as a failure of justice. A juror suggested that they should append to their verdict a statement to the effect that the indictment had been carelessly prepared. Mr. Baron Dowse asked whether the Attorney General was aware, when the indictment was being-framed, that a woman could not be examined against her husband in a criminal case, and added it was a serious miscarriage of justice, and if the Attorney General did not know the law in the case he ought to have known it;"
whether the Report is substantially correct; and, whether any steps have been taken or are intended to be taken to secure an efficient management of criminal prosecutions?
SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH, in reply, said, that this was one of those cases which not unfrequently happened in which evidence given at the trial differed from that given upon the information. There were three counts in the indictment against the prisoner. The first two were for assault upon a child under 12 years of age, and the third was for an indecent assault, without regard to the age of the child. No evidence could be adduced at the trial which satisfied the Court that the child was under 12 years of age, and it had since been ascertained that the child was absolutely over 12. It appeared by the information with regard to the third count that the child was not a consenting party, but upon her cross-examination it appeared that she was so. Therefore the count for an indecent assault could not be
786
sustained. There was no failure of justice with regard to this particular trial. With regard to the remarks attributed to Mr. Baron Dowse upon the occasion, he (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) held in his hand a letter from that learned Baron, from which it appeared that he did not use the words—" If the Attorney General did not know the law in the case he ought to have known it." Baron Dowse was, of course, aware that the duty of the Attorney General was merely to decide in cases of this kind whether a prosecution should be instituted or not, and that the form of the indictment and the future proceedings in any particular case were entrusted to two gentlemen—who in this case happened to be Mr. Murphy and Mr. O'Brien—who were universally admitted to be thoroughly capable of fulfilling their duties, and had been appointed to their offices by the late Government. He might also quote from Mr. Baron Dowse's letter that learned Judge's opinion with regard to the capabilities of these gentlemen. Mr. Baron Dowse said—
"I may add—and in this I have the assent of my colleague Mr. Justice Barry—that at the last very heavy commission, as a rule, the prosecutions in Green Street were remarkably well conducted by the experienced solicitor and able counsel who represent the Crown."
Other Judges had at different times expressed the same opinion. On the whole case he would remark that there had been no failure of justice, and that whatever might have occurred the Attorney General had been most unjustly blamed for a matter which was not under his own control, and in which he was not in any degree responsible.
MR. R. POWERasked, whether Mr. Justice Barry did not say that he could not characterize the proceedings except as a failure of justice?
SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHsaid, he thought that might very likely have been the case, and he would explain why. The learned justice and the jury were at the time under the impression, which was afterwards disproved, that the child was under 12 years old.

KINGDOM OF ITALY—THE MURDER OF MR. HINDE, NEAR NAPLES.

  QUESTION.
  SIR WILLIAM STIRLING-MAXWELLasked the Under Secretary of

  787
  State for Foreign Affairs, If he can give any information as to the state of the investigation into the murder of the late Mr. Hinde near Naples, and the steps taken on behalf of Her Majesty's Government to secure the conviction of the murderer?
  MR. BOURKE: Sir, I can assure my hon. Friend that the murder of Mr. Hinde near Naples in March last has from the first engaged the earnest attention and solicitude of Mr. Calvert, our Consul at Naples, and that of Sir Augustus Paget, at Rome; and Her Majesty's Government have every reason to believe that the Italian Government have acted with promptitude in doing their best to bring to justice the perpetrators of this very atrocious crime. Soon after the murder the gardener in Mr. Hinde's service was arrested, as well as his wife and two lads who worked in the garden. The evidence did not justify the detention of the woman or the lads, so they have been released. But a prosecution has been instituted against the gardener, who will be tried, it is expected, in a few days. We have been in communication with the Treasury upon the subject, and it has been arranged that any reasonable sum which may be required to secure the conviction of the guilty parties above what the family of Mr. Hinde have contributed shall be paid from the public funds.

CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACT—VETERINARY DEPARTNT OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL,—QUESTION.
MR. WILBRAHAM EGERTONasked the Vice President of the Council, Whether he would have any objection to publish in "The Gazette" the weekly returns in each county of all contagious and infectious diseases, except foot and mouth disease, included in "The Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1869;" and, if he could state when the Annual Report of the Veterinary Department of the Privy Council will be ready for publication?
VISCOUNT SANDON: Sir, in compliance with my hon. Friend's suggestions, the Lord President has already directed that the Returns asked for shall be published weekly in The London Gazette. The whole of the Report of the Veterinary Department for the year 1874
788
is in the hands of the printers, the greater part of it has been revised, and it will be ready for publication shortly.

ENDOWED SCHOOLS COMMISSIONERS—THE EXETER ENDOWED SCHOOLS SCHEME.—QUESTION.
SIR EDWARD WATKINasked the Vice President of the Council, Whether, in reference to the "Exeter Endowed Schools Scheme," it is true that that scheme was signed and approved by Lord Lyttelton and Mr. H. J. Roby, under date 22nd May 1874; and that, after it was so signed and approved, an important addition was made to Clause 72; and, if such addition was so made, if he would explain to the House at what date, on whose suggestion, and with what object was it made?
VISCOUNT SANDON: Sir, I am somewhat troubled by the form of the Question, but I will answer it as satisfactorily as I can. "The Exeter Endowed Schools Scheme" was forwarded to the Committee of Council on Education with the signatures of Lord Lyttelton and Mr. Roby attached to it, as appears in the Parliamentary Paper of the 22nd of May, 1874. Since that time various objections have been made to it, which, under the Act of 1873, the Committee of Council was bound to consider. Some of the changes proposed by the objectors were agreed to by the Committee of Council, and others were rejected, and after a time the scheme was approved by the Lord President of the Council. Under the Act it must lie upon the Table for two months, and during that time it is competent for any member to move the rejection of the scheme. If such should be the case, I shall be happy on the part of the Government to explain the reasons which led to the changes that have been made in the scheme; but it would not be in accordance with the usage of the Committee of Council for me to state, in answer to a Question, all the details which the hon. Member requests me to mention. I may add that the course pursued in this case with regard to the scheme which has been laid upon the Table is the same one which has been adopted with regard to others.
MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he wished to know whether the scheme which had been laid upon the Table, and to which the names of Lord Lyttelton and Mr. Roby were attached, was the scheme signed by Lord Lyttelton and Mr. Roby, and approved by them?
VISCOUNT SANDON: I think there can be no doubt whatever about that, because the original scheme was published in the locality; and this scheme is different from that, as an alteration has been made in it.
MR. W. E. FORSTER: I am afraid, the n, I must ask what that alteration is.
VISCOUNT SANDON: I think, with the indulgence of the House, it is hardly fitting to enter into an argument on the subject now.
MR. W. E. FORSTER: I do not ask my noble Friend for any argument in favour of the alteration; but, inasmuch as it is before the House as a scheme signed by those two gentlemen, and it appears—it may be through some mistake, but, at any rate, it so happens—that the scheme which appears to have been signed by them was really not signed by them. I ask what is the addition to the scheme?
VISCOUNT SANDON: The simplest thing would be to lay the whole scheme on the Table, and that, I think, would be a very desirable thing. The signatures of the Commissioners are attached to this scheme because my right hon. Friend objected last year to the practice of introducing schemes without the names of the Commissioners being attached to them.
MR. W. E. FORSTER: I am sorry to detain the House, but my objection was that the Commissioners should be made to appear as attaching their signatures to a portion of the scheme which they did not sign.
VISCOUNT SANDON: The simplest plan will be to lay upon the Table the alteration which has been made. There is no mystery whatever about it.
MR. NEWDEGATE: I wish to ask the noble Viscount whether the Education Department have not under the Act of 1873 power to alter a scheme after it has been proposed by the Commissioners who are now superseded?
MR. HORSMAN: What my right hon. Friend wishes to know, I presume, is whether the signature of the Commissioners is appended to that part of the
790
scheme which has been altered since they signed it originally.
VISCOUNT SANDON: There is no doubt whatever that the Committee of Council has power to alter a scheme under the circumstances to which my hon. Friend refers. With regard to the question of the right hon. Gentleman, I think the simplest thing will be to lay the scheme, with the alterations, on the Table, so that the House may be in a position to understand the matter fully.
MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that the words attached to the scheme were—" We hereby signify our approval of the scheme.—(Signed) LYTTELTON and J. H. ROBY." It was stated that it was signed by the Commissioners on the 22nd of May, 1875, but long before that date they had ceased to be Commissioners. He asked the noble Lord if, under all the circumstances, it would not be the best course to withdraw the scheme and to place a fresh one before the House?
VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, the date given must be a clerical error. He would make inquiry of the Charity Commissioners.
MR. W. E. FORSTERgave Notice that he would take an early opportunity of asking the Speaker whether the circumstances did not require a new scheme?

ARMY—KNIGHTSBRIDGE BARRACKS.

  QUESTION.
  CAPTAIN HOMEasked the Secretary of State for War, If his attention has been directed to a report in "The Times" of June 21st, of a Deputation to the First Commissioner of Works respecting "the discreditable condition of the Kensington Road," attributed by certain residents in that neighbourhood to "the existence of the Knightsbridge Barracks and their natural associations;" and, whether he is in possession of any information proving the truth or untruth of this and other similar statements which have been recently made reflecting on the character and conduct of the three regiments of Household Cavalry while quartered in Hyde Park?
  MR. GATHORNE HARDY, in reply, said, that his attention had been very much directed to this subject, since the deputation referred to. First of all he

  791
  received a letter from the clergyman at Windsor who had care of the Household Troops, and who was indignant at the charge made against them, as he knew them to be incapable of the conduct attributed to them. He had likewise received many communications on the subject from the commanding officers, the police, and others, and it was universally stated that the conduct of the Household Cavalry at the Knightsbridge Barracks was altogether unexceptionable. No complaints had been made about them by the police or any other persons. Their officers were extremely strict, and they did not frequent any bad house at all. They did not go to houses in the immediate neighbourhood, which he was afraid were kept up by customers of a totally different kind. No complaints on military grounds had been made to the Commander-in-Chief respecting these soldiers, nor was their any foundation for the assertion that they were the cause of any discreditable associations in the neighbourhood of Kensington Gore. His noble Friend the First Commissioner of Works desired him to repudiate in the strongest language the idea that he said anything injurious to the character of the soldiers in these barracks. As to the Cavalry in the Regent's Park Barracks, no complaint had been made of them and no complaint had been made respecting the conduct of the Cavalry in the streets of Windsor. Therefore, he thought the House would agree with him that the officers and soldiers had good reason to feel aggrieved at having imputations cast upon them which they in no way deserved.

THE QUEEN v. CASTRO.—QUESTION.
MR. WHALLEYasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to letters addressed to him soliciting the return to the senders of various original documents purporting to show that the convict Castro is Roger Tichborne, Whether he will be good enough to state why such letters are not acknowledged or replied to; and, what are the objections, if any, to return such documents to the senders, seeing that the Eight honourable gentleman has declared it to be his intention not to take any action thereon, or allow them to be published or inspected by members of this House?
MR. ASSHETON CROSS: I am afraid. Sir, I have already given an answer to that Question more than once—namely, that it is the invariable practice of the Home Office that documents sent there have to be registered and then become public property, and are never returned to the persons sending them.
MR. WHALLEYsaid, he was not aware that the right hon. Gentleman had answered the Question before. What he would ask the right hon. Gentleman was, whether he still persisted in refusing permission to inspect those documents? ["Order."]
MR. SPEAKER: I must point out to the hon. Member that the Question having been put and answered cannot be put a second time.

ARMY—SHORT SERVICE.—QUESTION.
SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLasked the Secretary of State for War, If he is in a position to state the general nature of the arrangement to render the system of short service in the Army compatible with the conditions of service in India?
MR. GATHORNE HARDY, in reply, said, that he had not yet come to any conclusion on the subject, but that he proposed to confer with the India Office with a view to placing the matter on a more satisfactory footing.

SUPPLY.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS.

  RESOLUTION.
  MR. WHITWELLrose to move—
  "That the case of the Teachers now serving in inspected Elementary Schools in England and Wales, and who were employed as recognised Teachers under Government inspection from the 21st December 1846, to the 6th of August 1851, and of those who were so employed from the latter date to the issue of the Revised Code in 1861, claims the consideration of the House of Commons, not only with regard to the Teachers themselves, but also in the interests of education."
  In bringing the subject before the House he admitted that the Government had taken it into careful consideration, and had made some improvements in the position of the teachers to which his Motion referred. But there were still

  793
  some points to which he thought the attention of the noble Lord (Viscount Sandon) might be usefully directed. According to the Minute which had been placed in the hands of members that morning various changes were being introduced that would impose on the teachers serious restrictions. One had reference to the number of years during which a teacher must have been engaged in an elementary school to entitle him to participate in the advantages of the Minute; whilst another excluded from consideration the claims of teachers whose salary had for seven years been £120 per annum. He trusted that such alterations would be made as would entitle these persons to have their claims for pensions considered. All that he wanted was that teachers who were fairly entitled from length of service should have their claims to pensions considered in competition with those of others. There were many teachers with salaries just above £120 per annum who would wish to retire from age and ill-health, and the managers of the schools were ready to supplement their pensions if the Government would only grant them £20 a-year each.
  MR. FORSYTHsaid, he was extremely glad to find from a Paper on the Table that the Government had done nearly all that was desired. He joined in asking the Vice President of the Council to re-consider that part of the new Minute which limited pensions to those male teachers whose salaries did not amount to £120 per annum, and female teachers whose salaries did not exceed £60 per annum. He suggested that every case should be taken upon its merits, and that a hard-and-fast line should not be drawn.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he was glad to receive the new Minute that morning, because it was one that the late Government would have issued if they had remained in office. The Select Committee who considered this subject came to the conclusion that these teachers had no legal claim, but that it was one deserving of consideration. Since then fresh evidence had come out; strong speeches were made in both Houses of Parliament at the time the original Minutes were passed, and it was impossible to read them without feeling that the teachers might fairly have inferred there was an expectation
  794
  that pensions would be granted. A small pension might meet the justice of the case in many hard and deserving instances. He supported the appeal of the hon. Members for Kendal and Marylebone that the Vice President would not fetter himself by the restrictions laid down in this Minute, and feel that by the letter of the Minute he was precluded by a technical difficulty from meeting deserving cases.
  MR. PEASEthanked the noble Lord the Vice President for doing this substantial act of justice. If these persons had not a legal claim, they certainly had a strong moral claim on the Government.
  MR. HOLT, while expressing his satisfaction at the course taken by the Government, thought that the Minute on the subject was somewhat too restricted, and might be extended with advantage.

PHYSICAL EDUCATION.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. BUTLER-JOHNSTONE, in rising to call the attention of the House to the desirability of introducing physical education in the Public Elementary Schools of the country, said:—Sir, I wish to call the attention of the House to the desirability of dealing with the subject in the manner indicated by my Notice, and to say that I think it is time that something of the sort were done. When the education of the people of this country was first seriously undertaken, so many difficulties—social, religious, and financial difficulties—confronted its first promoters, that it was not to be expected that they should burden themselves with more than they could manage, and they wisely confined their attention to the inculcation of reading, writing, and arithmetic. But these early difficulties are now happily surmounted, and universal compulsory education is fairly established in the country. The time seems therefore arrived when we may ask ourselves whether something essential has not been omitted, and if we think that it has, then with as much speed and as small a cost as possible, to endeavour to repair the omission. Now, taking all the wants of the people of this country into consideration, I think it may fairly be maintained that physical education is at least as necessary as intellectual education;

  795
  in some respects more. In all these cases where physical power is impaired by disease and neglect, and by ignorance of the elementary rules of hygiene, some knowledge, some elementary knowledge of these laws, with practical rules deduced from these laws, is at least as necessary as reading, writing, and arithmetic. But I do not wish to put physical education into competition with these subjects; it is not a rival but an auxiliary, and if rightly understood, and rightly and wisely applied, a very valuable auxiliary. Now, no one can have studied the statistics which I am about to lay before the House without being convinced that all is not satisfactory in the physique of the people of the country. Side by side with great stamina and splendid physical development, we find the following facts:—Out of 1,000 recruits, on an average of four years, 408 are rejected for imperfect physical development. Out of 5,500 boys applying for service in the Navy, a good deal more than one-half are rejected on the same grounds; out of 530 men applying for railway employment 290 are rejected—92 for insufficient breadth of chest—in a metropolitan suburban workhouse visited by an eminent London physician, 23 per cent of the children under 15 were found suffering from chronic diseases. In several ragged schools visited by the same gentleman, 50 per cent of the children are found affected with deformation of the spine, chest complaints, and strumous diseases. And a large manufacturer in Nelson Street, Liverpool, says it is a piteous sight to see the little girls with crooked spines and awry necks who come to his counter for payment on Saturday nights. Most people will agree that there is an eloquence of a melancholy sort in these statistics, and if we can do anything to remedy the evil complained of, it is our duty to make the attempt. It is scarcely necessary to dwell on the advantages which would result to the country from improving the physique of the population. Increased physical power means increased value of productive work; a decrease in depravity and disease means a decrease in poor rates and police rates, for ill-health and disease are too often causes of misery, poverty, and crime. But it is so obvious that the sum total of the happiness and well-being of the community would be
  796
  augmented if disease, mortality, and depravity were diminished, that it seems like an insult to people's understandings to dwell on these obvious advantages, and I prefer asking the attention of the House to the question of the practicability of attaining these desirable results. Now what is physical education? Unfortunately gymnastics, drill, athletics, and what goes in genteel girls' schools by the ambitious title of calisthenics, are too often jumbled up in people's minds under the common appellation of physical education, and when one talks of introducing physical education into boys' schools, the drill sergeant rises up before men's eyes as the embodied emblem of physical education. Now no one, Sir, has a greater respect than I have for the drill sergeant. He is a great, a useful, and even a solemn institution. I should like to see every able-bodied man in England pass through his reforming hands. But that is another and a totally different question from the one which I am discussing. You only degrade physical education, and defeat the very object which you wish to attain of preparing the whole male population for military service, by calling in prematurely the aid of the drill sergeant, in the case of children who require a whole course of preparatory training in order to make them of the best use in the drill sergeant's hands. You must work your cotton into yarn before it can be woven into cloth. By physical education I distinctly mean the inculcation of some sound, though elementary, principles of hygiene, combined with the practice of simple, though scientifically devised, exercises founded on sound physiological and anatomical principles. Now these two things ought to go together. Sound theory and wholesome practice are here, as in everything else, closely connected together. With reference to the first branch I hardly think its utility will be contested. Among otherwise well-educated people such unfortunate ignorance on the subject of hygiene prevails that we cannot be surprised if in the masses of the people the grossest and most unfortunate delusions on the subject are rife. It is all very well passing Public Health Bills, Pollution of Rivers Bills, and Food and Drugs Bills—an antecedent condition to the utility of all such measures is that their machinery should

  797
  be loyally and willingly worked by people possessed of the conviction of their value and utility. Now the value of fresh air, pure water, and wholesome food, is scarcely appreciated at all by the great majority of the people, and until you have opened their eyes, your labour will be more or less thrown away. With reference to the second branch of my definition, I think I can best illustrate my meaning by referring to what other nations have done on the subject. The lead in these matters has undoubtedly been taken by Sweden, and that owing to the genius of a man who was neither a politician nor a drill sergeant, but a poet and a patriot—I mean the great Ling. Ling's idea was a patriotic idea; he wished to raise the small population of his native country, by the physical training of each individual Swede, into a position to resist the encroachments of its dangerous neighbours, at that time seriously menacing its independence and very existence. With this view, he invented a thoroughly rational system of gymnastics, founded on physiological, anatomical, and mechanical laws, and which he divided into educational, military, medical, and athletic gymnastics. In 1813 he induced the Swedish Government to establish a large central institution at Stockholm for the training of teachers, who, after they had pursued a theoretical and practical course of instruction, and had passed an examination, were diffused throughout the different schools of the country; and their can be no doubt that much of the fine physical appearance of the population of Sweden is owing to this widely diffused early physical training. In 1845, the Prussian Government sent a Major Rothstein into Sweden to report about another matter, and he was so much impressed with this Swedish system of gymnastics that, on his return, he persuaded the Prussian Government to adopt it, and now not only throughout Prussia, but throughout the whole of Germany, and notably in Würtemburg and Saxony, the system is adopted, and central institutions for the training of teachers are established at Berlin, Stuttgard, Dresden, and other places. Italy, too, has not been backward, and has paid particular attention to an important branch of the subject—namely, the physical training of the girls. Hungary, too, in consequence of the initiative of the
  798
  late able Minister of Education, Baron Otoos, has made physical training compulsory in all her schools. Russia, too, after having long adopted physical training in her military and naval academies, has now instituted it for all the primary and secondary schools of the country. I have mentioned the case of Saxony. I wish now to call the particular attention of the House to the case of Saxony. Saxony is a manufacturing country, and here, as in the manufacturing districts of Prussia, it was found that there was such a deterioration of physique that the numbers in the conscription lists did not keep pace with the increase of the population. But since physical education has been made compulsory this falling off has been arrested and no more complaints have been heard. I think this fact is well worthy of the consideration of a manufacturing people like ourselves. Indeed, go into the manufacturing districts and what do we see? Little children whose quick brains and stunted frames seem to require rather physical than intellectual fostering, and where physical education ought scarcely to hold a secondary place in any wise system of education. Now contrast what has been done by other nations with what we have been doing in this respect. Except a few unscientific attempts at drill, absolutely nothing has been done for the physical education of the people of this country. One reason of this undoubtedly is that in no country in the world is so much done in the way of athletics and outdoor sports as is done in England. But I would call the attention of the House to this fact—that it is not among the classes who habitually practice athletic sports that I am especially advocating the introduction of physical education. There are our public schools, our higher and middleclass schools, the Universities and Colleges of the country. But where are the athletic sports in the crowded alleys of our large towns? It is no answer to the complaint that large classes are deprived of the advantages of physical exercises to say that other classes are devoted to those exercises! The fact is England is a nation of contrasts. Side by side with vast accumulations of wealth there are ugly patches of misery and wretchedness. Side by side with splendid physical development there is no physical education at all. It is to

  799
  remedy this state of things, to raise the physical level of the whole population, that I am advocating to-day the cause of physical education in the schools of the country. Before I sit down I wish to call the particular attention of the House to an experiment on a small scale, of this very thing which I am advocating, which has been tried through the public spirit of an eminent London physician, Dr. Roth, of Wimpole Street, who has devoted so much attention to this subject, and with remarkably successful results. Dr. Roth instructed gratuitously a number of female teachers who had been sent to him by the Educational Union and other societies, by giving them lectures and teaching them Ling's free educational exercises; and after a course of a few months they were enabled to instruct their schools in what they had learnt; and at the present moment some 400 or 500 girls are receiving physical training through this public spirited movement on the part of Dr. Roth, and what is important to note is that these teachers write to Dr. Roth and tell him that they find their efficiency as teachers in other respects decidedly increased by the physical training which they are able to give their pupils. Now, Sir, it had once been my intention to move for a Royal Commission to consider the whole subject—The necessity for the introduction of physical education and the best means of introducing it—but I am so convinced that a cause like this can only be advanced by the Government taking the initiative in the matter, that I should be only too glad to leave it in their hands, to see if they cannot further the cause of physical education in the schools of England.

ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACT (1870)—COMPULSORY ATTENDANCE—CASE OF MRS. MARKS.—RESOLUTION.
LORD ESLINGTON, in rising to call attention to the case of Mrs. Marks, as reported in "The Times" of the 4th day of May, and to move—
"That, in the opinion of this House, the cordial co-operation of School Boards and Boards of Guardians within their respective districts is essential to the just and beneficial exercise of the powers conferred upon School Boards of enforcing attendance at school upon children of the labouring poor,"
said, in bringing this subject before the
800
House he had not come down to run a-muck against school boards, or to blame school-board officials; the circumstances of which he was about to complain arose out of the execution of the laws. He had to point out a distinct grievance which required a remedy at the hands of the House, and he should suggest a remedy which he thought at once simple, reasonable, and efficacious. The case of Mrs. Marks occurred in the City Division of the London School Board. Her husband had been in the employment of a respectable person at the East End of London for 12 years. At the end of that time he was seized with paralysis. For six months she maintained him and three children by her labour. In November last he got worse, became a hopeless lunatic, and was transferred to a lunatic asylum at Stoke. Mrs. Marks was soon afterwards confined of twins; one of them died, and the other required the greatest care to rear. The eldest of her children was a girl of about 11 years. Mrs. Marks got 5s. a-week and four loaves from the parish. The rent of her room was 3s. 3d. per week. Her baby was ordered a large allowance of milk as necessary to life, and it cost weekly 4s. 4½d. The school fee was 4d. per week. That made 8s. in outgoings from the small earnings of Mrs. Marks. To support herself and children she had to work hard all day from 8 in the morning till 8 o'clock at night, her eldest daughter remaining at home to attend to the delicate infant. In April last the school-board officer called at the house. Mrs. Marks was not at home; the officer said to the girl—"You little beggar, you are getting your matter into fine trouble. I have just seen the relieving officer. Your relief will be stopped, and you will all be turned over to the workhouse." This case was not an isolated one, but only a specimen of several cases. One of these cases he would mention. It was that of the widow of a Frenchman who was for years manager of a white lead manufactory, and resided at Lewisham. The man was for seven years before his death afflicted with a disease of the brain, and during that time his wife maintained the whole family, consisting of her husband, herself, and four children. Her sight failing somewhere about the time of her husband's death, the poor woman was driven to washing

801
and in-door work in order to save her children and herself from the necessity of going into the workhouse. Her rent was 3s. per week, and the Guardians had been compelled to stop her weekly allowance of 4s. 6d., the law being imperative that no out-door relief should be granted to people who, having children of school age, failed to send them to school. Even zealous educationists would admit the hardship of this case, but would urge that it was one of the incidents of a compulsory system, and could not be avoided. To such people he would say that the imposition of compulsory education, though perfectly legal, was a difficult and delicate matter, and could not be successfully carried out, unless supported by public opinion. Further, he would say that public opinion, high and low, was deeply stirred by occurrences such as this; and if their occurrence had the effect of creating in the minds of the upper classes—between whom and the lowest classes there had always been a feeling of sympathy—a distrust of the compulsory system, how much more likely was that feeling to be deepened in the minds of the poorer classes, who were closely affected by the action of the law, and who, at the present moment, were sullenly and silently submissive to its provisions. He therefore asked the House seriously to consider whether it was not possible to provide a remedy for this state of things. The law provided as a condition of the granting of out-door relief to parents that all children between 5 and 13 should receive elementary education in reading, writing, and arithmetic, and it also provided that the Guardians should give such further relief, if any, as might be necessary for such purpose. What he would suggest, therefore, was that, if necessary, the law should be so altered as to enable the Guardians to make grants sufficient to free the parents' labour and to enable them to provide substitutes, in the performance of household and such-like duties, for the children whom the law carried away from their homes. The cost of doing this might seem to be large; but, as education was in time to extinguish pauperism, he could not help thinking it would be money well expended. The school boards themselves were in difficulty on this point. Mr. Francis Peek—a distinguished member of the London School
802
Board, and a relative of an hon. Member of that House—had stated that, being elected to administer a law which said that attendance must be compulsory, the school boards felt themselves in great difficulty when cases such as the present arose. The law was frequently broken in such cases; but it was not a proper or satisfactory position for boards to be placed in. In the Act of 1870 certain exceptions were admitted—namely, where children were prevented by sickness or any other unavoidable cause of absence, that should be deemed a reasonable excuse for not attending school. Why should not a school board be invested with the discretion to say that the nursing of an infant sister or brother was an unavoidable cause? This would meet many cases; and an alternative suggestion which would meet others was, that the Guardians should have the power of giving in relief, in addition to the school pence, a sum sufficient to enable the parent to send an infant to a temporary home. That would be an investment bearing high and valuable interest. He implored the House to consider this matter for the sake of reconciling the working classes to compulsory education; for if these cases of hardship continued to occur, we should raise an opposition which it would be difficult to cope with. When the Act first came into operation such cases did not occur, but when the officers of the school boards began to sweep up the waifs and strays they arose in great numbers, and the longer a system of this kind continued the tendency increased on the part of the officers to perform their duty in a perfunctory manner, and sweep in those waifs and strays rather in a peremptory manner, thereby augmenting the popular indignation in the courts and alleys of our great cities. In reply to a Question put by him on the 6th of May, the Vice President of the Department (Viscount Sandon) said that all children between the ages of 10 and 13 were obliged to attend school 10 hours a-week; but the London by-law required their attendance for as many hours as school was open; and he would suggest, as an alternative, that only five attendances of two hours each in the week should be required in exceptional cases, and that, if necessary, at a "night school." The noble Lord concluded by moving his Resolution.
MR. SANDFORDseconded the Resolution, and mentioned that the Board of Guardians of Maldon had been applied to in several instances by able-bodied men for relief, in consequence of some of their children being deprived of employment through the operation of the Act of 1872. When the Local Government Board were communicated with on the subject, they replied that they considered that out-door relief when given while a man continued in employment would be relief in aid of wages, and that the proper course for Guardians to adopt in such cases would be to offer admission into the workhouse for the man and his family. He should like to know whether the moral and social progress of the population would be best promoted by having a few children less at school, or having the whole of the remainder of the family in a workhouse? A recent Return of the expenditure of the Metropolitan Board abundantly established the charges of extravagance that were made against it. Architects on the staff were paid both by fees and commissions; pupil-teachers were paid almost double what they used to receive; the salaries of teachers were better than those of curates; and there was a large staff of "visitors," who ought to be designated spies and informers. The character of the education given to pauper children by these school boards, which, as he understood, were appointed only to supplement the education of the country, would surprise many hon. Gentlemen. They were to be taught reading, writing, and arithmetic, the history of England, geography, elementary drawing, music, domestic economy, algebra, and geometry. He did not think it was ever intended by the Legislature that pauper children should receive such a high-class education. He had heard of a school in Mayfair where a girl had been taken from her needlework to attend to a drawing class. Of what possible use could a knowledge of drawing be to young women intended for domestic service—except to enable them to caricature their mistresses—especially as it appeared that needlework was a branch of education in which these girls were particularly deficient, and which it was especially desirable they should be taught? Our Colonies were calling upon us to give them labourers and not clerks, and he protested against the miserable
804
gentility inculcated upon those who were taught that it was disgraceful to work with their hands, and who were ashamed of the horny hands of manual industry. It was the sure sign of the decay of a country when its people looked down upon useful manual labour, and the sort of education he had described was certainly not that which ought to be carried out by compulsion. As to the compulsory part of the measure, it appeared to be carried to excess. Last week a poor woman named Turner was summoned by an officer of the Board for not sending her children to school. She pleaded that she had a child suffering from fever, and that the other child was kept at home to mind it. She was fined 3s., with the option of going to prison for three days. She had to go to prison. This woman was a widow, and in great distress, and what would have been her condition if the people of the house had not during her absence looked after her children? In his humble opinion, the forms of the notices given by the School Board were absolutely illegal. These notices were to the following effect:—
"Take notice that you have been guilty of a breach of the law in that you have neglected to send your child to an efficient school, whereby you have rendered yourself liable to be apprehended and brought before a magistrate."
A child might be receiving efficient instruction at home from its parents, in which case the latter would certainly not be liable to proceedings. During the last year the parents of not less than 78,000 had been harassed by these notices, of whom 6,016 had been summoned and 4,000 fined. Some of the persons summoned before a police magistrate had declared that it was their intention to expatriate themselves, and to seek a country in which such laws did not exist. He sympathized with such views; for, if they searched the statute book they would find no legislation couched in a spirit so offensive and un-English as this Education Act. Of all the despotisms and tyrannies with which men could be afflicted, there was no tyranny so oppressive, and no despotism so intolerable, as the despotism of the pedant and the tyranny of the prig.
Amendment proposed,
To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words

805
"in the opinion of this House, the cordial cooperation of School Boards and Boards of Guardians within their respective districts is essential to the just and beneficial exercise of the powers conferred upon School Boards of enforcing attendance at school upon children of the labouring poor,"—(Lord Eslington,)
—instead thereof.
MR. EVANSsaid, that in the days of Dr. Johnson, whom the hon. Member who had just sat down might probably regard as a pedant, the fears which he held as to the spread of education were much more common. When it was said in Dr. Johnson's presence that if children were taught they would become unfit for the duties of common life, Dr. Johnson replied that if a very few were educated they would be vain of their accomplishments. If a very few persons, he said, were laced waistcoats, they would be vain of the distinction, but if everybody were laced waistcoats a person ceased to be proud of it; and he argued that, in the same way, if all were educated, none would be ashamed of being engaged in menial occupations. Having been chairman of a school board for more than four years, he could bear testimony to the fact that cases like those referred to by the noble Lord (Lord Eslington) were among the most painful that came before them. It was not a question of school fees, because the school board had the power to deal with that, but it was a question affecting the earnings of the children. A woman might be left a widow, or might be deserted by her husband. If she had a family she found it convenient to keep one at home, or a child might be earning wages, and if they were stopped the whole family might have to go into the workhouse. He should be most thankful if some plan could be found by which these cases might be met. There was no doubt that the Boards of Guardians knew more of the real circumstances of the poor than the school boards, and it was very desirable that their should be a good understanding, if not some co-operation between them and the school boards. It was most desirable that these cases of hardships should not be multiplied. Among the poorest class of the population the sending of their children to school, especially on compulsion, was very distasteful, and every case of this kind tended to increase the opposition which unfortunately existed. If these
806
cases could be met a great benefit would be conferred upon the country, and the cause of education, which everybody wished to see promoted, except perhaps the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Sandford), would be greatly benefited.
MR. A. MILLSagreed with the hon. Member who had just spoken in the advantage of the fullest co-operation between school boards and Boards of Guardians. It was said that a medical officer of the Poor Law would not without a fee give a certificate that a child was unable to attend school. He thought the medical officer of the Poor Law ought to be instructed to give certificates of that sort, or that the school boards should pay medical officers to do so. With regard to the harshness which had been imputed to the London School Board in connection with this matter, he thought account had not been taken of the great difficulties which the Board experienced in carrying out compulsory by-laws. He believed that gross injustice would be done by enforcing the by-laws in the case, for instance, of a child who was kept at home to "mind baby," and whoso parent could not afford to pay a person to do that work. In some cases the difficulty as to attendance at school was got over by an employer making arrangements by which a child in his employment could attend school in the evening. He (Mr. A. Mills) believed he had acted rightly in sanctioning such arrangements. With some persons it was necessary to deal gently, and with others firmly. A woman who had a large number of children, and allowed them to run about the streets instead of sending them to school, was called before the Board, and asked to account for her conduct. She said, in a very impudent tone—"I don't look to you for sympathy; I look to a higher power." While we were not to deal harshly, if the compulsory power were withdrawn, it would be impossible to carry out the system. He believed the Earl of Shaftesbury was mistaken in saying that the members of school boards were quite indifferent to the hardships which a too strict administration of the law would inflict on parents.
MR. W. E. FORSTER, having introduced the two Acts which had been referred to, wished to state what was his meaning and the meaning of the late Government in pressing those measures

807
upon the House. Before he did so he would make a remark upon an observation of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. The House must not suppose that in proposing an Education Bill giving a power to compel the attendance of children at school the late Government were not thoroughly conscious of the difficulty and danger of that undertaking. It would have been more difficult and more dangerous if they had not felt confident that that measure would be administered in the country with wisdom and justice. He believed that generally throughout the country the school boards had shown remarkable discretion, great industry, and sympathy with the poor in the way in which they had put into operation the two Acts in question. He was convinced that the school boards had acted with care and judgment; for if they had not done so, we should have a state of things very different from what existed. When cases of individual hardship were examined it was found that they did not always bear out the impression which was at first formed. For example, in the case of Mrs. Marks it was at first believed that she was forced to become a pauper in consequence of her child going to school, but it turned out that she had previously been in receipt of relief; and he should be very glad if hon. Members, before they took for granted that a great hardship had been inflicted, would thoroughly satisfy themselves of all the particulars of the case. It might have been expected to be a most unpopular act to interfere between the parent and his child; but, as a matter of fact, public opinion in every town in which there were compulsory by-laws was in favour of maintaining these laws. And that proved that there were not many cases of injustice and oppression in the carrying out of these Acts. He was not afraid of stating that fact, and of challenging any one in that House to contradict it. In reply to the remarks of his noble Friend, who thought that the Act of 1873 limited the power of the Guardians to give such relief as would enable a parent to send a child to school, he might state that when he framed that Act he was informed on the best authority that the Guardians were bound by the present law to give relief when there was a real want; and, consequently, if
808
the parents were put in a position of losing in such a way that they ought to have relief the Guardians were bound to give it. It was because he was thoroughly satisfied on this point that he did not think it necessary to insert any provision in the Bill in regard to it. Cases might, indeed, arise in which a man was not a pauper, but who just managed to get on, and who would be compelled to apply for relief if he lost the wages of one or two of his children. Here, however, the question raised was not merely between the education of the child and the relief of the parent, but it was the other very important question between in-door and out-door relief; and there was a strong feeling that it was very dangerous to encourage out-door relief to able-bodied men. If he were disposed to offer any advice to the Government, it would be that they ought to deal in these cases as leniently as possible, and stretch a point in favour of out-door relief. In any event it was desirable that the children should be educated and not be left without any chance in life at all; but the parent ought not to suffer in consequence by being sent to the workhouse; and therefore he should be glad if such cases could be settled without too strict an attention to the arguments in favour of in-door as against out-door relief. He did not think that there was much objection to the terms of the noble Lord's Resolution; but he hoped that it would not be pressed on the attention of the Government, as it implied a censure on the Department. He thought that more intimate communication was required between the Education Department and the Local Government Board, with a view to their more harmonious action. His noble Friend was wrong in supposing that school boards did not already possess the power of abstaining from prosecuting when they knew the absence of a child from school was due to illness or other unavoidable cause. There was one point on which he thought the Local Government Board went too far. A letter had been sent to them asking whether they would consider that the temporary severe illness of a parent was such a case as might excuse a child from attending school. He thought it was rather a hasty reply on the part of the Board, when they answered that they did not think so. In the case of a permanent

809
illness it would of course be different, for there they had to choose between the whole future of the child and the parents' need. He regretted the tone of the remarks of the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Sandford). As to the complaint about the salaries given to teachers, he might observe that any a them pt to lower them must result in inefficient education and the waste of the public money. For his own part, he rejoiced to find that the salaries of the teachers were rising throughout the country. There never was any expenditure more likely to benefit the working classes than that which would procure an abler and better paid body of teachers for their children. The hon. Gentleman seemed to think the head masters of our largest schools only had the salaries of curates; but he might have compared them to the income of Bishops. At the close of his speech the hon. Gentleman sympathized with those who said they would expatriate themselves rather than submit to a law which compelled parents to educate their children. He thought, on the other hand, that a great many persons would be glad to banish themselves from the country some years hence if in the meantime the children were not properly educated.
VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, he wished, with reference to the pensions, to express his great satisfaction at the way in which Her Majesty's Government had been treated. They felt decidedly that the teachers had no positive claim to pensions; but after the debates of 1846, when the Leaders of the different parties spoke strongly on the subject, and considering the language that was held afterwards, it was felt that the teachers had a moral claim which it would be unwise for any Government to disregard. He would briefly explain why the Government adopted the scale of pensions—£6,500 a-year—laid down in 1851. The circumstance had hitter to been overlooked that the noble Lord who was President of the Council in 1851 was the late Lord Lansdowne, who in that year put the interpretation on the Minute he had himself issued in 1846. The teachers might, therefore, regard that interpretation as the proper one. The points raised by his hon. Friend them ember for Kendal (Mr. Whitwell) would be treated with very respectful consideration by the Government, although at present he was unable to give
810
any pledge on the subject. He might claim for the Government a desire to do what they could to promote physical education in schools. He had every reason to believe that the substitution of military drill in place of the ordinary school drill would be attended with very advantageous results. He declined to give any pledge as to any further steps at present, as the few hours in which the children could be instructed must be spent to their best advantage. He had been asked to discourage the large sites which the London School Board were buying; but he held it was a wise expenditure of public money in a densely-crowded City to provide sufficient playgrounds for the children of the poorer classes. In those playgrounds a good deal of physical education would go on, though, perhaps, not in a cut-and-dried form. As to the remarks of the noble Lord them ember for South Northumberland (Lord Eslington), his own feelings and those of the Government were very much in unison with them respecting the very great difficulty and delicacy of the question of overhauling the poor of London and dragging their children to school. It was, no doubt, a very painful process to drag children from the arms of unwilling parents to school. It was painful also to have to pay these domiciliary visits; and nothing but the gravest necessity—a necessity acknowledged by the people themselves—would justify the placing of such powers in the hands of the school boards. He was convinced, however, that some such powers were necessary in dealing with the population of our large cities and in grappling with the ignorance and the misery of the lowest classes their. Every other means had been tried and every other means had failed. Had his noble Friend (Lord Eslington), who drew so dark a picture, ever thought of the other side of the picture? Had he remembered that in London there was a population something like equal to that of Scotland, that 77,000 notices and 6,000 summonses had been issued, and that 200 visiting officers were at work; and had he reflected how very few complaints comparatively had been made? It was a perfect marvel that there were so few, and the fact spoke volumes for the judgment and discretion of the School Board and its officers in dealing with so varied a population and one so touchy

811
of any interference. He could hardly imagine a more difficult task than that of visiting in all the courts and alleys of London, not backed by any policeman, even in the most horrible of these places; and yet the School Board officers discharged their duties in the most noble manner and with general discretion. As to the remedy proposed, the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. W. E. Forster) had thrown great light on this question, showing that the Guardians had full licence to pay the parent the loss of the child's wages, and he had no doubt that the School Board would give a liberal interpretation to the general law on this subject. It was difficult to say whether the workhouse should be offered as an alternative in such cases; but this was a point more within the province of the President of the Local Government Board than of his own. As to the Resolution of his noble Friend, he hoped it would not be pressed, because the Government would not be justified in accepting a Resolution which seemed to cast a slur upon the action of the school boards and the Boards of Guardians. The Government felt that nothing could be more desirable than that these two bodies should co-operate well together. But the cases showing the want of such co-operation were not yet sufficient to warrant such a censure as his noble Friend proposed. His hon. Friend them ember for Maldon (Mr. Sandford) had taken too strong a view of what was going on in London, and he would ask him to qualify, upon reflection, the somewhat invidious epithets of "spies" and "informers" which he had used towards the officers of the school boards. Then when the hon. Gentleman asked whether the instruction given was suitable for pauper children, he (Viscount Sandon) would point out that the schools were not intended only for pauper children, but for any class of children who were not able or willing to go to other schools. He thought it a very wise expenditure of public money to set up these great buildings, to get as good teachers as possible, and to give the most thorough education they could both in the interests of the children and of the country. This seemed to be a period when public opinion was oscillating rather rapidly in a direction contrary to that from which it had started. Five years ago the Report of the Duke of Newcastle's Commission
812
had stirred up a strong feeling in favour of education, especially the education of the out-door pauper class. Now, if we did not take care, these children would slip out of our fingers. He hoped Parliament would not, through tenderness for a few exceptional cases of hardship, forget the great object of getting rid of the taint of the pauper class in all our large towns. He was not indifferent to the sufferings of the poor in these oases; but Parliament was bound to hold the balance fairly between the school boards, who had very arduous duties to discharge, and the people with whom they had to deal.
MR. SCOURFIELDsaid, that, as one who had always opposed compulsory education, he was rather satisfied with the tone of the debate. He still retained his objections to compulsion, and believed this system was introduced in order to prove that the people who had advocated such an enormous amount of school accommodation should not be false prophets. There were two facts bearing upon this point taken from the last Report of the Committee of Council. School accommodation was provided for 2,861,319 children, while the average attendance was 1,678,759, so that there was an excess of school accommodation for 1,200,000 children above the number actually attending. Another fact was worth remembering. The present Government were pledged, on entering office, to take into consideration the local burdens which had been imposed upon the ratepayers; but not one word upon this point had yet been heard to-night. The course they were now pursuing was calculated to increase those burdens, which were them ore severely felt as they were borne by one class of property alone. He once more warned the Government and the House against estranging those who had been the best friends of education. From 1839 to 1874 a sum of above £6,000,000 had been spent on elementary education in this country, of which no less than £4,160,000 had been voluntary contributions. Was it wise, the n, to estrange persons who had acted with so much generosity? And as for the Government grants, what were they but grants out of the taxation of the country to which those very persons had contributed? In fact, the country was divided into two classes—those who paid all the expenses, and those who thought

813
they advanced education by making speeches. That put him in mind of the nigger who said—"Preachee or floggee, but don't do both." So the persons who made speeches buttoned up their pockets and left it to others to pay the money.
MR. HARDCASTLEunderstood the right hon. Member for Bradford to say that it was better that a family should go into the workhouse than that a child should go without education, and the right hon. Gentleman challenged the House to dispute the assertion. He accepted the challenge, and maintained that it was a much greater evil that a family should be removed to the workhouse than that a child at an early ago should go without education. There were numbers of persons who had gone without education at an early age, and who had been able to obtain it later in life. The principle laid down by the right hon. Gentleman was, he believed, an altogether mistaken one, and one against which he ventured to protest.
MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, the hon. Member had hardly represented him fairly. What he had said was that he thought it the duty of the Local Government Board to encourage Guardians to stretch the amount of out-door relief in favour of the parents in such cases. As to a whole family being taken into the workhouse in order that one child should receive compulsory education, he thought that such a thing would be perfectly impossible.
LORD ESLINGTONsaid, that after the discussion which had taken place, and the assurance on the part of the Government that the subject would receive attention, he would not press his Motion.
Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question," put, and agreed to.

CASE OF EX-GOVERNOR EYRE.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. HORSMAN, in rising to call attention to the subject of the Pension recently granted to Ex-Governor Eyre and to the grounds on which its amount was determined, said, that there was no question of principle or authority, but only one of technicality involved in this matter Mr. Eyre was Governor of Jamaica for four years and four months, but before
  814
  the close of that period he was suspended for two months; and the question was, whether those two months should be counted in his period of service, so as to entitle him to the full pension which a service of 21 years would entitle him to. He did not bring the question forward as a friend of that gentleman. Three days before he had given Notice on the subject he had never heard of the pension and never seen the face of Ex-Governor Eyre; and nine years ago, when there was much discussion of his case and much excitement in the House and out of it, he took no part in the debates. But some short time ago he was asked by an hon. Member to look into the Papers as an impartial person and give his opinion upon the question. He did so, and came to the conclusion that it was a very hard case. The facts were simply the see:—after long service in various quarters and climates, Mr. Eyre was in 1862 appointed Governor of Jamaica. He arrived in Jamaica in the spring of that year, and continued to administer the government without interruption or disturbance until October 1865, when a rebellion broke out. It was suppressed, and a Royal Commission was issued to inquire into the whole facts of the case. The Commission arrived in Jamaica in January, 1866. Mr. Eyre remained in Jamaica six months longer till the Commission had finished their labours; and the question was whether the interval between the arrival of the Commission and the time when they left the island Mr. Eyre's continuance there was a prolongation of his public service? There were three documents which bore on this point, two of them signed by the Secretary of State and the other bearing the Sign Manual of the Sovereign. When the Royal Commission was appointed, Mr. Eyre, the Governor, was informed by the Secretary of State that in order that the inquiry should be effective and satisfactory it was necessary that supreme power, military as well as civil, should be vested in the officer who was to preside over the Commission. Sir Henry Storks did not vacate his appointment as Governor of Malta; his appointment to Jamaica was only temporary. The Royal Commission and the appointment of Sir Henry Storks was no disapproval or censure on the part of the Government. On the contrary, every despatch presented to

  815
  Parliament expressed approval and commendation. Mr. Eyre remained at Jamaica under the clear orders of the Secretary of State. Then the question arose in what character did he remain their—as Governor, or in what other capacity? This question was made clear by the second despatch to which he would refer. There was no removal, no displacement. It was a mere temporary suspension, "until We shall think fit to determine these presents." It implied that when the Commission left the island Mr. Eyre should be re-instated in his government. This was rendered clear by the orders given in Mr. Cardwell's despatch to Sir Henry Storks relative to the salary of Mr. Eyre. Mr. Eyre was to receive the same salary—£5,000—while he continued in the island, which would have been payable to him if he had continued in the full exercise of his functions. In what capacity was he to be paid his full salary of £5,000 a-year unless as Governor of Jamaica? Mr. Eyre remained under the orders of the Secretary of State on his full salary until he left the island in July following. Mr. Cardwell expected when the inquiry was over Mr. Eyre would be restored to his functions, and no doubt that was the opinion of Sir Henry Storks, for he said to Mr. Eyre—"Whenever the inquiry is over, I make my bow and you resume your place as Governor." He knew that this question had been well considered by the Government after taking the best advice; but he felt satisfied, if he elicited a general opinion from the House that this was a mere question of construction and technicality, the Government would adopt a more liberal view and relax from the severity of their determination. He believed those of his Friends who expressed the strongest opinions against Mr. Eyre when speaking of his conduct in Jamaica would be the first to repudiate any connection between a great principle and a small legal technicality. He had the strongest conviction that Mr. Charles Buxton and Mr. John Stuart Mill, if they had been alive, would say,—" We impeached Governor Eyre while his acts were fresh in our memory, but we will not follow the individual into retirement; we will not hunt him down in his old age; we will not deprive his children of the substance they had a right to expect; we will not degrade a great question of principle into one of mere personal
  816
  spite and parsimonious persecution." If it were a question whether a pension should be granted or not, he should expect those who disapproved Governor Eyre's proceedings to say—"We have changed no opinion, we have abandoned no principle, and we will press the question of principle to the last." But this was not the question: the pension had been granted; any question of principle or policy was closed; and nothing but a legal technicality remained. He did not wish to make any complaint of the Government nor to press them for an immediate answer, but he wished to elicit an expression of opinion favourable to the view he took; and he could not think that this or any Government would desire to act unmercifully in such a case. He thought the Prime Minister would be glad to say,—"We did our duty, but the House has expressed a wish to which we shall gladly pay deference." Such a course would meet with the sympathy and approval of the country. He had intended to move—
  "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that She will be graciously pleased to take into further consideration the Pension recently granted to Ex-Governor Eyre, and the grounds on which its amount was determined; "
  but as the previous Motion had been negatived and he could not move another, he hoped that his object would be attained by discussion.
  COLONEL NORTH, who would have seconded the Motion if it could have been proposed, contended that Governor Eyre could not have remained in Jamaica in any other capacity than that of Governor. Governor Eyre had for 21 years shown the greatest ability in the discharge of his duties, and he appealed to the Government, as an act of justice to a distinguished public servant, to reconsider the matter and grant to Governor Eyre the full amount of pension to which he was entitled.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he would explain the reasons why it would have been impossible for the Government to assent to the Motion if it could have been made, and why they could not comply with the request made by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Horsman). The right hon. Gentleman had stated the circumstances of the case correctly, and he could assure him that the Government

  817
  did not arrive at their decision without full consideration and without consultation with those to whom they had to look for advice in the interpretation of the law. Mr. Eyre served for a period two months and a-half short of that which would have entitled him to claim a pension of the first-class under the Colonial Governors Pensions Act; and that being so, when the application was sent in for a pension it was considered, like all other similar applications, by reference to the Act of Parliament. As differences of opinion arose on the consideration of the case, it was referred to the Law Officers of the Crown; and their opinion was that the six months Mr. Eyre served in Jamaica after the arrival of the Royal Commission did not come within the terms of the Pension Act. It was true Mr. Eyre remained those six months under the orders of the Secretary of State; but anyone who referred to the provisions of the Act of Parliament would see that Governor Eyre was not, according to the terms of the Act, during that time administering the government of the Colony. The right hon. Gentleman had asked whether the Government had not decided the question by a legal technicality—a legal construction of the Act. Certainly they had, but was not the law entirely composed of legal technicalities? and it was the opinion of the Government that they were bound by the literal construction of the Act, as would have been the humblest of Her Majesty's subjects. He confessed it was a subject of sincere regret to the Secretary of State for the Colonies to have to arrive at a decision which might appear to involve hardship to a public servant. It would always be the wish of the present Secretary of State, as it would be that of anyone who held his place, to carry out the law with all tenderness as regarded private interests; but it was not in the power of any Minister of the Crown to override the construction of an Act of Parliament, and in the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown he was bound by the provisions of the Act to arrive at the determination which had been announced. In coming to it no reference was had to any particular incident in the career of Mr. Eyre. Throughout the whole inquiry, which lasted a considerable time, and which it was necessary to make with the view of determining
  818
  the amount of the pension to which Mr. Eyre was entitled, no weight was given by his noble Friend to any single circumstance arising out of the affairs of Jamaica. It was his noble Friend's opinion that Mr. Eyre, like any public servant who had been removed, still remained eligible for re-employment, and was entitled to such pension as he had earned by service. He hoped the House would consider that he had given reasons why it was utterly impossible for the Government to accede to the request made by the right hon. Gentleman. If the Motion could have been proposed it would have been his duty, on the part of the Government, to object to the question being raised in that form; for, by the terms of the Motion, an Address to Her Majesty was to be used as a means of overriding the express terms of an Act of Parliament. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman did not, in his speech, go so far; but the terms of the Notice involved that conclusion, and the right hon. Gentleman would see it was quite impossible to deal separately with any case in that way.
  MR. GREENEsaid, the case of Governor Eyre would be no encouragement to public servants, when they found they were liable to lose their well-earned pensions because they were deficient in time a few months. If the right hon. Gentleman could have gone to a division he would have been in a majority, and justice would have been done to a man who had so long and faithfully served his country.
  MR. FAWCETTsaid, the Government had been, to a certain extent, censured by one of their own supporters. He wished to remark that he believed that he expressed the opinion of many in that House when he said that he entirely approved of the course taken by the Government and their approval of the temperate and moderate speech of the Under Secretary for the Colonies. His speech was characterized by great discretion, good taste, and sound judgment; and he (Mr. Fawoett) did not wish the debate to close without expressing the approval by himself and others of the course the Government had taken with regard to this question.
  MR. M'LARENsaid, the right hon. Gentleman who introduced the subject having expressed his belief that if Mr. John Stuart Mill were still in that House

  819
  he would have supported his proposal, he wished to say that, having had the honour to sit near Mr. Mill for three years on that bench, and having heard him again and again express his opinion on that subject, he would venture to say that he would not have concurred in the sentiments of the right hon. Gentleman.

ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACT (1870)—RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. A. MILLSrose to call attention to the circumstance that 256 School Boards in England and Wales have provided, by their by-laws, that the Bible should be both read and taught in their schools; and to ask the Vice President of the Council, Whether the Government will consider the propriety of testing the accuracy of the instruction so imparted, by including it in the branches of knowledge to be reported upon by Her Majesty's Inspectors? The hon. Member said, it appeared to him to be a sound principle that all branches of education which were to be found in the public elementary schools should be subject to inspection, in order that it might be ascertained whether or not the work of the teacher was done in a satisfactory manner. The only alteration required to carry out his object was a slight alteration of Section 7 of the Act of 1870. Since the Act was passed there had been a considerable reaction against what was called secularism in education, and he thought there was now a general feeling that the grandest book in the world, in a literary point of view, should not be eliminated from the board schools.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, he looked with favour on the proposal of the hon. Member for Exeter. He hoped that if the Vice President of the Council did recognize this principle for the benefit of the children of Protestants, the noble Lord would take care how far he might, by so doing, oppose a similar necessity in the case of children belonging to parents of other creeds, such as Roman Catholics.
  MR. SALTsaid, he hoped that the time was not far distant when religious education would become much more a substantial part of elementary education
  820
  than it was at present, and there was abundant evidence to show that that feeling was entertained very largely in the country, not only as regarded school board schools, but also denominational schools. At the same time he fully concurred in the opinion that care should should be taken not to infringe upon the liberty of the conscience of parents. England was a country largely favoured by Providence. She possessed many blessings and almost boundless wealth. It was therefore but right and reasonable that provision should be made systematically for the instruction of children in our public elementary schools in the simple clear truths of Christianity; and the more so, as in so many cases parents were unable or even unwilling themselves to impart religious teaching to their children.
  VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, he fully appreciated the observations of the hon. Member (Mr. O'Shaughnessy). If the great subject of education were re-opened he should be prepared to advocate the view he held years ago, when he was not in Parliament—namely, that a very strict Conscience Clause was absolutely necessary. He believed the damage done in years past by not acknowledging the right of conscience could hardly be fully estimated. With reference to the subject touched upon by the hon. Member (Mr. Salt), it was clear from a Return, moved for by the hon. Member for Plymouth, that the opinion of the great bulk of the country, as tested by school board elections, was in favour of Bible reading, instruction in religion and morality in the schools. Now that the Government had withdrawn religious inspection from all schools, he could not but conceive to himself that serious danger might arise—not so much in board schools as in voluntary ones—owing to the interest of the managers and teachers, in a money point of view, being against the introduction of any other than secular topics in the curriculum; and the circumstance might happen that when the teachers of those schools who were accustomed to conduct them on religious principles dropped out, Bible teaching would gradually be taken out of the curriculum. How that danger was to be met, or whether it could be met at all, was a serious question. He was afraid he could not say the Government were prepared to establish such a

  821
  System of inspection as was proposed, for the subject was such a large one and had been so recently discussed that they would hardly be justified in re-opening it at the present time. As to the possibility of conducting religious education in elementary schools, the reports furnished to the London School Board were to his mind conclusive. One Inspector reported that, out of 60,000 children, only 28 had been withdrawn from Bible instruction, and that no difficulty had been experienced with the remainder, while the religious knowledge seemed to be imparted in as thorough and reverential a manner as in voluntary schools. Another Inspector reported in the same strain; and, under these circumstances, he ventured to think that religious instruction in board schools was not so worthless as had been alleged.
  Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.

SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
  CLASS IV.—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART.—VOTE 1.—PUBLIC EDUCATION.

    SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    (1.) £1,040,563, to complete the sum for Public Education, England and Wales.
    VISCOUNT SANDON, in rising to move the Vote for Public Education in England and Wales, said, he was afraid he should have to trouble the Committee with a few dull figures in explanation of the objects for which the sum was required. In the first place, there was a total increase of £206,000 in the Estimate; but the Estimate was larger than it appeared, for £14,000 had been struck out as the reduction, compared with last year, in the building grants and the organization of districts. The building grants were gradually falling off, and the organization of districts was somewhat rapidly coming to a close. There was, then, an increase of £206,000 for the future, and he knew well, from the feeling of the House of Commons on the great question of education, that they would not grudge that increase. It was chiefly caused by the increase of annual grants, which amounted to £191,700; another cause of increase being the raising of
    822
    the salaries in the Privy Council Office, at which, he thought, every hon. Member who was acquainted with the Office would rejoice. Some of that increase was due merely to annual increment, while some of it also, he was happy to say, was due to the view which the Treasury took of the duties which were performed by those gentlemen in the Office to whose exertions the country owed so much. A further portion of the increase in the Vote was due to the augmentation of the staff of Inspectors, and to that the Committee would not, he thought, object; for that augmentation meant a considerable increase in the benefits which the schools derived from the services of the gentlemen who were engaged in the work. The more thorough the inspection was, and the more time the Inspectors had to bestow upon it, the better would it be; so that the item of increase to which he was referring was one which he was sure the country would not grudge. He came, in the next place, to the general increase, and that brought him to the number of children to be provided for. The number he calculated to be in the schools where parents paid under 9d. a-week was 4,500,000 in the gross. The average attendance he desired to see was about 3,250,000. That was the starting point, and he would rapidly run over what had been done with regard to the apparatus of teaching. Since the year 1839, when these Votes were first granted, a very large sum had been spent on school buildings, dividing that sum between two contributories—namely, the generous donors of the country and the State. The voluntary contributions for the purpose since 1839 amounted to £4,500,000, and the State had given to meet those contributions £1,700,000. Last year—that was to say, up to the end of the school year in August, 1873—there was accommodation in the schools receiving annual grants for 2,500,000 children, and in August, 1874, for, in round numbers, 2,800,000, being an increase of 300,000. In August next he expected there would be school accommodation in the public elementary schools for 3,100,000. Those figures, he thought, showed that a vast amount of work had been done; and when he added that, in the inspected schools, there had been provided 1,000,000 fresh seats since 1870, the Committee would no doubt agree with

    823
    him that that was a result in the education of the country of which they might well be proud. But the Committee must take into account, besides, the number of non-inspected schools, many of them good of their kind, scattered throughout the country, without Government aid, but having been shown by examination to be giving an efficient education. Then there were all the private adventure schools, as to which he would not enter into any controversy on that occasion. He would, however, observe that the whole of them must not be condemned. Some, no doubt, were bad, and some exceedingly bad and grossly unhealthy; but, having had an interview with some gentlemen who were connected with country school boards, he had come to the conclusion that a great number of those schools were sufficiently good and that some were very good, so that several of them might be placed to the credit account in the calculation of the accommodation which we possessed. He wished to say in passing that, in his opinion, any Government would be very rash which should too hastily shut the door against private adventure schools, which, he thought, to a certain extent, formed a safety-value for compulsion, working its way with considerable difficulty among fanciful parents, parents with sickly children, and others. Although, then, he should be glad to see private adventure schools gradually supplanted by thoroughly efficient schools, he must state it as his deliberate opinion that, in the interests of education, it was necessary that great caution should be observed in dealing with those schools. Having now dealt with the first branch of the apparatus for teaching, school buildings, he came to the teachers, and he was happy to say there was a great increase in the staff. In 1873 there were 16,800 teachers, and in 1874 18,700, being an increase of 1,900. This year he was glad to think the increase would be still more rapid. Then, when he came to look to the supply from below to make up for the waste which was constantly occurring, he found that the pupil-teachers were increasing most rapidly, for while in 1873 their number was only 24,000, it reached, in 1874, to 27,000. To say the truth, the number of pupil-teachers now coming on was so great that it would be necessary to put some little restriction on it, or we should have too
    824
    great a crop of teachers as time went on. The number which it was expected would be required was 30,000, and with the training colleges at present in existence, and which were very much up to the mark, the waste which was occurring could easily be supplied. Of still greater importance was the quality of the teachers. It was impossible not to feel some anxiety with regard to pupil-teachers. He heard it said right and left that they had hitter to been somewhat neglected, and he wished to see lads and girls of a superior kind entering the profession. It would be a great advantage, in his opinion, that there should be a large admixture of the lower middle classes in the teaching strength of the country. How that object was to be attained it was difficult to say; but it appeared to him to be, at all events, well worthy of consideration. So far as the Government were concerned, they had taken a step in the direction of a more thorough training of pupil-teachers, by offering a pecuniary inducement to the masters to thoroughly instruct them. The Government had given them asters a grant on the passing of the pupil-teachers under their care. As regarded the teachers the accounts were, he thought, generally speaking, very encouraging. The country had every reason, he believed, to be proud of the army of teachers which it now possessed. They were, it seemed to him, throwing themselves into their work with a zeal which was beyond all praise, while every year was increasing the stock of knowledge which they brought to bear on the education of the children. A very careful watch, however, must be kept on our teachers. They were the key of our whole system, and it became more important every year, when we saw the spread of school board schools, that they should be well looked after, because, as he had said some months ago at a meeting of the London School Board, the great danger of school board schools was, that they might be left entirely in the charge of the master and mistress. He thought, therefore the Committee would agree with him that, unless there was some supervision over them aster, there would be something wanting in the conduct of those schools which was supplied in the case of voluntary schools, which were carefully watched over by those who had spent money on them,

    825
    and had, perhaps, a keen religious interest in them. The character of the teachers became more and more important every year from them ore natural course of events with regard to the school board schools, whereby the teachers must be more and more them asters of the situation in those schools. A third and most important branch of the apparatus of national education was inspection. He was happy to say they had been able to add very largely to their inspecting strength this year. The Treasury had allowed them to add 15 fresh Inspectors in England and 12 Inspectors' Assistants. It was impossible to overrate the importance of having an adequate inspecting staff. They had done what they could to lay down the principle that, if possible, the inspectors should make a second visit in the year to the schools. He knew that was impossible in some eases; but he attached exceeding value to it where it could be done. He thought the first visit should be a mere formal inspection, and the second a visit of encouragement and friendly intercourse with the teachers. He now came to the scholars they had in their schools; for all their educational apparatus was worth very little if they did not get scholars to take advantage of it. In that respect they had much ground for encouragement. The number of children on the books in 1873 was 2,200,000; in 1874 it was 2,500,000, and they might reasonably expect an increase for the coming year of about 300,000. So that the number on the books was rising with great rapidity, and he thought they would not be far wrong in calculating upon having an annual increment of about 300,000 for some time to come. Next, there was the question of the average attendance of children. That was fairly encouraging, but not quite so good as he should like it to be. In 1873 the average attendance was 1,500,000; and in 1874 it was 1,700,000, showing an increase of 200,000. Since 1870 they had increased the average attendance by 500,000. When they used those large figures they almost forget what they meant; but he thought the addition of 500,000 children, or a number about equal to the whole population of his constituency (Liverpool), to the average school attendance in England and Wales was a great feat of which the country might well be proud. With
    826
    regard to night schools, he knew that he and his right hon. Friend (Mr. Forster) did not so thoroughly agree as they did on some other points. In 1873, the number in night schools was 45,000; in 1874, it was 48,000; and he rejoiced to look forward to a very great increase of night scholars this year from certain changes which they had made in their Code. Notwithstanding the view taken by his right hon. Friend, he must repeat that in the present condition of education in England, he attached great importance to night schools. A great number of children must slip through their hands for reasons which their philanthropic friends might not admit to be valid—for instance, because they were nursing the baby or attending a sick parent. But those children might be caught by the night schools, in which they might receive a lift that they had missed. Therefore, he looked on the night schools as an admirable supplement to the day schools, at any rate in the present state of education. As to what the children learnt at the schools, they could not speak of any great improvement at present in regard to the Standard attained. But, so far as he saw, the improvement was steady and gradual, and the Department would do everything it possibly could to encourage and accelerate it. The Committee must not be discouraged by the exceedingly small number who passed the higher Standards. During the last 10 years very great endeavours had been made to bring the older children and those who had previously been neglected into the schools. Great trouble had been taken in that way both before the passing of the Act and after it, and if they looked at that great influx of the untrained older children into the schools, they might easily understand that its effect must have been to increase the difficulty of the teachers and pull down the Standard. The fact was, they had been in a state of transition, while their schools were flooded by classes of children who had been neglected in past years. All that made the numbers passing in the higher Standards seem small in proportion to the average attendance. He would now give a comparison of the numbers on the books and the average attendance during the four years before and the four years after the passing of the Education Act of 1870.

    827
    During the four years ending August 31, 1870, the number of children on the books increased 31·1 per cent. or in number 401,569—namely, froml,291,490 to 1,693,059. In the following four years—that was to August 31, 1874, the number on the books had risen to 2,497,602, being an increase of 804,643, or 47·5 per cent. That was a very interesting fact, as it showed that the last four years had done a great deal more than the natural work in adding to the school register. Next, as to the average attendance from 1867 to 1870, it increased from 867,420 to 1,152,389, or 33·4 per cent; while in the four years from 1871 to 1874 it rose to 1,678,589, or 562,200, or 45·5 per cent. which was again a very satisfactory increase. The regular attendance of infants—a very important matter—had increased during those last four years 69 per cent. Then the voluntary contributions within the last four years from the passing of the Act of 1870 had also increased 43 per cent. while within the same period the Government Grant had likewise increased 79 per cent. The Committee was aware that since the year 1870 1,000,000 seats had been provided, and of that number he found that the voluntary schools had provided 750,000, and the school boards 250,000, which showed that there was considerable vitality on the part of those who were working for the voluntary schools, and also that some of the alarm that was expressed was not called for. With regard to the present condition of final notices—notices issued by the Department that there was a deficiency of school accommodation, and that unless it was supplied an order for the election of a school board would be issued—one-third of these had been met by voluntary effort. With reference to another third, the time limited by the notice had not expired; and for the remainder school boards had been ordered by the Department. Those, the n, were the general facts, and almost all the figures, with which he need trouble the Committee. They were of some interest and importance, and also full of encouragement. He would add a few words on one or two other topics. And, first, as to the position of the Department with respect to school boards. He had always felt it incumbent on him—and it was the course which the Government had thought it right to adopt—to support the school
    828
    boards honestly and straightforwardly when they were doing their duty. When a school board was established, he regarded it as representing the deliberate opinion of the locality. When that deliberate opinion was once expressed, it was the duty of the Department to give the school boards no grudging support in their difficult task. But he held that it was not the duty of the Department to interfere with them, unless on points where the Act of Parliament had clearly laid on the Department the duty of interfering. It was not the right of the Department to interfere with the wishes of the school boards as to the building of large and ample schools. That was an affair for the school boards and for the ratepayers. Then, as to the salaries of the teachers, there was no power in the hands of the Department to interfere, and he declined to interfere. As to the compulsory by-laws, they had to be sanctioned by the Department, but thereafter the Department had no power of interfering with the working of them. It would be foolish for the Department to lecture the boards on matters on which it had no right to interfere, and it was a matter of the greatest possible importance that the Government should not get into the habit of meddling with the local authorities, except where it was their positive duty to interfere. There were certain matters, no doubt, in which it was bound by Act of Parliament to express a judgment. The question of sites came up when a school board asked the Department to authorize a loan for the purchase of a site, and in the Act of 1873 there were very stringent provisions by which the Department was required to satisfy itself that the sites were really needed. It was in duty bound to exercise a judgment upon the matter, and not to allow sites to be bought in localities where there was no school deficiency. With regard also to annual grants, he held the Department was bound to exercise a distinct judgment. It would, of course, be wrong to make grants to schools which were not wanted in the locality. The subject of transfers was becoming, perhaps daily, of more importance, and he was anxious to explain the position he took in the matter. If a school board had an offer from an existing school of the lease for a year or more of a building such as suited the

    829
    requirements of the board, a refusal of that offer ought not to be allowed. As the Committee was aware, a school could not be transferred to a school board for any money consideration. It must be transferred for a mere nominal sum. If, therefore, a school board had the opportunity of obtaining in that way, even for a short term, a building which would enable it to meet the wants of the locality, he, for one, thought the Department would not be justified in allowing it to use the ratepayers' money in building a new school. On another point—that of fees—he held a strong opinion. He quite acknowledged that the localities themselves were very good judges, to a certain degree, as to what the fees ought to be, and if he looked at the matter from the point of view of the supporters of the voluntary schools, he would say—"Let the school boards open all their schools at mere nominal fees," for the effect of that would be that the voluntary schools would have the pick of the artizan class, who would not send their children to schools where they would associate with the poorest and lowest children. But, as he understood, Parliament had decided that it would not have a system of free schools. The matter had been discussed at very great length, and that was the determination which had been come to. He held, therefore, that the Department was bound after what had passed, and by the Act of Parliament itself, not to consent to mere nominal fees in the board schools. It had laid down the general rule that the fees should be calculated according to the circumstances of the people in the particular locality. In one case an absolutely free school had been sanctioned, because the people were in absolute want. In other cases there were penny fees, and so on, always following the rule he had mentioned, that they should be adopted to the actual wants of the particular locality. In this course he had no doubt the Department would have the support of the Committee. He had now done with the details which he had to lay before them, and would come back for a moment to a very old them e. It was his strong and increasing conviction that what they ought to study chiefly was to secure early and regular attendance of the children. He ventured to say the Government had dome something in this direction, The first condition
    830
    of getting children to school was that their should be thoroughly good schools. He had been very much struck by the following observation of the Bishop of Manchester:—
    "Give me a thoroughly good school, and I want no compulsion, for in my long experience as an Inspector of Schools I have never known a good school empty."
    Government had taken, and were taking, very great pains to secure that first great necessity. Before long the country would be able to say that it had sufficient schools everywhere, and what was more, that it had good teachers everywhere. He ventured, moreover, to say that it had at present a good system of teaching. Under the present Code they had taken a great step in advance. They had secured that the children who went to these schools should find, not a dull mechanical system of teaching, but such a system as would awaken their intelligence and interest them in their work. The object had been to give freedom to the teachers, so as to leave them unhampered in their efforts to make their teaching interesting, and also to secure, as far as possible, that all the children should be examined—to secure, in other words, what the right hon. Gentleman them ember for the University of London (Mr. Lowe) had struggled for so long—namely, that the teaching should not be confined to the pick of the children in the school, but that all of them should have the greatest possible advantage. He had always thought that full justice had not been done to the right hon. Gentleman for the changes he introduced many years ago with a view to improvement in that direction. The right hon. Gentleman had to fight with an unsound state of things. At the time to which he referred there was a tendency to push forward the clever children and make them ornaments of the school, while the others were more or less left in the shade. The right hon. Gentleman, at a great expenditure of his popularity, reversed that system, and he (Viscount Sandon), for one, would be sorry to depart from the policy then introduced. Indeed, he held that Government had gone still further in the same direction by endeavouring, as far as possible, to get all the children to come up for examination. Referring to the Code, he would add, on the part of the Government, that they hoped to keep it as free from change as

    831
    possible for some time to come. Of course, he could not say tow long he would be connected with the Education Department; but whether they had hit upon exactly the best scheme of education or not, he thought it very desirable that the Code should remain as it was, for, at all events, a few years to come. It was important that the masters should feel that there was some fixity, and should know what they had to work up to. They would have to work up to it gradually, and meanwhile the Inspectors would be instructed to be very cautious in dealing with the new system. There were of course matters in the Code not relating immediately to teaching, as to which he did not mean to lay down any distinct line. Another point might be mentioned in connection with the effort to secure thoroughly good schools. Certain small endowments—those not amounting to £100 a-year—could be dealt with by the Department, and it was their earnest desire that such endowments should be used as exhibitions for the primary schools. He was very strongly in favour of the system of exhibitions. He wanted every man to feel that if he had a child of superior talent, character, and application, that child would have a means of getting from the bottom of the tree to the top; and as far as Government were concerned, they meant to encourage exhibitions as much as they could. He would also take credit to the Department for what it had done to place an elementary instruction in science and art within the reach of children to whom it would be especially useful. Another subject he must advert to. Of course, he watched with very great interest the two competing systems of getting children to school which were how in operation, and which he ventured to say were on their trial. Both direct compulsion and indirect compulsion were now in full work in the country, and what verdict would hereafter be pronounced upon the experiments that were going on they could not venture to predict. It was impossible to shut one's eyes to the confusion which at present existed in connection with the means of securing attendance at school. He sometimes thought there was the maximum of inconvenience with the minimum of result. They had to observe the provisions of different Acts relating to agriculture, workshops, mines, &c. Moreover, there
    832
    were different systems of work in contiguous districts—compulsion in one place and no compulsion in the other. The labour market consequently was in a rather difficult position. He hoped that before long a satisfactory solution of the difficulty would be found. At the same time, he thought that the present symptoms of the public mind taught them that very great caution and consideration were needed in any further action. He had now touched upon nearly every subject with which it was necessary to trouble the Committee, and he would only say that so far they had fortunately carried with them the confidence of the working classes. There had been popular elections since the passing of the Education Act which had gone in favour of education, although he was also bound to say that popular elections had gone strongly in favour of a decidedly religious education. In dealing with the working classes, it must be remembered that they had their fancies, prejudices, and wishes, as to their children, just as hon. Members had, and great caution was necessary in dealing with those prejudices. The Legislature should interfere as little as possible with the homes and general habits of the people. England had grown up to her present state of greatness—not under Government supervision and regulation—but from the strong individuality of her people, and the inveterate love of freedom inherent in the breast of every Englishman. And much as they might wish to see their efforts brought to a healthy termination as soon as possible, they would find that time would not be wasted by their being cautious and gradual in their proceedings. By so doing they would draw to them the hearty feeling of the independent English race, instead of alienating them and turning them—not into allies—but into doubtful friends, and possibly even into foes. The noble Lord concluded by moving the Vote.
    MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he wished to congratulate the noble Lord on the statement he had been able to make. It could not be denied that a good deal of progress had been made in the education of the people. He was happy to find that the consent of the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been obtained to the appointment of several additional Inspectors, for he did not think the work

    833
    could have been done without such additional aid. These schools, however, did not absolutely rely upon Government inspection, as their were, especially in London, committees of ladies and others who devoted themselves to the details of education. He did not grudge the noble Lord the money which his Colleagues had given him for night schools, unless, indeed, the result were that he or the Department should go upon the supposition that night schools would supply the place of day schools. That they did not, and never would; and it would be fatal to the cause of education to rely upon the evening schools to supply the place of day schools. He was rather sorry to hear the remarks of the noble Lord with reference to the action of the Department as regarded its power over the school boards in the matter of the provision of accommodation. He thought the Central Department might more properly confine its attention to seeing that the school boards performed their duty, rather than interfering with and checking them in doing so. Then as to annual grants, his noble Friend had said that the Department had used the discretion vested in them of refusing such grants where they believed they were not required. The 19th section of the Act, however, provided that the refusal should be based on a special report, and that fact in itself showed that only a strong case could at all justify a refusal. The noble Lord, taking stock of our position, thought we had got, or were sure to have, good schools in regard to buildings throughout the kingdom, as well as good teachers. Good teachers meant good teaching, and there was reason for congratulation that the demand for these had been so well supplied, and that we were not likely to experience any difficulty in that matter. He was glad to have the opportunity of repeating his thanks to the noble Lord and the Duke of Richmond for the improvement they had effected in teaching by their Code. But then came a point which was not so bright or pleasant—namely, that good schools and good teaching were rendered almost useless by want of attendance. In sweeping the country over they had got many children to attend occasionally, but not regularly. They ought not to be discouraged, however, by that fact. The children were very poor; their
    834
    parents did not care for their education, and to get them to attend at all was in itself a good thing. They must not, however, stop their. The money of the ratepayers would be uselessly expended if that were the only result they attained. It was a compulsory law which had given good results as regarded the provision of school accommodation, and nothing but compulsion, he believed, could secure satisfactory attendance. He believed that if the noble Lord would take courage from the experiments that had already been made with reference to compulsion, and make it a general law throughout the kingdom, he would find that his difficulties would greatly diminish. Putting aside special cases, he would find the greatest difference in his favour from the mere fact of its being declared that throughout this country it was a legal obligation on every parent that his child should be taught, and that if he could not do it himself there was an obligation on the State to do it for him, supplying the money that was necessary for the purpose. The noble Lord said he had watched and compared the effect of direct and indirect compulsion in the towns and in the country. With regard to the country, the fact was that, generally speaking, the compulsion there was no compulsion at all; it was not to be compared with even indirect compulsion in the towns. But he believed that in the rural districts generally, an overwhelming majority of the parents and of the community would be found to be in favour of the same compulsion their as we had in the towns. Some of the employers might take a different view; but what we had to consult was the interests of the children and the wishes of the parents. The Government and the country had provided an educational machinery so perfect that it was now only necessary to secure the attendance of the children to enable England to challenge comparison in the matter of education with any other civilized nation.
    MR. HEYGATE, having expressed regret that the Report of the Education Department for the past year had only within the last two days been placed in the hands of hon. Members, proceeded to explain his general satisfaction with the interesting nature and fulness of the document. It showed a great increase in the schools, in the attendance, in the

    835
    number of children on the register, and in the number of voluntary schools; but he regretted that some of the grievances of which sincere friends of education complained were still unredressed. The chief of these was to be found in the fact that in many places persons who had done their duty in the matter of providing voluntary schools were called upon to pay rates for the support of schools conducted on a principle which they could not approve. A solution for this difficulty had been found in Canada, by giving ratepayers power to allocate their rates, and he hoped it would not long remain unsolved in this country, because until this was done a sense of injustice must linger in the minds of those who so liberally supported voluntary schools. In the original Bill, the draft of which was preferred by the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright), assistance out of the rates was promised to voluntary schools, and in withdrawing that proposal the then Prime Minister offered, as a substitute, to increase the proportion which the Government grants bore to the amount raised under the voluntary system from one-third to one-half. But that promise had never been realized. In 1870, the Government grant amounted to £528,000, and the voluntary contributions to £1,527,000. In 1874, the Government grant amounted to £861,000, and the voluntary payments to £2,398,000, or nearly the same proportion as before the Act. The substitution of the 50 per cent of expenditure had been incapable of realization. It might be said that the reason of this was that the schools were indifferent; but if they were bad schools they could not pass muster, and, in fact, they were better than board schools on an average, as they earned nearly 2s. per child more. Thus, though the grant had increased, the expenditure had increased almost as much as the grant. Why had the expenditure increased? Because the price of everything that could be purchased had increased to a very considerable extent, and also owing to the undue competition to which voluntary schools had been exposed. It was said, "Nothing could be more healthy than a generous competition;" but how was that possible, between a school that could draw upon the pockets of the ratepayers and one that must depend on the subscription of individuals, who,
    836
    moreover, had to pay their share of the rates, and thus paid twice over for education? It was also due in some measure to the extravagance which had been displayed by school boards. Then as to the question of salaries—these had risen much within the last five years. In 1870, the average salary of trained schoolmasters was rather more than £95, and of trained schoolmistresses rather upwards of £57; whereas in 1874 these salaries had risen to £107 and £64 respectively. One of the objectionable characteristics of school boards was that they were inclined to subject ratepayers to the expense of building board schools even in districts which had already efficient and sufficient voluntary schools. There could be nothing more indefensible than the proposal which the London School Board made with reference to the Fitzroy Market district in Marylebone. Although that district had school accommodation for 5,092 children, and the largest number of children who could possibly attend school was 5,280, the London School Board proposed that a new school to accommodate upwards of 5,000 children should be built in the district. If that could be done by a school board, people would be very chary as to the adoption of the school-board system. One expected that in London affairs would be managed with more intelligence than in the country; but if such a proposal as that with regard to the Fitzroy district were carried out, what absurdity and injustice might not be perpetrated with reference to this subject among poor people in the country? He hoped the proposal he referred to would not be adopted. It had been adjourned, he believed, for six months; but it had been adjourned only by a majority of one or two, which showed how very nearly such a proposal had approached adoption. Then as to the rating of schools; this was formerly unimportant, as schools hitter to had little commercial value, but now that they had palaces for schools it was becoming a serious question. Again, the high rate for maintenance had increased very rapidly. There were 89 school-board districts in which a rate of 6d. had been reached, and he found that there were 61 per cent of all school board schools bearing a rate of 3d. in the pound and over. It amounted, in fact, to an additional poor rate in many

    837
    parishes. The Government grant had increased considerably; but that was because greater exertions had been made, because new schools had been founded, and because schools not inspected before were inspected now. The results obtained showed that vast efforts had been made by those who supported the voluntary schools. He acknowledged that gratefully; but in answer to a circular sent out by the National Society, it appeared that in 108 out of 326 schools in school board districts subscriptions had largely declined in consequence of the action of school boards. It appeared that 364 schools, besides private schools, had already been transferred to school boards. This showed there was a very strong case for some relief in the direction he had intimated. He thought the Education Department ought to show more discretion than it did with reference to its sanction of the placing of school board schools in immediate proximity to existing schools. The answer of the noble Duke who presided over the Education Department to the complaints that had been made to him as to the action of school boards—namely, that the ratepayers had this remedy against school boards: they could turn them out—was a mere delusion. It was too late to turn out a school board after it had spent the ratepayers' money, and pledged the rates for many years. He trusted that it would be taken into consideration whether it could not be provided that applications for a school board in a district should not take place more than once in every three years instead of every year. If they were to be asked every year whether they would have a school board surely they should also be at liberty every year to say whether they would get rid of a school board. In other words, power should be given to dissolve school boards as well as to adopt them. He disliked the school board system in comparison with voluntary schools, because under the voluntary school system there was better security for religious instruction. There was, indeed, a certain system of religious instruction under school boards; but the Return as to religious education in school board schools recently presented told a melancholy tale, and proved it was not such a system as was satisfactory in a Christian country. That
    838
    the Bible should simply be read for five or ten minutes without note or comment was not to his mind very satisfactory, and in no less than 42 schools no religious instruction whatever was given. Well might the Earl of Shaftesbury say the other day that he "looked with dismay on the lukewarm way in which religion was treated in the board schools, and that he believed the best and wisest of the Nonconformists shared that feeling." Another argument in favour of voluntary schools was the comparatively small cost of their building in the first instance. In London the cost of site and building for a considerable number of voluntary schools was £7 17 s. 2d. per child in cases where the sites were purchased, and in cases where the sites were given the cost was £6 0s. 5d. per child; whereas the cost of board schools was as much as £15 7s. 2d. per child. Again, the average cost of the maintenance of a child in a voluntary school was 30 s. 6d., as against 35 s.4d. in board schools. For these reasons it could not be surprising that he and others who desired to see religious instruction encouraged hoped the greatest assistance would be given to maintain a system which had proved so valuable. Its only weak point was the want of the power of compulsion. If we could get the country prepared for universal compulsion, it would be a great advantage to schools of all descriptions. He saw no hardship in compelling children to go into the voluntary schools, because the Conscience Clause prevented every objection on the ground of religion. If we could get public opinion in favour of compulsion established by Boards of Guardians or in any way other than by the school boards, he, for one, should feel satisfied with the results. In the meantime the Government was right in watching the course of events, and he thought his noble Friend was wise in not rushing too hastily to a conclusion which might only rouse a feeling of opposition in the country. He thanked the House for the attention with which they had received those observations.
    MR. PEASEsaid, he had listened with attention to the long statement of the hon. Gentleman who had just addressed the House, and he must say that he could not agree with the hon. Gentleman in his statements in reference to the board schools as compared with the

    839
    schools on the voluntary principle. He (Mr. Pease) was informed that the school boards had in most places been of the greatest possible assistance to voluntary schools. The school board schools also in almost all cases were taking care of the religious education of the country. Why were voluntary schools turned over to the school boards, but that the persons interested were satisfied with the education in all respects afforded in those schools. In school board schools religious instruction was as good as in most other schools, and exactly the same, with but one exception—that was that catechisms and dogmas were not taught. The hon. Gentleman had said that the voluntary schools were not getting as much money as they had a right to expect; but he (Mr. Pease) did not think there was any just ground of complaint in that respect. What the country wanted was that which the right hon. Gentleman them ember for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster) had indicated and expressed a wish for—namely, compulsory attendance at the schools. The people in the North of England were thoroughly prepared for universal compulsion, and working men there were of opinion that all should be compelled to make the same sacrifices. A system of compulsion would not only fill the schools, but it would add to the money received in the schools; it would raise the standard of education, and more money would cause the employment of masters instead of pupil-teachers. There could be no doubt that the noble Lord or his successor must make up his mind to compulsory education. The statement of the noble Lord was in all respects a very satisfactory one, and he felt great pleasure in saying he should give it his support.
    MR. SALTthanked the noble Lord for having placed in the hands of members before this discussion the most valuable and interesting Report of the Education Department. It should be remembered that the sum voted by Parliament for elementary education was only a very small proportion of the amount which the country was called upon to apply to that purpose. Besides these Votes, there were the sums contributed from local rates, which were annually increasing, the money collected by voluntary subscriptions, and the school fees. He found that these items
    840
    together amounted in 1874 to about £3,500,000, which was our total annual expenditure for elementary education, not including a steadily increasing debt of £3,000,000 or £4,000,000 incurred by school boards for building. He did not for a moment mean to say that that was too large a sum to pay in aid of elementary education. On the contrary, he should not complain if the sum was even twice as large. But what had they got in return for that very large sum? It appeared from Returns which they had got that between 1870 and 1874 there had been a very great increase in school accommodation; and the average attendance of children at the schools was the best gauge they had as to the value they were getting for the money. Some children were not in the habit of attending regularly, and many were in the habit of moving about from place to place, and therefore frequently changing their schools or giving a most irregular attendance. Of the education which that class of children got much could not be said. Between 1870 and 1874 the increased school accommodation had been 1,000,000, but the increased average of children during the same time was only 500,000. In other words, just double the accommodation that seemed to be practically requisite had been provided. That was a point to which it was necessary to pay attention, because it referred to two important considerations—one, the large increase in school accommodation; the other, the small average attendance of children. It might be said that they were overbuilding and their appeared to be reason for thinking so. He had received an interesting letter from a clergyman who said that in his parish accommodation had with great difficulty been provided for 800 children, but even with compulsion they could not get the attendance of more than 550. It appeared to him (Mr. Salt), therefore, worthy of consideration whether they were not overbuilding. He submitted that the system of increased school accommodation was one that ought to be carried out very carefully and gradually. There were some men who were of opinion that the Government ought, in the first instance, to enter into a large outlay of public money for school accommodation; but he earnestly urged that time should be given before further expenditure was entered into. There was

    841
    another point far more difficult and important. Seeing that we had accommodation for 1,000,000 more children now than we had in 1870, and we had got only 500,000 more into the schools as the result of our efforts during that period, while the statistics showed that we ought to have got something like a third more, the question was whether we had exhausted all the means in our power to get the children into the schools? He was somewhat unwilling to use that word which had become a bugbear to some of his hon. Friends—compulsion, and therefore he would employ the word inducement. Well, then, was there any inducement or encouragement which we could use to get the children into the schools; for our Returns would never be satisfactory until, having provided ample accommodation, we should discover some means to get the children to avail themselves of it? It was perfectly true there were difficulties in the way. He was a member of a school board, and he had said to his colleagues—"It is true we have the power of compulsion, but we must use it discreetly. The moment you use it harshly your system will break down." He believed everyone who had experience in the matter would agree with him that parents, so far from wishing to keep there children from school, were, as a rule, most anxious to get them there, though, of course, there were exceptions. He knew cases in which parents came to consult them embers of school boards how to force their children to school, over whom they had too little control. He held in his hand a most valuable report from the school board of Stockport, which deserved to be widely known. Stockport was remarkable for two things—in the first place, it had no school board schools; and, secondly, it was almost the only place which had brought the attendance of children up to the supposed average of the Department. Not only so, but so closely had it swept the children into the schools that the figures showed they had more children at school than, according to the Census, could possibly exist in the place. They had also spent a good deal of money and spent it most efficiently. There was one fact which was worthy of notice, and that was the effect which their action had had upon juvenile crime. Stockport was a place
    842
    of about 58,000 inhabitants, and while in 1870 the total number of children apprehended was 66, in 1871 it was reduced to 47, in 1872 to 37, and in 1873 to 36. Here was an instance in which the system had been fairly and thoroughly tried, and what had been done at Stockport by means of compulsion might be done by other and cheaper agencies in other places. He trusted the noble Lord would take this matter in hand, and face the difficulties of the question so as to overcome them.
    SIR JOHN LUBBOCKsuggested that a longer interval should be allowed to elapse between the circulation of the Report of the Education Department and the discussion of the Estimates. He quite felt that the present Code was in some important respects an improvement on its predecessor, and he begged to thank the noble Lord for the amendments he had introduced. But while he fully recognized the value of the alterations which had been introduced, there were some points which he thought might be re-considered with advantage. The Code of 1874 included among the extra subjects "any definite subject of instruction, taught according to a graduated scheme," of which the Inspector could report that it was well adapted to the capacity of the children. These words were omitted in the Code of 1875, and consequently schoolmasters and school committees were at present strictly limited to the subjects mentioned in the Schedule. This seemed to him a mistake. Why should not schoolmasters and school committees be allowed, especially under the above limitations, to choose such extra subjects as they thought best? He knew a case in which a school was learning elementary astronomy out of the little book issued by the Christian Knowledge Society—The Starry Heavens. The children were very much interested in it. They liked to know something about the sun and the moon and the stars. The master liked it because the children were interested, and because he found it enabled them to understand the geography lesson much better. Then came the Inspector, who said—"You must give up the astronomy and take to grammar." The children hated the grammar and the master was sorry for the change; still the present Code forced them to give up the astronomy, which they liked, and take to grammar, which

    843
    they did not like. Now, to show how much doubt existed in the highest quarters as to the best subjects, he might point out that in the Irish Regulations one of the subjects—not an extra, but a regular subject—was Agriculture. The subjects, for instance, in Class 4 were reading, spelling, writing, arithmetic, grammar, geography, and agriculture. Under this head the children were expected "to answer intelligently on the subject matter of the lessons in the 'Agricultural Class Book,'" and a corresponding provision appeared in the regulations for all the higher classes. Thus we actually insisted in Ireland on a subject which was altogether excluded in England. It seemed to him that some knowledge of crops was a very appropriate subject for a country school; but, whether that was so or not, surely no one could maintain that a subject which we insisted on in Ireland was so unsuitable that it ought to be forbidden in England? He hoped, therefore, that the noble Lord would restore the words which had been omitted. Again, he did not see why domestic economy was to be confined to girls. Surely the nature of food and of the materials of clothing, the management and ventilation of the dwelling, the simple rules of health, the management of wages, and the importance of saving were subjects which might be taught to boys, also, with great advantage? Nor did he understand the reason for the difference which existed between the English and Scotch standards, and he might add the Irish also, in every case the English standard being the most difficult. He was ready to admit that in some respects the system of education in Scotland had been superior to ours; but he thought that fact was an argument against expecting more from English children than from Scotch children of the same age. If there was to be any difference in the Codes he thought that more should be expected in Scotland than in England; and, at any rate, he could not see why the English standards should be made so much more difficult than the Scotch. He should be glad to say a few words in reference to school books these now in use contained many remarkable statements. For instance, in one popular set of handbooks it was stated that "there were no animals in New Zealand when it was visited by Captain Cook in 1769;" and,
    844
    again, with reference to the same country, it was said that "certainly the English will not be tempted by gold digging or sheep keeping to stay in a place where it is likely they will be killed, cooked, and eaten." In the same series it was stated that cod "abounds in the Norway lakes, and there is a great lot of game;" that "Africa, owing to the new canal, is now an island." Under the heading "Auguries of Birds," the children were told that "all the accidents of the seas are predicted by birds." The principal blot of the present Code was in reference to the so-called extra subjects. One most important function of education was to train the powers of observation; but neither grammar, history, nor political geography had any decided tendency in this direction. If history and geography were taken as two of the subjects, it seemed to him to be of the greatest importance that either botany, zoology, mechanics, or some other subject which could be taught from the actual objects the mselves should be selected as the third. Under the head of domestic economy were comprised the preparation of food, the materials of clothing, the mode of warming, cleaning, and ventilating the dwelling; simple rules for health, cottage income, expenditure, and saving. Surely these were most important subjects, yet no child was to learn them who had not already passed an examination in history, geography, and grammar, or two of them. Grammar as it was often taught was not so well adapted to children as several other subjects which were excluded. In the grammar which he believed was most used he found such statements as that "the Misses Johnstone" was more correct than "the Miss Johnstones," because in the latter case they were considered a compound substantive. Again, "Man and John are masculine, because they are the names of male persons; woman and Susan are feminine, because they are the names of female persons." Surely there was not sufficient advantage in this that such subjects as domestic economy should be excluded in favour of grammar. History, as taught to young children, was a dry tax on the memory. It consisted of dates and wars, lightened, or rather say darkened, by deeds of treachery and murder. He quoted some passages from Scotch history

    845
    as used in Scotch schools, especially with reference to the border wars, and asked whether it was desirable that children should be kept in ignorance of the objects of nature, of the animals and plants by which they were surrounded, of the sun and moon, or of the laws of light and sound, until they had been instructed in the dark pages of history, and, in the case of Scotch children, well-grounded in the wickedness of England? The inspectors themselves did not agree in the selection of the subjects to which prominence should be given. He ventured, therefore, to suggest to the noble Lord that he should leave managers at liberty to take up any two subjects for the examination, allowing them at the same time the extra grant of 4s. per subject for any other two subjects which might be taken up in addition. It was obvious that their might be some schools in which from their situation one or other of the extra subjects might be taught with peculiar benefit. There were schoolmasters with special gifts of which it was desirable to take advantage, and it might well be—nay, he believed that it would be—The case that when we should have had more experience we should find that the subjects which had been selected by the Department were not after all the best that could be chosen. At any rate, their could surely be do harm in leaving this point open. They ought to be very careful not unduly to hamper or interfere with the freedom of schoolmasters and of school managers, who gave so much valuable time to the cause of education.
    MR. SAMPSON LLOYDsaid, he thought the country much indebted to the right hon. Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster) for the Act of 1870, which, on the whole, had conferred great national benefits. But care must be taken not to destroy the existing denominational system. It was a most valuable part of the educational machinery of the country, which, so long as it was efficiently conducted, was not to be extinguished. The condition on which the Act was accepted was that denominational schools should have fair play, because they existed, and because, in the opinion of many, they gave religious instruction which could not be given in board schools, nor even in British and Foreign schools. Injustice was done to denominational schools by
    846
    the reduction of the grant to them under the 32nd article of the Code. A school might earn £200 by efficiently teaching the subjects in respect of which the 4s. allowances were made, and yet because it was in a poor neighbourhood and had a poor subscription list the grant might be cut down to £20, while if it were in a better neighbourhood in which fees of 8d. and 9d. could be charged and large subscriptions obtained, it might be in such a flourishing condition as to secure the whole of the grant it had earned. This condition affected most seriously the schools which most required assistance, and rendered it difficult to carry on denominational schools in poor neighbourhoods. Another harsh condition affecting these schools was the limitation of the grant by the expenditure. Many of these schools were conducted at a very great loss. He held in his hand a pamphlet, written by a Manchester gentleman, who stated that the expenditure in connection with the Church of England schools in the year 1873 exceeded their income by £22,544. The latter sum had to be paid by charitable donations. If the 4s. allowance was too much let it be reduced for all alike, and let the deficiencies thus caused to the board schools be made up by the ratepayers; but if 4s. was the allowance dictated by public policy, it was hard upon denominational schools to deprive them of the grant they had earned on account of adventitious circumstances peculiar to the locality, over which they had no control. He urged the Government to consider the propriety of abolishing these fines, and also of allowing a person who could prove that he had subscribed to a public elementary school to set off: the amount of his subscription against the rate, minus a proportion; which should be one-tenth, but might be put down at one-fourth, in respect of that portion of the subscription which was devoted to the expenses of religious instruction.
    MR. D. DAVIESsaid, that the Act of 1870 was passed as a supplementary measure. In his parish there were four schools—two denominational and two board schools. The supporters of the former paid their subscriptions as before, to keep up the denominational schools, and they also paid the rates for the board schools, and by this means the whole parish was being educated. When hon.

    847
    Members expressd alarm about the rates be said let the children be educated for 15 years, and then the poor rates would probably show a great diminution. The people of England had not hitter to been properly educated. He himself had, unfortunately, not been properly educated; but he was willing to do his duty in educating the children of the rising generation. The difficulty which bad been alluded to that night occurred in his parish. A poor woman who had six children, and kept one cow, and whose husband earned 16 s. a-week on a railway, come crying to the school board, and told them that if she was compelled to send her eldest girl, aged 11 years, to school regularly, they must go into the workhouse. Well, what did the school board do? Why, they "put it right for the woman," and that was what ought to be done all over the country. The schools were now built, and the difficulty was to get the children into them without compulsion. There was a certain class of boys who were them asters of their parents, and they could not be got to school unless some one took them by the collar and made them go.
    MR. RODWELLsaid, that the speech of the Vice President of the Council showed that he had a better knowledge of human nature and of the feelings of the humbler classes than those who were always talking of education. He had never heard anyone explain bow they were going to introduce a compulsory system of education into the agricultural districts of England. He denied that the power existed, and if the children were driven to school, and if the parents were called upon to send them under compulsion, it would do more to stop the progress of education than any other measure that could be devised. It was doing the agricultural labourers a great injustice to say that they were unwilling to send their children to school. The fact was the very reverse, but the real difficulty was that they were asking these parents to make sacrifices which no members of that House were called upon to make for the education of their children. In rural districts there was a great demand for juvenile labour, and this acted as a great temptation, and induced parents to keep their children away from school. There was no analogy between the children who ran about the streets of our
    848
    large towns and the children in rural districts who were honestly earning money for their parents. In some parts of Cambridgeshire and Norfolk it would be downright cruelty to force the children to go to school at certain periods of the year. He trusted the noble Lord would adhere to the principle he had laid down, and that he would appeal to the feelings and desires of the people, who really wished to improve their condition, and to take advantage of any system which might be offered to them. On behalf of the district he had the honour to represent (Cambridgeshire), be protested against any compulsory system being introduced their. The farmers and clergy in the rural districts bad assisted in the great work of education, and if it were done in that manner it would bring about greater results than if it were done against the will of the people, who might be led, but who would not be driven.
    MR. LYON PLAYFAIRsaid: If the hon. Member for Cambridgeshire (Mr. Rodwell) had not made such an anti-compulsion speech, I should not have addressed the Committee. Year after year the Education Department tells us with perfect frankness that its labours are attended with unsatisfactory results, and that the cause of this failure is the non-attendance of children at school. Year after year the age of children in attendance diminishes. In foreign schools, children attend till 14 years of age, the age of infancy fixed under our own Factory Acts. Out of 10,000 children at school, 1,200 ought to be of that age. Twenty-five years ago in England we had about a third of that number, or exactly 424; five years ago we had only 280, and now we have only 240, or just one-fifth. There is a constant lowering of school age which compulsion in the towns has not as yet succeeded in arresting, and even out of the number examined what a woful tale the Report tells us. Of the children above 10 years of age who were presented for examination, 63 per cent aimed at an infant standard of examination, while only 37 per cent ventured on the only standards which are fitted to give a permanent impress on the education furnished by the State. Or, taking it in another way, we have 2,500,000 of scholars on the register of whom only 150,000, or six in the hundred, are giving evidence of any

    849
    efficiency in our national system of education, by passing Standard IV. and upwards, while 94 in the hundred are pursuing the course, not of a national education, but of a gigantic system of infant training. The Education Department, as I have said, conceal none of these facts from us, and indeed draw the only legitimate conclusion, that you can make no considerable advance in education unless you can ensure more regular attendance at school up to the age when the State ceases to regard the child in loco parentis. I do not accuse the Government of doing nothing to remedy the evils which they have pointed out to us. The noble Lord the Vice President of the Council, and the noble Duke at the head of the Education Department, have shown themselves earnest friends of education and efficient administrators. It would be unworthy of Party politics, especially in a subject so affecting the interests of the people, and which ought to be treated with as few Party considerations as possible, if we did not admit that with one notable slip backwards in lowering the education of pauper children, their have been several important steps forward. The indirect compulsion of the Factory Act introduced by the Home Secretary, the well-intended but not yet very efficient Agricultural Education Act, which we owe to the present Secretary of the Local Government Board, are in a spirit of progress, and since last year the introduction of a new and greatly improved Code has removed much of the difficulty of enforcing compulsory attendance. For our national schools had become degraded to little more than a gigantic system of infant education applied to children up to 13 years of age. With such a low system of education, compulsion is difficult of application, for a parent might reasonably say, why force my child of 10 or 12 to go to a school where little is taught beyond Standard III., which a well-instructed infant ought readily to master? The new Code will, I hope, in time elevate the character of our schools. In this point of view I highly appreciate the Code of my noble Friend the Vice President of the Council. He himself has given us an important argument for enforcing the necessity for compulsion. I always felt it difficult to apply compulsion under an inferior school system. Our system is still inferior, but at least the motive now
    850
    exists for improving it. A superior character of education is the logical necessity of powers for enforcing attendance. No law could be so tyrannical as to force a parent to send a grown boy or girl to a school that, in reality, only gives education fit for infants. The explanation of the fact that there is no uprising against the compulsory laws in towns, notwithstanding the low character of much of the education, is that the whole mass of children are terribly backward. As they become more educated, the standard of education must either be elevated, or you must abandon compulsion. But now that the Government have given us a Code through which this difficulty has been removed, we are entitled to ask what steps it intends to take to remedy those irregularities of attendance of which it so grievously complains in the two last Reports of the Education Department. My hon. Friend them ember for Birmingham (Mr. Dixon) brought forward a Bill this year to enforce compulsory attendance, but it was thrown out by a large majority. The responsibility now rests with the Government to devise a better machinery, because the country will expect some remedy for the failure of the national system which is annually announced to us. They have passed indirect laws of compulsion, and they support fairly the administration of direct compulsion to nearly all our large towns. Now, is this great country Party opposite prepared to refuse to the rural population these educational benefits of schools which the law now enforces upon the dwellers in towns? If our educational net in towns succeeds in sweeping into the schools the neglected children of the streets and alleys, will it not be a scandal to the country districts that the children wandering in the fields or sitting under the hedges are to be allowed to grow up in ignorance, because Government cannot arrange with its followers what is the best kind of machinery for carrying out a compulsory law? I argued last year, and I do not intend to repeat the argument, that under a system of denominational schools compulsion is more easily applied than under non-sectarian schools. But if year after year passes over our head, and we find that we cannot introduce compulsion into a system of voluntary schools, you cannot be surprised if the question forces itself upon us—Are voluntary schools

    851
    capable of continuing to perform an important part in the education of the country? The principle of the Act of 1870 was to recognize them whenever they were efficient. But efficiency is a wide word in a national sense. Voluntary schools not in connection with school boards may be efficient for teaching the children within their walls; but they may be, and at present are, wholly inefficient to teach the neglected children of the district in which they are placed. The advocates of voluntary schools should clearly perceive this difference. If, as a system, they are efficient, they must comprehend the necessities of education within their sphere. Both sides of the House, with exceptions who could be counted by the fingers on a single hand, admit that education cannot comprehend above half our children without compulsory law. Annual Returns tell us that only 41 per cent of the children on the actual register gave 250 attendances, while only 6 per cent of those who ought to pass in the higher standards actually do pass. This huge waste of our educational resources cannot be allowed to continue. All admit that—those who favour indirect compulsion through restrictions on labour admit it as much as those who demand universal direct compulsion, for the principle involved is the same in both. The only reply which we got last year we get this year—"Don't move too fast." Well, in the towns this may be said with some show of reason; but it is their where compulsion is working well, with singularly little difficulty, for the occasional instances of hardship are few in number. I have made these remarks because I think we shall be entitled to ask Government, before we grant the Education Estimates next year, what steps they propose to take throughout the country to remedy the non-attendance and irregularities of attendance to which they attribute the failure of our national system. We know the steps taken in the towns; but we desire to know, before another year, what they propose to do with country districts. When in process of time the children of the working classes in towns are educated under the operation of the same Act under which masses of agricultural children are left without efficient education, will not parents in rural districts be apt to throw the blame on the voluntary school system
    852
    which refuses to adapt itself to a full development of the common educational laws? Or if the parents of neglected children are not intelligent enough to draw this conclusion for themselves, will not the nation as a whole do it for them? But even the Government may find that it would be better to face the difficulty as a legitimate consequence of their own improved Code than to rest satisfied with admitting to us, by their Reports year after year, that the failure of the national system mainly depends upon their want of courage to introduce a universal compulsory law.
    VISCOUNT SANDONdeclined to compare town and country in an educational sense, but could answer for the fact that in the country there was a great anxiety to get the children to school, and that great sacrifices were made their with that object. It was certainly a serious thing to find children leaving school at an earlier age than they used to leave. One reason was the higher value of children's labour. Another reason given by the Scotch schoolmasters who came to the Department the other day was that the moment parents ceased to be bound by the law to keep their children at school, that moment they ceased to keep them at school. The London schoolmasters spoke of a similar change, and these facts suggested difficulties in the way of universal compulsion—difficulties requiring the gravest consideration. He agreed with his right hon. Friend (Mr. Forster) that where school boards would spend the money they should have Inspectors, and the London School Board had two. The Act of 1873 prescribed the cases in which additional school accommodation should be provided, and by that clause the hands of the Department were tied. While, however, the Department would be careful not to require excessive accommodation beyond what was necessary for the district, they would be equally strict in seeing that school boards should supply the necessary accommodation. The Government were always prepared, when a locality showed by a house to house visitation that the number of children did not exist to fill the schools which the Department had ordered to be built, to withdraw the plans. If the locality did not accept that test they had no other course than to be guided by the general standard required. He was much obliged

    853
    to the hon. Member for Maidstone (Sir John Lubbock) for what he had said about the Code, although he confessed that he expected warmer praise from the hon. Baronet on that matter. The Government had removed the fifteen-shilling barrier which stood in the way of advanced teaching, and they had encouraged the extra subjects. He could not, however, think the fact of a schoolmaster not being allowed to teach astronomy, and being obliged to go back to grammar, was a very dreadful case; because, in regard to children of 10 years of age, it was desirable that they should get a tolerable knowledge of their own language before going on to learn astronomy. No doubt there were many trashy educational works, but he was happy to say there were now a great number of good ones superseding them. He rejoiced in having had a hand in carrying out considerable improvements in the Code; but he thought it would be better for the children that they should be let alone for a year or two. The Government were determined to carry out this question of education thoroughly well. When it would be complete, or how it might be altered, he could not say; but he was very hopeful that the cause of education was now on a good line—that they were on the right track, and that the present system would land this great nation in the haven where we would wish it to be—of having a good and sound education for its people.
    Vote agreed to.
    (2.) £213,552, to complete the sum for the Science and Art Department.
    MR. MACDONALDobserved, that there was a sum of about £9,000 for the School of Mines and the Geological Museum. He thought it would be desirable to have a few thousand pounds spent in investigating the subject of mining in foreign countries, and for the establishment of mining schools.
    MR. EVELYN ASHLEYexpressed a doubt as to the competency of the Inspectors in Science and Art to examine in both departments, and as to the assistant Inspectors, he could not see why they were almost entirely chosen from the Corps of Engineers.
    MR. M'LARENwished to call the attention of the noble Lord and the House to what was being done, or rather was not being done, respecting the Industrial
    854
    Museum of Edinburgh. He had obtained a Return a few weeks ago, which showed the state of matters. Hon. Members were apt to think that out of London everything was of very little importance; but this Return showed that the number of visitors to the Edinburgh Museum was 336,000, while that of the whole of the London museums was 2,100,000. Therefore, the attendance at Edinburgh was a sixth of the whole of the London museums, while the money given to these institutions was 25 times as much as was given to Edinburgh. The Edinburgh Museum was commenced 19 years ago. It was not finished yet, and there was no grant for it in the Estimates of the present year. No doubt the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said something about a Supplementary Estimate; but he did not think provincial museums should be impoverished for the benefit of the London ones. One instance of their respective importance—Professor Huxley lectured to some 50 students in Jermyn Street. At present, the Natural Philosophy Professor was away in the Challenger, and Professor Huxley was lecturing in his stead at Edinburgh. What was the result? In Jermyn Street, as he had said, he lectured to 60 students; in Edinburgh he lectured to 350. If they looked at the grants, they would find that the contrast between Jermyn Street and Edinburgh was exactly the other way; and it was to be remembered that the lectures were not merely popular ones, but lectures which the students of the Edinburgh medical School required to attend. The Return also showed that during the last five years the payments to Jermyn Street for education Votes and salaries had been £25,181, while the whole Votes for the same purpose to the Edinburgh Museum had been £15,169. The same principle ran through other grants. Since 1853 the grants to Ireland for science and art had been nearly £500,000, while the grants to Scotland had only been £186,000. He did think the Government were bound in fairness to re-consider the whole of these Estimates, and do more justice to Scotland.
    GENREAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURwas also understood to urge that Scotland should have larger grants than she had hither to had, pointing out that the contrast between the Expenditure voted

    855
    in the Civil Service Estimates in 1853–54, which was a standard year for comparing the expenditure of the present time, showed the public outlay for Education, Science, and Art to have quadrupled, but that the additions to England and Ireland had far exceeded the proportion of the increase to which Scotland was entitled. The people of Scotland had been foremost in the race between the three divisions of the Kingdom to extend elementary education, but were now distanced in the running by reason of the want of that public aid so liberally granted by Parliament to England and Ireland to promote the higher instruction which was being given not only to the people of England and Ireland, but to the people of the Continent, and particularly to Germany; and he would continue to urge a greater fairness being shown by Parliament to Scotland in distributing the grants of public money.
    MR. MUNDELLAurged that more liberality should be shown in the case of museums generally, and that something should be done to stimulate their growth. There was a museum in Bethnal Green. Why should not their be one in Sheffield, Leeds, and other great centres in the Provinces?
    MR. SULLIVANurged the Prime Minister to give him an opportunity of bringing forward his Motion on science and art on an early day, when it could be fully discussed. In the view of that discussion, he would not detain the House with any observations now, but would merely remark that he hoped he should not find himself shunted by a Morning Sitting when he brought forward his Motion.
    MR. MITCHELL HENRYcalled attention to the Botanical Gardens, Dublin, and asked the Government to consider whether they could not do something to increase the salary of the director, who was one of the most distinguished botanists in the world, and received a salary of only £300 a-year?
    MR. DILLWYNsaid, there was an obvious answer to the question why should not Sheffield and other places have museums? If the House of Commons once started on this road it would be necessary to provide museums for every town in the Kingdom, and there would be no end to the expenditure. He protested against the continued outlay at the South Kensington Museum, which,
    856
    in his opinion, yielded a very small return for the money it cost.
    VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, the remarks of the hon. Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) were most opportune. He was simply alarmed at the number of applications which poured in from all parts of the country, both for the establishment of museums and for sums in aid of Art Schools. Those applications struck him as indicating a falling off in that spirit of self-reliance which used to be the boast of Englishmen. No one could rejoice more than he did at the spread of such institutions; but it was a serious question whether they should be maintained at the cost of the nation. Liverpool had a museum, of which she was justly proud, but it was supported by the inhabitants. With reference to the institution in Jermyn Street, it was one of which they might all be proud. With regard to the question that had been addressed to him as to the Inspectors of local schools, he might say that their duty was to consider the question of organization. As regarded the Art Schools, valuable testimony had been borne to the progress they had made. As to the Edinburgh Museum, he was afraid they could do nothing this year, but another Session they might be able to meet the views of the hon. Member for Edinburgh (Mr. M'Laren).
    MR. M'LARENsaid, he did not think an answer had been given to his appeal for common justice.
    MR. ERRINGTONasked whether it was intended to vote any sum of money this year for the purposes of the Sub-Wealden exploration?
    MR. W. H. SMITHsaid, no payment had been made, because the conditions laid down by the Government had not yet been complied with; but a Supplementary Vote would be moved for this year to provide for payment, upon satisfactory evidence being given that the conditions had been complied with.
    Vote agreed, to.
    (3.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £238,410, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1876, for Public Education in Scotland."
    DR. C. CAMERONmoved that the Chairman report Progress.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Dr. Cameron.)
    MR. DISRAELIsaid, it was unusual on these occasions, especially at this time of the year, to make such a Motion shortly after 12 o'clock. In consequence of the lengthy discussion which had arisen on. English education, the Committee had only just commenced the voting of Supply. Therefore, he hoped the hon. Member would not persist in his Motion.
    MR. RAMSAYcomplained of hon. Members below the Gangway on the Ministerial side of the House as the party whose interruptions of hon. Members on his side of the House were the cause of much delay through out the evening in passing the Votes. They would not listen to, but interrupted every hon. Member who questioned the Votes.
    MR. STACPOOLEcomplained of the manner in which the Votes were put. A little time ago the Committee were considering the Vote on Museums, and he wished to say something on that subject.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I beg to remind the hon. Gentleman that the museums are not now before the Committee.
    MR. STACPOOLE: And why were they not. He wished to say something about museums; but the Committee had been led to jump away from them to another question—Scotch education.
    MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he hoped the hon. Member would withdraw his Motion that the Chairman report Progress.
    DR. C. CAMERONsaid, the reason why he moved that the Chairman report Progress was, that he saw that several Votes which preceded the Scotch Education Vote had been passed over.
    MR. DILLWYNconcurred with the hon. Member who moved that the Chairman report Progress, and he was himself inclined to do so. He also concurred with the hon. Member (Mr. Ramsay) who complained of the interruptions of hon. Members below the gangway on the opposite side of the House as retarding the public business.
    DR. C. CAMERONsaid, that if it were the pleasure of the House he would withdraw his proposal to report Progress.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    VISCOUNT SANDON, in explaining the Vote, said, he could state very little this year as to the effect of the Scotch Education Act, because, as hon. Members were aware, this had been a period of the transition between the two Codes. He was, therefore, at the present moment unable to give any very good account of the state of things. He would, however, refer hon. Members who took an interest in the subject to the very interesting Report which had been prepared by the Board of Education in Scotland. That Report had, unfortunately, not been long enough in the hands of the Department to enable them to enter into the question. The work of building was going on at a very rapid rate, and they should soon have schools built to accommodate 250,000 children. As hon. Members from Scotland were well aware, there were certain difficulties lurking in the background with regard to the supply of schools, and he only hoped that an interpretation of the law might be found that would enable certain schools to be handed over to the Board. With regard to teachers, he found that there had been a very steady increase in the number of teachers in Scotland. In 1873 the number of teachers was 2,600, and in 1874 the number was 3,100. There was, therefore, very good hope that an ample supply of teachers would be forthcoming. As to Inspectors, they had been extremely happy to provide five additional Inspectors, whom, it was hoped, would be of great assistance to the cause of education. With respect to attendance, there was every reason to be proud. For the year 1873, the average attendance was 220,000, which rose in 1874 to 263,000, being an increase of 20 per cent. and in the present year he found that the increase had been still greater, amounting to 23 per cent. He found that the new Code had been largely taken advantage of, and that many schools had got an increased amount of the public money. He congratulated them upon this fact, as he believed it meant a greatly increased amount of learning in the schools. The House was probably aware that the Department had thought it better this year to interfere as little as possible with the Scotch Code; but he could not hold out any hopes to Scotland that she could expect to be left alone as to her Code. As far as his knowledge went, the work

    859
    of education was prospering under the Act passed two years ago for Scotland.
    MR. RAMSAYsaid, he would have been glad to have stated some of the facts respecting the working of the Scotch Education Act had it been at an earlier period of the evening, but he could not do so at that hour of the morning. As regarded Shetland, he must say that he believed nothing would more tend to relieve the poverty of the people living in that district than their efficient education, and the noble Lord might discharge from his mind any apprehension that by reason of the recent educational Vote there would be depopulation in any part of Scotland, even among the hardy race of the Shetland Isles.
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    (4.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £4,997, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1876, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Education for Scotland."
    MR. M'LARENsaid, this was an important Vote, and could not be discussed at that hour of the night. At all events, the Government ought to say what they intended to do respecting the Scotch Education Board, which would soon expire. He begged to move that Progress be reported.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. M'Laren.)
    VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, the Government would use the powers they possessed to continue the Board temporarily for two years. He was not prepared at present to state what the intentions of the Government were as to the permanency of the Board.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;
    Committee to sit again To-morrow.

POOR LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
(Mr. Sclater-Booth, Mr. Clare Read.)
POOR LAW AMENDMENT BILL.

  [BILL 217.] SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. SCLATER-BOOTH, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, it embodied many of the suggestions of the Select Committee of 1873, for entrusting the Local Government Board with certain powers with reference to local administrative arrears. The Bill would not touch the sacred boundaries of counties, but dealt only with parishes and unions. It would contain provisions under which certain isolated portions of parishes might by Provisional Order be added to the unions with which they were geographically mixed. Certain small parishes would be added to other larger parishes, and power was taken to dissolve certain unions, the object being, as far as possible, to assimilate the union map to the county map of England. The Bill was also an omnibus Bill, and would contain several provisions for the better administration of the Poor Law.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Sclater-Booth.)
  MR. WHITWELLapproved of the Bill, but the clauses would require careful consideration. He suggested the adjournment of the debate.
  MR. DILLWYNmoved that the debate be now adjourned.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Dillwyn.)
  SIR WALTER BARTTELOTsupported the Amendment. The Bill might or might not be of advantage to the public, but it required to be thoroughly discussed. He doubted if it was wise or prudent to bring in such a Bill at so late a period of the Session.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Debate adjourned till Monday next.
  House adjourned at a quarter after One o'clock.