CLASS IV.—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART.

HC Deb 08 August 1881 vol 264 cc1300-42

(1.) £1,283,958, to complete the sum for Education, England and Wales.

VISCOUNT SANDON

said, he was not anxious to trouble the Committee in any way; but he thought that the full and very interesting Statement of the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council would require a good deal of time for the consideration of the facts contained in it before they could express any judgment upon it. He thought no excuse was needed for the long speech which had been made to them, as it was one of great interest to all who had the pleasure of hearing it; and he would only venture to remark that he hoped another time to have the satisfaction of entering at length into the points which the right hon. Gentleman had laid before them that night. He was inclined to doubt the advisability of the practice which the Vice President had adopted that night, and which he (Viscount Sandon) tried to adopt when he filled the Office of Vice President of the Council—namely, of making a Statement with the Speaker in the Chair. Unfortunately, other matters had intercepted that Statement, and the natural discussion of the points raised by the right hon. Gentleman, and the result was that they had arrived at a very late hour before they were able to discuss the Vote. As he had said, he was not to blame for not having set a bad example in the matter, because he did try to make his statement with the Speaker in the Chair; but he was prevented from doing so by the present Chief Secretary for Ireland. He gathered from the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council that the experience of the last 10 years had somewhat disappointed the expectations that were raised, and, to some extent, that it dissipated some of the fears that were expressed. Some of them expected that the voluntary schools would be very much encouraged by the course of legislation adopted; but those expectations had been disappointed. On the other hand, the expectation entertained that the progress of education would be a little more rapid had been somewhat dashed. The hopeful aspect of the case was that the parties who disagreed in former years were now evincing a desire to work together in a more harmonious manner for the benefit of the children committed to their charge. He was gratified to hear the high testimony which the Vice President of the Council bore to the voluntary work of the country, both in regard to the board schools and the voluntary schools. They found that some very vague and voluntary dreams which had been formed of the past had been abandoned, judging from the Vice President's speech. Nobody spoke more strongly than the Vice President did now against the evils of free and gratuitous education. The right hon. Gentleman was perfectly consistent in that; but it was most important that a person holding the high position of the right hon. Gentleman should be able to say that the opinion of the country was entirely against free education. As to religious instruction, the testimony of the right hon. Gentleman was in favour of its value; and he (Viscount Sandon) rejoiced that it was so after the 18 months' experience the right hon. Gentleman had had of the working of the Department. He congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on the fact that it had fallen to his lot to come to the House at a time of comparative calm in the Education Department, so that he was able to turn his mind to a further revision of the Education Code. He hoped, in the long run, the right hon. Gentleman might not find that in trying to be concise he had become obscure. The right hon. Gentleman was able to undertake this im- portant work, owing to the Department being more free in regard to the supply of schools, and owing to the board system having been started and got into full working order. He was also able to undertake the work of compulsion which had been proposed by his noble Friend the Member for Middlesex (Lord George Hamilton). His way had been cleared for him, and he (Viscount Sandon) felt that the right hon. Gentleman was perfectly right in giving a large meed of praise to the exceeding vigour of the heads of the Education Department, not only the Gentleman who was at the head of all, but those who were at the head of the subordinate departments. In regard to the Code itself, he hoped he might be allowed to record his opinion, and he trusted that all hon. Gentlemen who were interested in education would do the same. Until they had seen the system fully in operation, the whole future of the schools must depend entirely on the good working of the Code. They must remember that all the changes were purely tentative after all, and the great question which lurked behind was that of the money. They were told that they were not to consider the money question at present; but to look to it solely as an educational question. That was very admirable and very excellent; but the schools of the country must look to it from the money point of view; and the case of the board schools, and voluntary schools, as between small schools and large schools, rural schools and urban schools, must be decided by the facilities which the new Code afforded. It would, therefore, be unwise to express an opinion as to the Code until they knew how the money was to be allocated. There was one thing, however, which they ought to require. He did trust the right hon. Gentleman would watch the matter carefully, so as not to place too great a head pressure upon the children. He said that from the experience he had gained when Vice President, and he was satisfied that there was great danger of pressing too heavily on children of tender age. He would venture to call special attention to the case of the pupil teachers. He was quite sure that in many cases they demanded far too much from young pupil teachers. They had to give out these poor children, as well as take them in, and the pressure upon their minds was very great, in having to teach during the greater part of the day, to stand almost entirely throughout the day, and then to study at night. Then, also, in regard to increasing the intellectual pressure, he would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, after the strong expressions he had used as to the advantages of religious teaching, to keep a careful watch that in their exertions for the spread of secular knowledge they did not ignore religious teaching. There was great danger, if they showed that the interests of the State in the schools was merely based on secular knowledge, that in the course of time pure religious teaching would be cast aside as of no importance whatever. He thought that was quite unintentional on the part of Her Majesty's Government; and he believed that they might virtually make it impossible that that religious teaching they wished to foster should suffer. He congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on his praiseworthy endeavours to remove the temptation to fraud which existed at present, and which were so serious in our schools. No one would rejoice more than he would when the scheme relating to the 250 attendances was carried out. As to The Child's School Book to which the right hon. Gentleman had alluded, he was in favour of getting rid of all unnecessary forms; and, therefore, he should only be too happy if he succeeded in getting rid of The Child's School Book. The right hon. Gentleman said he was also going to give greater prominence to poetry, recitation, history, and geography. He would be glad indeed if the right hon. Gentleman had time to get those matters attended to in the ordinary curriculum of the schools. For his own part, he was a little doubtful whether Milton and Shakspeare offered the best kind of poetry to children of 10 or 12 years of age; and he was rather in favour of some of our excellent patriotic lyrics which very easily adapted themselves to the intellects of children. But that was a matter of detail. The right hon. Gentleman had also assured them that he was going to lay great stress on sewing as a branch of instruction. He believed he had the honour to be the first to give the money of the State for the promotion of that most important art amongst girls, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would do all in his power to encourage it. At the same time, he ventured to put in a word for those despised subjects—domestic economy and cooking. They should all have in view the importance of teaching those useful and necessary subjects in schools. It was difficult in practice, he knew; but they were most necessary to be taught to girls, and he hoped the Vice President would encourage them. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman meant to keep the attention of Inspectors fully engaged on the moral character of the schools. Everyone who knew what schools were would see how important it was that the Inspectors should show great attention to the general moral tone which prevailed in them. The right hon. Gentleman had used one happy expression. He said he was determined that the teaching in these elementary schools should be thorough. He reminded the House that they had made it compulsory on parents to send their children to those schools; that they were bound to see that the teaching was thorough and good, and that it was absolute cruelty and wrong to subject children to insufficient instruction. That point should, undoubtedly, be kept steadily in view. He wished the right hon. Gentleman success in his endeavour to promote night schools; and he agreed that he was taking a bold and wise course in allowing clerical teachers to instruct in night schools. It was probably the most important change of any made in the Code to throw open the profession of teachers to graduates of the Universities; and he thought the more people considered it, the more they would see the advantages of making that alteration. It would however, be necessary, in fairness to existing teachers, that they should have due warning of the change, because, having entered upon their career on the understanding that it was a closed one, they should certainly receive notice of what would appear to them a very sudden and important change. He also hoped care would be taken to find a more suitable class of teachers for rural schools. The misfortune was that it was impossible for the districts in which those schools were situated to give a high rate of pay, and yet it was exceedingly bad to have very young teachers. That question, undoubtedly, merited great attention. It was the case that there was some deterioration in respect of the time during which teachers stayed in their schools; and they found that as a rule where there was only a mistress she stayed only for a year, or possibly two years. Anyone would understand that the effect of that upon the children was disastrous. In that way the teacher had no time to make acquaintance with the children, who were always being put under new systems, while, in fact, the moral hold was relaxed. That was a very important difficulty which all interested in rural education should consider. He could not agree with the remarks of the Vice President of the Council on the subject of honour certificates. He had always regarded them both as tending to raise the tone in schools and as incentives to future exertion. He thought those certificates did tend to elevate the character of their elementary schools, and he was afraid he should adhere to that view. He thought it a pity, for the sake of £1,000, to sacrifice what he believed to be in many cases a useful incentive; and, therefore, he trusted that if any change was made the system might be modified without being abandoned. He saw that about 13,000 children in the course of the year got those certificates; and he was constantly meeting with children who had gained them and who showed them with great pride, while the parents had told him that the moral effect upon their families was surprising. There was one point on which he should be obliged to challenge the decision of his right hon. Friend if he should think it his duty to press it. He, for one, was loth in any way to lower the character of the Inspectorate, because it was of the highest importance that its intellectual standard should be kept up; so much so, in his opinion, that when he held the Office of Vice President very severe conditions were attached as qualifications for that office. Therefore, he trusted that nothing would be done to lower the position of the Inspectorate. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there was any truth in the rumour alluded to in the Press that he held out hopes to teachers of extending the pension system generally? He was aware that he granted a certain number of pensions in cases where the teachers were old and underpaid; but he carefully guarded himself from holding out any hope whatever of a general pension system, which would be a most serious and grave undertaking for the country, and he hardly thought the right hon. Gentleman could have been correctly reported when he was said to hold out hopes of so great a change. Although he should not be sorry to see a system of assurances established which would secure teachers against the consequences of sickness and old age, he did not think it was the business of the State to go further in the matter. He did not wish to stand in the way of the right hon. Gentleman; but he must hold himself absolutely free with regard to the changes in the Code, and with regard, also, to the changes in connection with the Inspectorate.

MR. RICHARD

said, he had a Motion on the Paper on going into Committee of Supply which, yielding to the appeal of his right hon. Friend, he did not proceed with; but to which, perhaps, he might be permitted to refer in Committee and to say a few words on the subject of it. He referred to what he could not but regard as a great anomaly in their educational system—that was to say, the denominational character of so many of our Training Colleges. He did not severely blame anybody for that, because it had grown out of a state of things which existed formerly, but which no longer prevailed. It was well known that for a long time the education of the people of the country was left in the hands of voluntary associations, and they frankly and gratefully acknowledged that they rendered valuable service to the cause of education. As long as these associations were purely voluntary, and supported by the contributions of their friends, they had a right to make their own rules; but when Government undertook to subsidize those efforts, then, of course, the matter was very much altered. It was enacted that all elementary schools should be subject to the Conscience Clause, which, to some extent, modified the denominational character of those schools, but the Training Colleges remained as they were, being governed by the same rules as existed when they were purely voluntary institutions. But they were no longer voluntary institutions; so much otherwise that by far the larger proportion of the incomes by which they were supported was derived from Parliamentary grants, and the fees paid by students. He would give some figures, by way of illustration, taken from the Report of the Committee of Council. He found that with regard to the Training College at Carnarvon the total annual expenditure was £2,227, the subscriptions and donations amounted to only £293. At Cheltenham College the total expenditure was £5,275, of which only £500 was raised by subscriptions and donations; the total expenditure of the Female College in the same town being £2,281, with subscriptions and donations amounting to only £117. The British Schools College, in the Borough Road, had a total expenditure of £7,000, of which only £1,390 was raised by voluntary contributions, and the Wesleyan College, at Battersea, a total expenditure of £4,172, and the donations and subscriptions amounted to £321. Thus it would be apparent to the Committee that, so far as support was concerned, those Colleges had become almost State institutions; and the question was whether it was right that institutions, which were practically dependent on public money, to which all classes of the community contributed, should remain sectarian in their character, government, and teaching. The tendency of their legislation had been, of late years, to unsectarianize education. That was proved by the Elementary Education Act, the Endowed Schools Act, and the various Acts passed by the Legislature during the last 20 or 30 years in relation to the Universities. But the Training Colleges remained on the same footing as before, many of them being, beyond doubt, purely denominational. A Memorial had been sent in to the London School Board, signed by the members of the Teachers' Association in this Metropolis, complaining of the disabilities imposed upon them by the denominational character of the examination to which their pupils were subject before they could enter the Training Colleges. The School Board thereupon applied to each Training College in the country for copies of the forms of application for admission, and for information with regard to the nature of the religious examination required to be passed by candidates. The Returns to the London School Board were as follows:—There were 41 Training Colleges of all kinds in England and Wales. Of these, six made no Return, five had no religious examination, and 25 had returned that they required, on entrance, an examination in the Old and New Testaments and in the Prayer Book. In all the Church of England and Diocesan Training Colleges this examination was exacted. The Wesleyan Methodists required an examination in the Old and New Testaments and the Conference Catechism; and as to the preliminary inquiries of an ecclesiastical character there were a great variety. Some Colleges merely required testimonials as to character from a clergyman or minister, and others addressed questions of this kind—"Are you a Communicant?" "Are you a member of the Church of England?" "Are you prepared to make a declaration that you will continue as a teacher in the Church schools?" Now, he asked the Committee again whether it was fair that these institutions, which were supported almost entirely out of public money, should have a character so decidedly denominational as to exclude entirely from the advantages of the training they gave all the Nonconformists of the country? He did not wish to say one disrespectful word of the Book of Common Prayer. It was not his habit to speak disrespectfully of anything that was an object of reverence to any of his countrymen; but he might be permitted to say there was much in the Book of Common Prayer that the Nonconformist conscientiously objected to. They did not teach it in their schools; therefore, any of the Nonconformist teachers who wished to go to those Training Colleges were barred by the requirement that a candidate must be examined in the Book of Common Prayer. There was a great hardship in that, inasmuch as these teachers might wish to go to the Training Colleges for the purpose of, afterwards, teaching in the board schools, which did not, and were not, allowed to teach the children the Prayer Book and the Catechism. The board schools were forbidden, by the 14th section of the Elementary Education Act, from giving the children such instruction. No examination on these matters was required in the scholarship examination undertaken by the Government; and yet, when these young people presented themselves for admission to the Training Colleges, they were made to submit to that religious test examination into the Prayer Book, and, in some cases, they were compelled to declare that they were members of the Church of England. He must say it was time that all this should be changed. It was undesirable that any of these Training Colleges should be denominational in their character; but, in any case, he maintained, the sectarian restrictions which prevented others than members of the Church of England from enjoying the advantages of those Training Colleges, and other institutions supported by public money, should be removed. He was not able to move the Resolution he had put on the Paper, owing to the Forms of the House; but, if the Committee would permit him, he would read it, in order that hon. Members might see the modest proposal he intended to make as to those elementary teachers. It was as follows:— That the Training Colleges for Elementary Teachers, which are almost entirely maintained by public grants and by the contributions of the students, should, so long as the present system of denominational colleges exists, be open without sectarian restrictions to those candidates who, being otherwise qualified, pass the scholarship examination with the greatest success, and the same religious liberty should be secured to them during their training which the Law now secures to students at the Universities, Grammar Schools, and in public Elementary Schools throughout the Country. He was told it happened very frequently that pupils who had been trained in the London School Board schools, and were proficient in all other branches of knowledge, being perfectly as well qualified to enter into the Training Colleges as any of those candidates who stood by their side, yet were rejected because they would not undergo examinations in the Prayer Book. He said this was unfair, and that the time had come when some change should be effected in the interests of religious liberty.

MR. J. G. TALBOT

said, that one of the disadvantages they experienced on the present occasion, and which his noble Friend the Member for Liverpool had referred to, was that they had not been able to follow the interesting Statement of the Vice President by a general discussion. The debate had strayed over various topics, interesting in themselves, some of them highly interesting, almost sensational, and those had diverted them from the main topic of the evening—namely, a review of the educational proceedings of the past, and of the educational policy of the future. He could not help expressing a hope that if the revision of the Rules of the House was, as had been indicated, to form an important part of the programme for next Session, no new Rule would be adopted which would encourage and sanction the course of proceeding which had been pursued that night. Discussions of that kind came on under great disadvantages at such an hour of the morning, and it was very difficult for one to compress into the few minutes which he felt himself at liberty to occupy all the observations he desired to make concerning the large number of interesting topics referred to. He did not intend to go into the case of Mr. Goffin; but he would say a word with regard to what the hon. Member for Merthyr (Mr. Richard) had, with great moderation from his point of view, just stated. He (Mr. Richard) had made an appeal to the Government, and he thought it would have been very desirable if they could have come to some decision on the subject. Just as in the case of Mr. Goffin they were unable to come to a decision, so also in the matter of Training Colleges they were unable to come to a decision. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Mundella) would not be led into an incautious statement in approval of what had fallen from the hon. Member for Merthyr in so seductive a manner. He had spoken as though a gentle change might be made to bring these Training Colleges in harmony with other institutions in the country, conducted upon what he called the undenominational principle. If they were at an earlier period of the evening he should endeavour to persuade the hon. Member that this institution, whose example he recommended, was not so undenominational as he seemed to think. He would have reminded him of the endowed schools which came under Clause 19 of the Endowed Schools Act, and he would have pointed to the larger "public schools," as they were called, where religious education was given. But he would not now go into matters of that kind. He would only ask the Committee to remember that any change of the kind the hon. Member proposed would be a great and fundamental change, and not only that, but it would be a change that would amount to something very much like a breach of faith, because, although it was true that those institutions were supported in a great measure by the State—and he fully recognized the fact—yet it was also equally true that they were founded in a great measure by the liberality of private persons, for the express purpose of their being connected with a certain religious denomination. That remark did not only apply to the Church of England in which he was interested. There were Wesleyan Colleges, founded by and for Wesleyans, and also Roman Catholic Colleges, which were founded by and for Roman Catholics. Therefore, he trusted the Vice President of the Council would not, in a moment of incaution, be induced to adopt the view of the hon. Member for Merthyr, and, by so doing, give a severe shock to public feeling—to a great deal of the sound feeling on which the education of this country had hitherto rested, to which the Vice President of the Council had given credit, and to which the hon. Member himself had given credit. Education in this country was, for a very long time, chiefly dependent on voluntary effort. That voluntary effort was entirely connected with some religious body, and that religious body was mainly Church of England, as being the principal representative of religion in the country. He did not know that he would detain the Committee longer on this matter, except to say this—that there was a great difference between Training Colleges and public elementary schools. In connection with the latter there was the Conscience Clause, and the children of parents of any religious opinion could be admitted, every person's religious convictions being respected. He was not merely going into those matters on his own authority, but the Schools Inquiry Commissioners in their Report said that great distinction was to be drawn between places where pupils were received, educated, and boarded, and those to which children went as day scholars. Boarding schools it was pointed out, were in loco parentum, and it was shown that to have no definite system of religious teaching in them would be a serious detriment to their character. He was not speaking to those in the House who would discard religious instruction altogether from all schools; his arguments would be of no value to them; but to anyone who believed in giving young people some religious instruction, he said that unless they instructed the teachers in some definite form of religion—he cared not for the purpose of the present argument what, so long as it were definite—they had no chance of producing that class of teachers who would be the best and truest teachers in the sense in which they wished the children of this country to be taught. On this subject, speaking of Training Colleges, he was naturally led to say a word on a very important point—namely, the new Code, of which the right hon. Gentleman had given them an outline. He spoke of graduates of any University being recognized as assistant teachers without having to undergo examination for certificates. The existing rule might be relaxed harmlessly; and if that article of the Code was carried out to any extent, they would have a large number of teachers in the country who would not have been trained in Training Colleges, which was now necessary; but would have had the advantages of that free training which was given in the Universities. No work could be more suited to graduates, who had gone through a great deal of teaching themselves, than to impart their knowledge to others. The system contemplated had been already tried, he believed, and had been found successful, especially in the case of ladies. He did not mean to say that those ladies had absolutely taken University degrees; but they had passed the University examinations, and were those who would be expected, under certain circumstances, to take degrees and enrol themselves in the ranks of school teachers. He was glad to see anything like an advance in that direction. Teaching was one of the noblest occupations possible. Anything which raised the profession was a distinct benefit to the community, and he here spoke not only of University, but elementary teaching. He most cordially thanked the right hon. Gentleman for his proposal. He had here one or two figures which he thought he might trouble the Committee with, just to show how great had been the progress of the schools connected with the Church of England—which were the larger part of the voluntary schools—and the large share they had had in the scholastic development of the country. In 1870 the accommodation in the Church schools was 1,365,000, and in 1880, 2,327,379, whilst the average attendance in 1870 was 844,334, and in 1880, 1,471,615; or, in other words, 962,299 additional places had been provided in Church schools in 10 years; whilst all other denominations, together with the school boards, afforded additional places for 1,399,870. In 1880, there was, as he had said, in Church schools accommodation for 2,327,379, or more than half the whole school accommodation of the whole country, which was 4,240,753. It was said that the school boards represented the elementary education of the country. He did not wish to discourage the good work done by the school boards; but his view was that they had only to supplement what was already partly done by the voluntary schools in the matter of elementary education. But it was important to observe that far from killing, or even checking, voluntary effort, the school board system seemed to have stimulated and encouraged that effort. They were entitled to ask how that had occurred. There was a very pertinent view taken of that matter by some people. They said—"People won't pay twice over for the same thing." It was said—"How can you expect people to subscribe towards the support of voluntary schools when they have to pay taxes for the maintenance of the school board schools?" Well, it was because at the bottom of the voluntary system there was something sufficient to counterbalance the selfish element. There seemed to be in such a matter an analogy with the relief of the poor. It might be supposed that nobody would subscribe to voluntary hospitals, when there were infirmaries scattered all over the country provided out of the rates; but just as they found in that case that people always would provide more in the way of relief than was required to simply meet the necessities of the case, so in this case he thought they would find that the voluntary system of education would not be killed, but would rather be quickened and increased by the action of the School Board. With regard to the details of the new scheme, although they had only heard them for the first time that night, they would give to it all the favourable consideration in their power, and heartily co-operate with the right hon. Gentleman in respect to it.

MR. LYULPH STANLEY

wished to say a word or two as to the Training Colleges which were referred to by the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydvil. In the first place, there was not only the grievance of those who were driven out of the Training Colleges by conscientious scruples, but there was the moral harm to the other ex-pupil teachers who felt compelled to sacrifice their religious scruples in order to obtain the training. That was a result which they ought to look at quite as much as to the injury to those who adhered to their religious opinions. In fact, he thought they ought to consider the latter class rather more than those who withdrew from the Colleges. Then, with regard to the training of teachers, the country paid this large sum of money in order that the most experienced and industrious of the teachers might proceed through the Colleges to the work of elementary teaching. By giving preference to an ex-pupil teacher who passed low down in the examination because he could pass an examination on the Church Service, or who gave a promise that he would teach in Church schools, they got inferior teachers when they might secure superior teachers. He did not think it necessary to labour that point further, except to remind the hon. Member for the University of Oxford that freedom of conscience and exemption from religious services and instruction existed in all the Colleges among the undergraduates. He congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on the steady progress made by his Department this year. The progress was, perhaps, not as great as they would have liked to see; but there was a sufficiently distinct progress to make them feel that they were promoting elementary education. He did not think it was necessary, at that late hour, for him to take up the challenge the right hon. Gentleman threw down as to the ex-pensiveness of the London School Board. The right hon. Gentleman knew that he held strongly that the duty of the Department was to look after the efficiency of the School Board and not the cost, which was the business only of the ratepayers. He hoped the Department would keep their minds on the question of efficiency, and not run into other matters. They had too much of the Education Department under the late Government, when it tried to hold up economy at the risk of sacrificing efficiency. It was not proper in a debate in Parliament to drag in considerations of cost as between one school and another. Then, with regard to the proposals for the revision of the Code, no one could give a final opinion favourable or unfavourable upon them. It was a most important scheme, and full of very valuable considerations; but their remarks that night must be purely provisional, and further discussion must be reserved. But there were one or two points which he should like his right hon. Friend to consider before finally pledging himself to this scheme. He should like to suggest under No. 5 whether sewing, which was to be compulsory for all girls, might not be made optional for girls who were half-timers. It was necessary there should be compulsory sewing; but in industrial districts, where girls were half-timers, they got so little opportunity for mental training that he thought sewing should not be made part of the curriculum. Then, as to Clause 6, the Department had to steer between two shoals, the danger of mechanical instruction, and the danger of trusting everything to inspection. If they wished to give the Inspector greater power and liberty, they would be exposed to the danger of its being said that they were putting the schoolmaster under the Inspector, and enabling the Inspector to impose his own theories upon a whole district. That was a danger they ought to be alive to—the danger of excessive State interference. He was sufficiently in favour of local individualism not to wish to see that, but to see something like free play and individual working out of the educational system in the country. A stereotyped pattern of education throughout the country would be, on the whole, bad, although it might be useful in backward districts. He welcomed No. 8 as to adult teachers; but he should like to call the attention of his right hon. Friend to No. 8 in connection with Nos. 36 and 37. He gathered from the Vice President of the Council that by the latter Articles of the Code it was intended to wipe out the ex-pupil teacher in favour of certificated teachers. He did not dissent from that; but he should like to ask what was the meaning in No. 8 of an adult teacher up to the number of 40, and a certificated teacher when the number amounted to 60. Then, in No. 20, needlework would cease to be a class subject. It had been put in as a necessary subject according to the Schedule; but it would be a necessary subject in the routine of the day, and not a class subject. He did not object to that; but he would remind the Vice President of the Council that if he put needlework in the Schedule he would materially raise the standard, because at present, if needlework was taught according to Schedule, it was taught as a class subject, and it became a matter for extra grants. The modification of the specific subjects was too minute a proposal to be discussed at that hour; but it would naturally be discussed in the autumn by persons practically engaged in education. In No. 28, he thought the Vice President was going too far in the direction of checking and discouraging specific subjects unless elementary subjects were well taught. He had not the slightest objection to the provision that where less than 75 per cent passed in elementary subjects the grant should not be paid in that particular year for specific subjects; but he thought it would be hard to reduce the grant if there was less than 75 per cent passed in the previous year, for there might have been many things, such as an epidemic, for instance, to interfere with the results. He knew schools in one district of London where they frequently got less than 75 per cent, but where the Inspector reported that the state of education was thoroughly satisfactory. In fact, he believed that in that particular district schools were more efficient, passing under 75 per cent, than many other schools passing up to 85 or even 90 per cent, so different was the standard of different Inspectors. Therefore, he thought to prohibit the grant for specific subjects merely on account of the percentage of the school would be a mistake. He should not object to giving the Inspectors some discretionary power, or that if they reported the general teaching of a school to have fallen back, the grant for specific subjects for the coming year should be suspended; but he did not think they should have a mechanical self-acting standard like 75 per cent. With regard to night schools, he sympathized with the desire of the Department to raise the teaching; but night schools took up education after a boy had left the elementary schools, and it was not enough to go to the Seventh Standard in those schools, because some of the boys would probably have passed the sixth or even the seventh by the time they were 13 years old, and for these there would be no further education in the night schools. He should like to see something which would enable night schools to go beyond that. Then, with regard to No. 34 and the three pupil teachers, he sympathized with the intention of the Department to keep down the number; but three pupil teachers would be too many in a small school of, say, 120 average attendance; while, on the other hand, in infant schools with an average of 600 three pupil teachers would not be sufficient. He would rather fix the number at one for every 100 of the average attendance. That would keep down the number of teachers more than the present proposal. As to No. 36, he agreed with the proposal to reduce the value of the certificated assistant, and to let him count for 60 instead of 80; but he thought it would be necessary, if they reduced the value of the assistant, that they should reduce the value of the pupil teacher. He had hitherto been valued as half; but if they made the value 40 as compared with 60, they were stimulating pupil teachers rather than assistants. As to No. 39, dealing with graduates, that had been spoken of as if it were a concession; but it did not concede or give anything of moment, and there was nothing to prevent a graduate of a University getting an appointment to a school and sitting for his certificate. He would admit no ex-pupil teachers unless they were prepared to pass the Government examination; but he would not close the door absolutely to persons who might be of great merit, and. some of whom were doing admirable work in their schools, unless they were prepared to go through a University training. Although, as a rule, that training was valuable, they might get some people who had been teaching in private schools, but could not afford University training, who were very efficient for teaching; and they would be doing great injustice to them and depriving elementary schools of valuable teachers by the present proposal. Then he thought No. 39 would immensely strengthen the argument of the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydvil (Mr. Richard) in favour of breaking down the present monopoly of the Training Colleges. But if they proposed that the only door of admission to the schools should be the Training Colleges, they made an overwhelming argument for the contention against any denominational distinction whatever. On the whole, however, he congratulated his right hon. Friend upon his scheme.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, he thought two parts of the Vice President's speech seemed to afford general satisfaction to the House—his expressed desire to render educational endowments more generally useful, and his statement that he would bring in a Bill next year. Although he did not now propose to go into the question of endowments at any length, he would submit to the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be possible to do something in the meantime. The facts were these. Whereas the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster) hoped that the Endowed Schools Commission would be able to deal with all the endowed schools in five years, 10 years had elapsed and less than half of the schools had been dealt with. He would, therefore, submit to his right hon. Friend whether it was not possible to increase the number of the Charity Commissioners so that there might be some more rapid progress made. Unless that was done it was perfectly clear that they could not hope that any more rapid advance would be secured. He hoped it would not be supposed that he was complaining of the Charity Commissioners. He believed they had worked with all due diligence, and that they were not to blame in the matter. At the same time, the question was one of much importance. It was one thing to prepare a Bill, and another to pass it through Parliament; and, therefore, even if his noble Friend the Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Frederick Cavendish) was prepared to introduce a Bill next year, it was still very desirable to hasten the action of the Endowed Schools Commissioners in the meantime. There was one point connected with higher education upon which he should like to say a word—namely, as to the great desirability of knowing what was being done in the schools of the country. He did not desire to interfere with the action of the head masters and Governing Bodies of schools; but he thought that parents should have the opportunity of knowing what kind of education their sons would receive. They had Blue Books containing interesting and valuable statistics as to the property, land, and buildings belonging to the public schools; but they really had not, until the Returns given him by his noble Friend the Member for Middlesex (Lord George Hamilton) two years ago, any information as to the system of education pursued in the public schools, and he regretted to say, in spite of all that had been said as to the desirability of introducing modern languages and science, only two or three hours at the most were being given to each of them. Those who felt with him in that matter would be sorry to see literature excluded from the public schools; but as there were 42 hours devoted to study he would hope that some greater amount of time would be devoted to those branches.

THE CHAIRMAN

I must point out that the hon. Member is now dealing with the question of secondary schools, whereas the Vote before the Committee is one for the elementary schools.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

thought the Vote included the expenses of the Education Committee; and, therefore, he had considered that he was justified in alluding to that question. He would, however, not pursue the question, but would only ask his right hon. Friend to give attention to the subject. Coming to the question—namely, of specific subjects in elementary schools, there was one point connected with the Inspectors to which he would like to call the attention of his right hon. Friend. His right hon. Friend had told them that evening that he proposed to deal with that subject. Last year he (Sir John Lubbock) troubled the Committee with statistics showing conclusively that the introduction of specific subjects, so far from interfering with reading, writing, and arithmetic, really benefited the merely fundamental subjects; and he thought the statistics which had been produced that day showed that experience had proved that the introduction of specific subjects had not had the effect of interfering with the study of other subjects. Although the hour was late, he hoped he might be permitted to mention one little anecdote which showed how well children were able to follow a little instruction in this matter. A friend of his, the wife of a distinguished Member of that House, had given lessons in mechanics to one of her children only about four years old. Some time afterwards she told him the story of the fox and the crane, and how the crane extracted the bone from the throat of the fox. "When she came to the end of the fable the child said—"Well, Mamma, was it a hand crane, or was it a steam crane?" He regretted to find from their Reports that some of the Inspectors were very unfriendly to the specific subjects. He did not wish to quote any names, because he did not wish to make a personal attack upon the Inspectors. According to the Blue Book, for instance, one of the Inspectors said he had no sympathy with the desire to add science to the subjects already taught; another said that it would be ridiculous to see 3,800,000 children assembled listening to sermons on stones; another stated that children could not understand scientific questions at all; another did not regret that specific subjects were not taught in his schools; and another could not see what business a Fourth Standard child had to be dabbling in science. All this showed how very little appreciation there was of the instruction proposed to be given. He would not weary the Committee with other quotations to the same effect; but he would submit that these gentlemen had such strong views on the matter that they could hardly be expected to give to these specific subjects a fair trial when they were brought before them. He heard one or two expressions which fell from his right hon. Friend in his opening address with great regret. At the same time, he did not think, on further discussion, that it would be found that they differed very much after all. At any rate, he was glad to hear the proposal that technical knowledge should te continued from the commencement of school life until the close. He agreed with what had been said by the hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Lyulph Stanley) as to leaving the school committees as free in this matter as possible. He objected strongly to the proposal to make grammar a compulsory subject. No doubt a very large proportion of schools would take grammar as one of the class subjects; but still he should like to leave the school committees the option of doing as they pleased in that matter. He did not understand how many specific subjects could be taken in addition to class subjects.

MR. MUNDELLA

Two.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

Maya third class subject be taken as a specific subject?

MR. MUNDELLA

Yes.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, he was glad to hear that that was the case. Of course, they could not now discuss all the details of the proposed arrangements. It struck him in looking through the Code that it might be improved in details; for instance, that it made rather too little reference to plants; but that question they would have an opportunity of considering afterwards. He was glad, as a University Member, to see the step which his right hon. Friend proposed to take in that direction; and, on the whole, he thought they might fairly congratulate his right hon. Friend on the fact that the alterations he proposed were likely to be of benefit to the education of the country. He thanked the Committee for allowing him to make these observations; and in sitting down he would only add that they might all congratulate themselves on the energy, ability, and zeal with which the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President was conducting the important duties of his Office.

MR. NEWDEGATE

said, he trusted the hon. Member for Merthyr (Mr. Richard) would excuse him if he expressed some pain at the observations which the hon. Member had addressed to the House. It seemed to him that the hon. Member was bent on invading the voluntary principle. He might be wrong; but that was the impression that the speech of the hon. Member conveyed. He was old enough to remember when the representatives of the denominations strove earnestly for the recognition of that principle, and he very humbly aided them in that object; but now the hon. Gentleman pointed with jealousy to the success of that very principle, because the most successful denomination had been the Church of England. Next to the Church of England, the hon. Member pointed out, not as a subject of congratulation, but as a subject of regret, the amount which the Wesleyans had earned for their Training Colleges. Now, if that was not a recognition of the voluntary principle, he (Mr. Newdegate) knew not what was. The hon. Gentleman would carry the point at issue to this—that not equality of treatment, but numerical equality, should be insisted upon; and that was a most tyrannical principle. The hon. Member would excuse him if he asked the hon. Member to glance back at the period of the Commonwealth. Surely he would accept Cromwell, advised, as he was, by his chaplain, Owen, and his secretary, Milton, as in favour of religious freedom up to the point when freedom became irreligious. If the hon. Member would study the history of the Commonwealth he would find, that Cromwell, advised by Dr. Owen, and with Milton for his secretary, was compelled to restrain with a strong hand that denominational jealousy which that great man clearly foretold would, if gratified, prove fatal to all religious freedom.

MR. H. H. FOWLER

said, it was stated that they had little to do with economy, but that their great point should be efficiency. The Education Department had to consider both economy and efficiency, and the attention of the country had therefore been properly directed to the increased expenditure for educational purposes. The grant in 1870 amounted to something like 9s. 8d. a-head. It had now risen to 15s. 8d. a-head; and he was afraid, from some indications which his right hon. Friend had given, that he did not contemplate any limit to the amount to which the grant might go. He should be sorry to object to any expenditure that would secure the efficiency of the schools; but as there was a growing tendency towards extravagance in the local administration of the educational expenditure of the country, and as it arose, to a great extent, from having the Imperial Exchequer to fall back upon, he did think that that was a point deserving of attention. He did not propose to pursue that matter further; but with respect to the challenge given to him by the right hon. Gentleman, he wished to call attention to one sentence contained in the Report of the right hon. Gentleman himself, which the right hon. Gentleman did not read to the House, but which he (Mr. H. H. Fowler) regarded as very unsatisfactory and very depressing. The Report said that— Whereas, out of 1,900,000 scholars examined, there were 969,000 over 10 years of age who ought to have been presented in Standards IV., V., and VI., but that only 461,000 were so presented. [Mr. MUNDELLA: Hear, [hear!] His right hon. Friend said "Hear, hear;" but he (Mr. Fowler) contended that it was a most unsatisfactory state of affairs that only one-half of the entire number were presented. The Report, however, did not state there what it did in the Appendix—namely, that the total number who passed in Standards IV., V., and VI., out of the 461,000, was only 263,000; and he ventured to say that when they found so large a number who failed in those Standards, it was impossible that they should allow the education to remain there. In Standard VI. last year 52,625 children were presented for examination; but only 58 per cent of that number passed. The practical result of that was that they were paying in this country something like £5,000,000 per annum for the education of the rising generation, out of which the Imperial Exchequer and the local rates contributed £2,750,000, and yet the result was that less than 40,000 children passed a satisfactory examination in reading, writing, and arithmetic. He said that that was not a satisfactory state of things, and he had sufficient confidence in the right hon. Gentleman to believe that he would do his utmost to bring about a better condition of affairs. He was sorry to see in the New Code introduced to the House that night that it was not intended to grapple with the question of the age at which children should be compelled to pass in the several Standards. By Clause 15 it was provided that a boy of 10 years of age, after April, 1883, should be passed over in the First or Second Standards. Now, the First Standard ought to be passed by a boy of seven, the Second by a boy of eight, the Third by a boy of nine, and the Fourth by a boy of 10. And yet he saw a clause introduced to allow children over 10 years of age to go on for two years, and then to allow them to escape two of the Standards. Their educational system had now been in force for 10 years; and he thought the Department would be justified in saying, before they granted the public money to any school children, that a child of seven years must pass in Standard I., another of eight in Standard II, and so on, carrying out their own rule. In that case he did not think it would be found that out of 461,000 children examined in Standard IV. only 260,000 were able to pass. He congratulated his right hon. Friend on the masterly and statesmanlike manner in which he had made his Statement that evening, and on the determination he had evinced to make his administration of that Department a great success; but he would press upon him the necessity of raising, as far as possible, the standard of general education.

MR. MUNDELLA

said, he hoped it would not be thought disrespectful if he did not reply to many of the questions which had been addressed to him in the course of the discussion. The noble Lord the Member for Liverpool (Viscount Sandon) had made some useful suggestions, and also the hon. Member for Oxford University (Mr. J. G. Talbot). He should very much like to allude to those suggestions if it were not for the lateness of the hour. He had only time to answer the question which had been raised by his hon. Friend the Member for Merthyr (Mr. Richard). Before doing so, however, he would say in reply to his hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. H. H. Fowler), who asked him to put more pressure on the schools of the country in order to bring more children into the higher standard, that that was not where the pressure was required. The pressure should be put first on that House, and next on the local authorities. If they wanted the children to pass in the Six Standards they should have the courage to do what was done in Switzerland, Germany, and other countries, and say to the children that they must continue at school from the 6th to the 14th year, until they had passed through all the curriculum laid down. It was of no use saying to a child that it might work half time as soon as it had reached the Second and Third Standards, and full time when it had reached the Fourth, and then complain that the schoolmaster did not make all the children pass the Sixth Standard. It was not the fault of the secular schoolmaster, but of Parliament which seemed to have a low estimate, of what the education ought to be, and had never had the courage to do its duty to the children. They talked about foreign competition, and yet they still sacrificed their children to that foreign competition. When Parliament exhibited more courage his faith in the principles of a higher education would be considerably strengthened. What they ought to do was to keep their children at school up to their 14th year. That was his answer to the statement of the hon. Gentleman, and the whole answer he had to give him. He certainly believed that their system and their schoolmasters were quite as good as those of any other country. He was sorry he was not able to give as complete an answer to the hon. Member for Merthyr (Mr. Richard) as he should like. He confessed that the question of the Training Colleges had not occupied his attention. He was assured, however, that school board teachers did go to the Training Colleges, 123 male and 224 female teachers having passed through them, according to the last Return. He was told that legislation would be necessary on this subject; but that depended on the will of the House. He thought no teacher ought to be debarred from the Training Colleges on account of his other religious opinions, and he was prepared to consider what was necessary to be done in that matter. If his hon. Friend would give him a little time he would look into the question. His noble Friend (Viscount Sandon) had complained that he had set a bad example by making his Statement with the Speaker in the Chair; but he could assure him that this course was adopted after much consideration, and with due regard to the convenience of the House, for had not his Statement been made under these circumstances, he was sure, having regard to the number of Motions on the Paper, that he should have been making it now. He hoped, after the satisfactory discussion which had taken place, that he might be allowed to take this Vote.

MR. ILLING WORTH

said, he regretted that this most important subject of education had been brought on so late in the Session, and at so late an hour of the night. He thought it was a reflection on Members of the House that when small matters were under consideration, there was, as a rule., a full attendance, but that when subjects of the deepest interest were before them they found themselves reduced to scarcely a quorum. The Vice President of the Council had not absolutely closed the door against his hon. Friend (Mr. Richard); but he was bound to say that the assurances he had given were of a very vague character. Now, in these days, when religious tests had been removed in every direction, it was impossible that in such a matter as elementary education those who were qualifying themselves for the position of teachers should be debarred from entering any public training institution they pleased. Sooner or later some change must come. He thought his hon. Friend had put his proposal in the mildest form, having regard to the prejudices of those who sought to maintain the denominational character of the Training Colleges; but if it was found that some relaxation of the present tests was not conceded, he was certain that some radical change must be made in the direction of establishing Training Colleges against which the objection now urged would not lie. The hon. Gentleman the Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) had reproached his hon. Friend with having gone counter to the voluntary system. But he did not see how this could be said, seeing that 95 per cent of the maintenance of these institutions came from the public funds, and that there only remained 5 per cent upon which they could hang their claim to be considered voluntary institutions. They were not voluntary institutions; they were public institutions controlled by denominations and maintained by public money, and they were, therefore, anomalies. It was only fair on the part of his hon. Friend to say that, unless some substantial proposal by way of relief were made, it would be necessary next year to proceed much further than his hon. Friend now proposed. Let hon. Members look at the possible injury done by the present system. The hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Lyulph Stanley) truly stated that the object should be to provide the highest class of teachers which the country could find; and what had been the result of the Test Act so far as our Universities were concerned? The last 17 years would testify. In 11 of those years the highest honours had been taken by Dissenters, who, before the Act was passed, were denied the right of entry. There had been gross injustice done to men belonging to the Dissenting Bodies of the country in placing obstacles in the way of their entrance into suitable training institutions. Again, he must say that the right hon. and other hon. Members were by no means entitled to call the denominational schools of the country voluntary schools, because they were only so to a limited extent; and they knew that a great proportion of their cost came from the taxes of the country and the payments of the children. The great blot on the Education Act of 1870 was the leave given to denominational bodies to claim and occupy as much ground as they liked; and the country, as was well known, was startled by the sudden zeal shown by denominationalists to occupy ground which ought to have been really occupied by a national system of education. In the rural districts it was notorious that this denominational zeal had been shown for the purpose of keeping out board schools and the representative system. He himself had a curious instance of this presented to him in conversation with a clergyman in the North of England, who said—"Although he was certain the change must come, he had been round to all the farmers to put them on their guard against the possibility of having board schools in the parish." That was evidence of the strongest kind of the prejudice which prevailed in certain quarters against the board schools. It was now asked that what was maintained at the public expense, and what was established by national authority, should be put under national control. He deeply regretted that their Episcopalian friends did not take up their position side by side with their fellow-citizens in the maintenance and furtherance of national control with regard to the educational system of the country. In conclusion, his right hon. Friend pointed to the sum of £18,000 a-year contributed in aid of the Training Colleges; but he thought he must know that that sum represented but a small percentage of their entire cost, and by no means entitled him to defend their present position. He believed that those who were favourable to national education in this country would be justified in putting entire confidence in his right hon. Friend, knowing that he would hold the balance fairly, and that justice would be done.

MR. WOODALL

wished to know whether, in addition to the grants upon class subjects, aid would be given towards instruction in specific subjects in night schools?

MR. HEALY

asked, in reference to the statements of the hon. Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. H. H. Fowler), whether it had been brought under notice that the real reason why children were prevented from passing in the higher Standards was that they were compelled, owing to the inherent difficulty of our orthography, to pass the first seven or eight years of their lives in learning to read? He asked, also, whether anything had been done with regard to the Memorial from 130 school boards for making use of a concurrent phonetic system of spelling? He should be glad to know whether the Department had made any inquiries into the matter, and whether they were prepared to give that proposal recognition side by side with the old musical notation? He might as well give Notice that he would take an early opportunity of moving that a Select Committee be appointed to consider the desirability of establishing a phonetic system of spelling.

Vote agreed to.

MR. BIGGAR

said, it was now after 2 o'clock, and he therefore begged to move that the Chairman report Progress. It was unreasonable to keep them sitting here at this hour, when they had most important Business to get through tomorrow. They would, at their next Sitting, have the Land Bill before them again, and it was desirable that they should be able to give that attention to it which would enable them to deal with it satisfactorily. In the last Parliament they were never asked to vote money after 1 o'clock; but now the Government seemed to think it the proper thing to ask them to sit up all night voting money.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Biggar.)

MR. MUNDELLA

said, the question of Science and Art was thoroughly discussed in the early part of the night. The hon. Member for the University of London (Sir John Lubbock) had sat there a very long time to discuss the British Museum Vote.

MR. BIGGAR

said, he did not wish to be unreasonable. The Government were anxious to make a Jew's bargain; but he (Mr. Biggar) desired to be perfectly reasonable. Therefore, on the understanding that after the Science and Art Vote had been disposed of Progress would be reported, he would withdraw his Motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

(2.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £227,181, 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 1882, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Science and Art Department, and of the Establishments connected therewith.

MR. G. HOWARD

said, that in the absence of his hon. Friend the Member for Ayrshire (Mr. Cochran-Patrick), who had interested himself in the matter, and who, if he had been present, would have called attention to it, he wished to say a word with regard to the General Pitt Rivers' Correspondence. A Committee, upon which were to be found some of the very best names from a scientific point of view, was appointed to consider whether General Pitt Rivers' offer should be accepted or not. The Committee unanimously recommended that the collection should be taken over, and one was rather surprised to find that the Department had not adopted that course. They gave as their reason for not accepting the collection, first of all, want of space; but that was a bad argument in connection with a National Museum, especially now that something was being said about enlarging it. The next reason given was that there was a collection of a similar kind at the British Museum. Well, that was entirely disputed not only by General Pitt Rivers himself, but by the Committee, who stated that the collection would not interfere with any existing collection. It was arranged on different principles, and illustrated different points. He would not detain the Committee, but would urge most strongly on the Government the desirability of reconsidering their decision. He trusted they had not given a final answer.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, that, as Chairman of the Committee to which reference had been made, he hoped he should be allowed to say one or two words. He had heard one or two murmurs, and if hon. Members were to discuss these Votes, he trusted the Committee would allow them to do it without interruption. This collection of General Pitt Rivers was, perhaps, one of the finest collections in the world. The collection was offered to the nation by General Pitt Rivers, and not only that, but this gentleman undertook, if the collection were accepted, to provide a curator at his own expense. The Committee unanimously decided that the collection was of the greatest value and interest, and should be accepted; and, having done that, the Government then declined to receive it, on the ground of want of space. It would have been much better if the Government had made up their mind not to accept the collection at the outset, instead of appointing a Committee of scientific gentlemen, whose time was of great value to them, whose recommendation had been ignored. He did not suppose the hon. Member wished to divide the Committee on this Vote; but he (Sir John Lubbock) would like to know whether the decision of the Department was final, or whether the matter was still open? General Pitt Rivers did not care whether the collection was under the South Kensington authorities or those of the British Museum; but, having got together a most interesting collection, he wished to present it to the nation, and it appeared to him (Sir John Lubbock) very unwise to decline it, and not to see whether some arrangement could not be made under which it could be accepted. If the Government did not care about putting the collection in the South Kensington Museum or the British Museum, arrangements could, perhaps, be made for exhibiting it permanently at Liverpool or Manchester. He therefore ventured to express a hope that the Government would not look upon this matter as absolutely finally closed, but would place themselves in communication with General Pitt Rivers, with a view to seeing whether some arrangement could not be made for the purpose of accepting this very valuable collection for the benefit of the nation.

MR. MUNDELLA

The Department quite recognized the public spirit of General Pitt Rivers; but the ground on which they have declined the collection is that it is not suitable for preservation in the Museum at South Kensington, where the collections have reference to Art and applied Science. It is an ethnological collection, and can be of no kind of value in the work South Kensington has to do. As to want of space, the hon. Member is mistaken about that. The gallery in which the collection is arranged belonged to the Commissioners of 1851. They at first allowed us to have it without rent; but they now ask us to pay £2,000 a-year for it. More than that, General Pitt Rivers says the collection requires a certain amount of space, and that amount of space seems to us to be altogether out of proportion to the advantages of possessing the collection. He says he will require almost double the amount of space he at present occupies at once, and then he desires to have the collection entirely under his own control. He requires that the collection shall not in any way be dispersed, or dealt with otherwise than as he pleases. He insists on having it entirely under his own management during his lifetime. It seems to me that gifts made to the nation in this form should not be accepted. No one, however generous he may be, has a right to impose these conditions. A gentleman, in giving a collection, should say, as many people have said before—" You may take my collection as a whole, and I will have no connection with it whatever." As it is, General Pitt Rivers wants to have the collection under his own control, and we are to pay the expense of its maintenance. The proper place for the collection is the British Museum, where there is already a small collection. Why should not this collection go with the National Collection? No doubt it is a very interesting collection; indeed, it afforded me considerable pleasure when I went to see it; but, at the same time, South Kensington is not the place for it.

MR. THOROLD ROGERS

said, what a pity it was that General Pitt Rivers did not go to the University of Oxford, where he would have got abundant room and better treatment than he had received from the stingy autocratic body he had gone to.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, the collection was at South Kensington already, so that the objection of want of space was not a good one. If they accepted the collection, and desired to part with it, the Government could give it up again at any time. General Pitt Rivers had offered to provide a curator; and, again, on the question of space, hon. Members would see, if they referred to the Report of the Committee he had referred to, that they had expressly guarded themselves against the demand for so much space. If it was understood that the refusal was on the part of the South Kensington authorities, and not on the part of the Government as a whole, they would have gained their point. Whether the collection was put in South Kensington or the British Museum was not a matter of importance. What they desired was that this valuable collection should not be lost to the nation.

MR. MAGNIAC

said, he entirely agreed with the view which had been taken of this matter by the South Kensington authorities. The collection was entirely different to anything at South Kensington, and it took up an enormous amount of room. It was utterly unsuitable, and the Government was right in not accepting it. It was said that General Pitt Rivers would provide a curator. So he would; but at his death the authorities at South Kensington would have to look after the collection themselves. As to the British Museum taking the collection, that was entirely a matter for General Pitt Rivers and the Museum Trustees. The Government could not control them, and if General Pitt Rivers wished his collection to go to South Kensington, he had nothing to do but to go to the Trustees. It would be putting their funds to an improper purpose to accept the collection at South Kensington.

MR. HEALY

said, there was an item of £150 for house rents for Sir Richard Wallace's Collection, which was removed in 1873. Why should the Vote have gone on since 1873? This Vote embraced the Dublin Museum of Science and Art, and he was sorry that the Vote should have been taken, as the hon. Member for Carlow (Mr. Gray), who was not now present, was very much interested in it. The hon. Member would be in his place to-morrow, and he (Mr. Healy) had hoped that he would have been able to speak upon this matter. There was a strong feeling in Ireland on the subject of the Science and Art Museum of Dublin, and it would have given his hon. Friend much satisfaction if he could have had an assurance with regard to it.

MR. MAGNIAC

said, that on page 314, in what was supposed to be a resumé and analysis of the Vote, there was an item of £30,380 for "purchases, catalogues, &c. There was not a line, however, in the Estimates showing what the purchases had been. They knew that South Kensington and the other Departments must purchase specimens; but it was desirable that the details of those purchases should be shown, as, owing to jealousy, the different Departments might compete with one another.

MR. MUNDELLA

As to the question asked by the hon. Member opposite, I stated about a month ago that we had sent a person over to Ireland to see what amount of space was required at the Dublin Museum, and to prepare a ground plan. We have received from the Treasury a notice that the Office of Works in Dublin is prepared to put out an advertisement inviting tenders for the building of a new Science and Art Museum forthwith. Nothing can be done until that matter is decided.

MR. BIGGAR

wished to have an explanation of the item £6,234 for "Simpkin's Defalcations," and of the item £500 for "Solar Physics." What did these Votes mean?

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, he was sorry to state that "Simpkin's Defalcations" was an item which had appeared in the accounts for many years. The defalcations were only wiped out last year. With respect to "Solar Physics," he thought that explained itself.

MR. HEALY

said, he saw in the Vote the item of £150 for house rent, and he would suggest that if it was to be a permanent item it should be transferred to the Buildings Vote.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he thought the noble Lord was right in saying the solar physics spoke for itself. It was evident he had not much to say in support of it, and all the best authorities in the country thought that this item ought not to appear in the Estimates. The ex-Astronomer Royal, writing on this subject, said— I think that the granting of public money for scientific research ought not to be sanctioned, unless in one of the following cases:—Either where it appears probable that results useful to the public will be obtained, or whore it appears that scientific investigations, interesting to the educated classes, and commensurate with the probable cost, are beyond the reach of private persons or societies, but may be undertaken with advantage at the public expense. My objection to the establishment of the Committee on Solar Physics is intended to apply only so far as it is a paid Committee; I do not object to the purpose for which the Committee was appointed, or to the payment of a secretary, or to expenses incidental to an office. The Committee, I believe, have faithfully discharged their understood duties, and I shall willingly co-operate with them to the best of my power. What was this item? £500 was paid to one or two men who thought they were promoting scientific research, while they were simply amusing themselves by looking through telescopes and spectroscopes from one year's end to another. He was not at all singular in his opinion upon this. In April there was a special meeting of the Royal Astronomical Society with regard to this item, and the following resolutions were passed:— (1.) That, in the opinion of this Society, the granting of public money for scientific research, in cases where it does not appear that results useful to the public will be obtained, or where the researches proposed are likely to be undertaken by private individuals or public bodies, does not tend to the real advancement of science. (2.) That this meeting considers it inexpedient that a Physical Observatory should be founded at the national expense. (3.) That this meeting is of opinion that the Government grant to the Committee on Solar Physics at South Kensington should be discontinued. (4.) That, in the opinion of this meeting, full accounts should be published of all money expended by the Government for scientific purposes, and that in all cases the nature of the work to be undertaken should be defined as clearly as possible. His expression as to looking through telescopes was not his own; it was the expression of Sir Edmund Beckett, who said— You may employ anybody if you like to amuse himself with looking through a telescope and a spectroscope, and there may be no definite work expected; and— On the other hand, if a man is to be paid for only amusing himself, in order that he may every now and then publish a book on some solar theory, or something of that kind, there is no sort of security that he will be employed usefully. And again— There was the great object that was to be obtained by what has been called in later times by the amusing name of the science of sunspottery. I do not know that that science so-called has done much for mankind. These were the views of the Astronomical Society, and he thought that Society might be supposed to have as good a knowledge of the subject as Members of this House. Mr. Ranyard, one of the members of the Society— Considered that those who asked for endowment ought to be able to show the usefulness of the researches upon which they were engaged—for instance, that the study of solar physics was useful to prevent periodical famines in India, and so on. Mr. Bidden, who was certainly an authority, said— Having listened to the letter of the Astronomer Royal, he thought it was directed to discouraging" the grant of money to gentlemen of a scientific turn who had no particular definite object in view, but who desired to promote in a particular manner the science in which they were interested, without any evidence of its being for the benefit of mankind in general. No doubt, many would be very glad to spend more of their time in scientific experiment, and to dignify it with the name of scientific research; but there should be an adequate motive of public utility for making an application for a grant of public money. He thought that was very reasonable, and he should be glad if the Government could state what Public Service had been forwarded by voting this item for Solar Physics year after year. He had no hesitation in saying that he regarded it as a waste of money, given to keep a particular individual in a very pleasant semi-occupation—in something like what Addison called "physic-idleness." It was not worth while to pay £500 to gentlemen for physi-idleness.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £226,681, 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 1882, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Science and Art Department, and of the Establishments connected therewith."—(Mr. Arthur O'Connor.)

MR. STORY-MASKELYNE

thought the observations of the hon. Member ought not to pass without comment by one who knew Mr. Norman Lockyer. He did not like to hear an hon. Member, who knew nothing about this matter, speaking of the labours of scientific men in a most insolent manner—

MR. HEALY

rose to Order, and asked whether the term "insolent manner" was a proper term to use?

THE CHAIRMAN

I do not know whether it is un-Parliamentary, but it is not becoming.

MR. STORY-MASKELYNE

would withdraw the words, and substitute "most unbecoming manner." He was sure that if the hon. Member knew anything at all about the branch of science to which Mr. Lockyer had contributed important discoveries, one of which had been crowned by the medal of the French Academy—a body that was certainly a good judge—he would see that something had been done by the gentleman of whom he spoke in such a flippant manner. He did not think any £500 could be voted for a better purpose than that of promoting such research.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he certainly would not withdraw his Amendment. He knew it was Mr. Lockyer who was concerned; but he had not gone upon his own opinion, but on those of the ex-Astronomer royal and other members of the Society.

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH

said, this Vote was made on the special recommendation of a special Committee of distinguished gentlemen.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, he had been talking to the ex-Astronomer Royal a few days ago, and thought he expressed an opinion rather the opposite of those given in the passages quoted by the hon. Member.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

repeated that what he had read had been the proceedings of the Royal Astronomical Society in April last. Mr. Christie, the new Astronomer Royal, read the letter of the ex-Astronomer Royal in the sense in which he signed the first of the third resolutions.

MR. HEALY

said, he differed somewhat from his hon. Friend the course he had taken; but he thought the hon. Member was as much entitled to be heard on the subject as the hon. Member for Cricklade (Mr. Story-Maskelyne). His hon. Friend had known Mr. Lockyer for 15 years as a friend; and he was, therefore, perhaps, competent to know what that gentleman's capabilities were. He himself would not oppose any Vote for scientific research; for he did not think this country spent enough in that direction. He believed every one of Mr. Lockyer's theories had been confuted; but they could not expect to get truth without discussion, and he would respectfully ask his hon. Friend to withdraw his Amendment.

MR. MUNDELLA

said, he would also appeal to the hon. Member to withdraw. What this country had done in science was highly valued in India.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he was perfectly convinced that this was money thrown away; but as he did not think he should have anyone to "tell" with him he would withdraw.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(3.) £69,939, to complete the sum for British Museum.

MR. SPENCER WALPOLE

You are about to move, Sir, the Vote for the British Museum, and there are two points upon which I wish to speak. The first is on the apparent increase in the Estimate. That is not an increase proper, but is an increase entirely, or almost entirely, on account of the removal of collections to the South Kensington Museum, and for the necessary increase of the staff. At the same time, I expect this increase will go on for a few years until the whole of the collections are removed. The other point arises out of an observation which I understand was made earlier in the discussion upon the grants to private local institutions. The right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council will probably be pleased to hear what I am going to say. Two or three years ago power was given to the Museum to give duplicates to these local institutions. I understand that something has been said this evening to the effect that the Trustees of the Museum neither give duplicates nor lend any part of their collections to these institutions; but the Trustees are forbidden by Parliament from lending their collections, and are bound to preserve all collections in the Museum to all posterity. With regard to duplicates, when we transferred the Natural History Collections, we took care to see what duplicates could be given, and several have been sent to six or seven of the largest institutions in the country. The question of loans is one involving much greater considerations than can be discussed on a mere Vote. Those loans can only be made by Act of Parliament, and then you will have to consider whether you will entirely alter the British Museum as contrasted with the South Kensington Museum, the one being a repository where everything is to be found for the purposes of study; the other being a place more or less for the granting of loans. I venture to sug- gest this for the consideration of the Committee.

MR. THOROLD ROGERS

said, he fully recognized the force of the remarks which had been made by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Walpole); but it was only fair to say that the position taken up by the Trustees of the British Museum in regard to the lending of books and manuscripts was regarded by most foreigners as singularly churlish. They could get the loan of MSS. from Florence, Vienna, Berlin, and other places; and the University of Oxford, with which he was connected, was also willing to lend any rare books or MSS. it possessed. A rigid rule against lending prevailed, however, in the British Museum, and it was an exceedingly churlish rule. He hoped that the Trustees would be induced to make some arrangement by which important MSS. and documents might be lent to other Museums, where they would be copied and kept in perfect safety. He only made these remarks in consequence of what the right hon. Gentleman had said, and also in connection with the fact that a large amount of the treasures of the British Museum was rendered practically useless to the great mass of scholars throughout the world in consequence of the great expense attending a journey to London, that being the only place where there was a possibility of seeing them.

MR. MAGNIAC

said, he wished to make an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Walpole), as one of the Trustees of the British Museum, to induce the Museum occasionally to part with some of its MSS., and also to extend the hours during which the building was allowed to remain open. He thought the adoption of such a policy would be of material advantage to the country, and conduce to promote the interests of the Museum itself. If the Trustees were of opinion that at present they had no power to do this, a short Act of Parliament might be brought in giving them the power, and he believed it would be hailed with great satisfaction. The library of the Museum was at present rich in the possession of MSS., and only wanted one other collection to be quite perfect. He believed that a good collection of Spanish MSS. was the only absentee, and he trusted that steps would be taken to remedy the deficiency.

MR. STORY-MASKELYNE

desired to say a word in regard to the transfer of the collections from the British Museum to South Kensington. The transfer commenced more than a year ago; and at the time when the last year's Vote was taken the collection of minerals with which he had been connected for a period of 32 years had been already removed to the South Kensington Museum without the slightest accident, and had been arranged in accordance with plans previously made for its exhibition and safe-keeping. He was sorry to think, however, that this was the only collection which had yet been completely transferred. He believed that the Geological Collection had been transferred, but that it had not yet been completely arranged. The Botanical Collection was nearly transferred; but in biology not a single specimen had as yet been removed. He thought it was a great pity, seeing that an important and costly Museum had been built at South Kensington for the reception of these collections, that so long a time should elapse before it was in a position to fulfil the purpose to which it had been dedicated. At present the space to be vacated at the British Museum was still incapable of being devoted to the collections remaining at that locality. It was very much to be regretted, and he wished to know whether any steps towards completing the transfer were about to be taken? He believed that the keeper of the Department had an idea that he must move all at once or not at all. It seemed to him (Mr. Story - Maskelyne), however, that it would very much help the transfer to move part, and that a good deal might be done in arranging such a part in the course of the next few months. He understood that most of the cases were now very nearly ready for the reception of the specimens; and he hoped to have some assurance from the right hon. Gentleman that the transfer was to be soon begun and be rapidly and properly carried on. He believed that there would be plenty of room in the Museum for General Pitt Rivers' Collection, if it was a collection of a kind desirable to be incorporated with those now at the British Museum—a point on which there seemed to be much question.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK

said, the difficulty in completing the removal of the Natural History Collection arose from the fact that it had been found impossible to induce the late Government to give the money that was required for providing the necessary cases; and it was impossible to remove the various specimens of birds and animals until cases were fitted up for their reception. He thought that hon. Members would hardly wish that some of the specimens should be removed before the whole of them could be transferred. If they were removed bit by bit they were likely to sustain injury. As to the desirability of allowing the precious MSS. possessed by the British Museum to go abroad, although a good deal might be said in favour of it, still there were various considerations of great weight which had hitherto induced those who had looked into the matter to believe that it was better to keep them in England. At any rate, the Trustees could not fairly be blamed for not doing so, because at present they had no power. To lend the MSS. as suggested would be contrary to the law.

Vote agreed to.

MR. BIGGAR

thought the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council would not object now to report Progress. There were several other Orders upon the Paper which it would be necessary to dispose of, and the hour was late—nearly 3 o'clock. He did not mean to argue that the next two or three Votes were likely to give rise to much discussion; but they would occupy no larger amount of time on the next Supply night than they would then. He would therefore, suggest to the right hon. Gentleman the propriety of reporting Progress.

MR. MUNDELLA

said, he did not propose to take any of the succeeding Votes, except the Vote for Education in Scotland. He would take that Vote, which he believed would not require discussion, and he would then move to report Progress.

(4.) £228,435, to complete the sum for Public Education, Scotland.

MR. J. A. CAMPBELL

wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council how Scotland would be affected by the new arrangements in regard to the Education Code? Nothing had been said in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman before the House went into Committee as to Scotland; and he was afraid that it was not intended to extend the advantages of the New Code to Scotland. He trusted that no length of time would be allowed to elapse before Scotland received a scheme somewhat similar to that which was now offered to England. He wished, further, to ask the right hon. Gentleman why it was that the Education Department had not yet put in force two of the provisions of the Education (Scotland) Amendment Act, 1878, relating to the examination of higher class schools—which were part of the Scotch educational system. One of these provisions related to the examination of higher class schools which were not under school boards—private schools—and gave power to the Department to appoint Examiners to such schools, provided that the managers of the schools offered suitable payment for the examination? There would thus be no expense to the Department in carrying out this provision of the Act. The second provision related to the examination of higher class schools under school boards. In that case, there would be some additional expense to the Education Department; but it would be very little compared with the great advantage which the cause of education would derive from having an examination of the higher class schools conducted by officers of the Education Department, and having all the schools examined on one uniform system. If this were done, it would give the school boards a much higher sense of the importance of the schools of this kind under their charge. He would, therefore, ask if the Education Department contemplated putting in operation these two provisions of the Education (Scotland) Amendment Act of 1878?

MR. MUNDELLA

said, the scheme contained in the New Code was intended to apply to England and Wales only; but if the Scotch people approved of it there would be no difficulty in extending it to Scotland. The necessity, however, for a New Code was not so urgent in Scotland as in England, because many of the provisions contained in the new arrangement were already adopted in Scotland. The Scotch Code was very much more liberal than the English Code; but if the New Code was found to work satisfactorily, he should be perfectly ready to make the two systems thoroughly uniform. As to the other question of the hon. Member in regard to the provisions of the Education (Scotland) Amendment Act of 1878, the hon. Gentleman would probably be aware that some doubts had been expressed as to the provisions in regard to the examination of higher class schools and the power of inspection possessed by the Department under the Act. He should be happy to take the question into consideration.

Vote agreed to.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow.