§ Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Amendment to Question 22nd March, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
§
Which Amendment was—
To leave out from the word 'That,' to the end of the Question, in order to add the words 'in the opinion of this House, the provision for education in Ireland in all its branches (primary, secondary, and university) is insufficient and unsatisfactory, and that the interests of the Irish have been and are suffering most ruinous injury from the long delay in applying a remedy '—(Mr. Murphy).—instead thereof.
§ Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
§ MR. CLANCYsaid after the speeches that had already been made he did not think he would be justified in dealing at any length with the question now before the House, but there were one or two remarks he would like to make upon the subject of University education. He entirely agreed with the remarks of the hon. Member for East Mayo when he said that he thought reform in this matter ought to begin not from the bottom but from the top. It was too much the habit to assume that University education was intended for the higher or richer classes of the population. They had been for so long accustomed to the fact that the revenues, the honours, and the emoluments, of the great Universities in this country and in Ireland had been appropriated for the purposes of the rich classes that he thought many people had come to the conclusion that such an appropriation was in fact right and proper. For his 702 part he thought that those who took that view entirely forgot the history of the University. The Rev. Charles Kingsley, in the original preface to "Alton Locke," drew attention to the fact that the Universities were founded not for the rich but for the poor, that the endowments of the universities were provided by bequests and gifts of generous testators and others especially for the education of the poor, and for many years after their foundation it was a matter of fact that both the great English universities were devoted almost exclusively to the training of the poor. In course of time that had been changed, and the rich had come to regard as for their own benefit that which was left for the benefit of the poor. It had been going on for so long that people now had come to think that that was the proper way in which University endowments should be appropriated. Ireland, being a poor country, took a different view. The majority of people in Ireland being poor they were the very persons for whom the Universities ought to be especially provided. It was no answer to this demand to say that they had not many students in Ireland to attend any new or old University, for they would have plenty of students if endowments were opened to the children of the poor just as they had been open for many years to the children of the poor in Scoland. He had listened to the speech of the hon. Member for the Cricklade division of Wiltshire with a feeling of despair. The hon. Gentleman was one who had presumably made himself acquainted with the history of the question, and yet he thought it right to give the House a re-hash of all the secularist arguments which the most advanced secularists in Enrope, Ireland, and Scotland had been advancing in vain for the last twenty-five years. Granting for the sake of argument that what he said about the bishops and priests coercing the conscience of the Irish on this matter was true, how much further did it carry them? Whatever brought about the present state of things—whether it was the bishops or priests, or the innate objection of the Catholic people to enter institutions which they regarded as hostile to their faith and nationality—the fact was plain that 703 they would not go there. They were faced with a situation in Ireland in which the overwhelming majority of the Catholics, for one reason or other, were resolutely opposed to availing themselves of the benefits of higher education, and the question was not as to who brought this about, or the cause' of this state of things, but how it was to be remedied. Did anyone in the House, even the greatest secularist, think it better that the people of Ireland should be ignorant than that they should follow the course that they had themselves selected? The secularist arguments did not carry the matter one whit beyond the stage which it reached twenty-five or thirty years ago, and those arguments, if prolonged until the Day of Judgment, would not effect a revolution. He would not refer to the religious difficulty, but he wished to draw the attention of the Chief Secretary to the fact that he as a Nationalist rejected the idea of being forced, as some of them had been forced, into halls of learning where the spirit of English oppression in the past had been the principal thing met with. When he was at Queen's College he felt he was in a kind of glorified police barracks. He felt the hand of the police on him. He felt the hand of the Lord-Lieutenant and his Proclamation. He felt the hand of the Privy Council in Dublin Castle. He felt the hand of the resident magistrate. He thought they all pervaded the place, and he made up his mind that if ever he had any children they should never enter an institution like that, to be converted by force, perhaps, into English Protestants. Trinity College, Dublin, was not only an anti-Catholic institution; it was also an anti - Nationalist institution. As recently as last Saturday when the Nationalist Lord Mayor of Dublin was having his annual procession through the streets of Dublin, the only place where any insult was offered to him was at Trinity College, where the students came out and threw mud and flour at him. That was the spirit of Trinity College, and that was the institution which the children of Nationalists were asked to enter. They would reject, and would always continue to reject, any such invitation 704 What gave this country at the present time the right to say to the Catholics of Ireland: "We offer you this because we think it right?" If there was a single thing in which every man ought to be supreme it was in that of the education of his own children, and it was not for any hon. Member who differed in religion and perhaps in politics to say: "You are wrong; we know better than you, and because we are stronger we will force our opinions upon you." That was not liberation according to his opinion, nor was it democracy. It offended against the just principles of liberty. They could not go into Trinity College because, in the words of the late Prime Minister, it was Protestant in every sense in which it could be. Catholics of Ireland asked for a college open to everybody who chose to come in and work for its honours, its prizes, and its emoluments. They might get there, if they wished, by public examination. There should be no tests, and on the governing body there should not be a majority of bishops. Start by making it as Catholic as Trinity College was Protestant, and they would be perfectly satisfied whatever happened afterwards. He could not see on what ground that could be objected to by the hon. Gentleman for the Cricklade Division of Wiltshire, except that in the botton of his heart and, perhaps without knowing it, he was going on the old principle of persecution, namely, that the Catholic religion ought not to be tolerated. He would give every man what he wanted in this respect. Those who were opposed to him would only give what they thought right themselves, and force that upon others. Such a thing was intolerable, and he warned the Government that any such doctrine might have a serious effect upon the political conduct of the Nationalist Party. He would not allude to the religious difficulty, but he would say that reform in university, intermediate and primary education must proceed on Irish lines, and not on anti-Irish lines. All these systems at present were from top to bottom not only anti-Catholic but anti-Irish as well. The object of them all had been the anglicisation of the Irish people. The whole system of education in Ireland—university, intermediate, and primary— 705 needed reformation. The education offered to the Irish people was essentially anti-Irish. Here was a verse which Irish children in the national schools were expected to get by heart—
I thank the goodness and the graceThat on my birth have smiled,And made me in these Christian timesA happy English child.Here was their geography—On the east of Ireland is England, where the Queen lives. Many people who live in Ireland were born in England.The children were not told, however, that they lived in Ireland on good, fat salaries. Every other nation taught its history to the children of its citizens, but in Ireland Irish history was banned and forgotten. But the campaign against the nationality of Ireland had failed, because it was a fight against nature. There was, however, something in the soil of a country, something in being born on that soil and brought up on it and taking breath amongst its mountains, lakes and rivers, and something in the thought that beneath that soil lay the ashes of their fathers. There was something in the thought that they lived amid scenes of past deeds and past glories. It was this something that created within them a genuine spirit of patriotism and a feeling of love for one's own country, a reverence for its past, and a desire to help it along the path of happiness and prosperity. He believed most solemnly that if they could clear the whole of the inhabitants out of Ireland to-morrow morning and plant there a race of the strongest Protestants they could get from England or Scotland, in five, ten, or fifteen years at the most they would develop a spirit of Irish patriotism which would astonish the people of this country. Every wise Government in the world had recognised this spirit of patriotism, but in Ireland it was dreaded, and the love of Ireland, which was what was meant by patriotism, was confounded with hatred of England, which it did not mean. People often confounded the two. The patriotism of Ireland was a love for their country, which was totally distinct from that spurious form of patriotism which consisted of the hatred of any other country. It was this genuine spirit of patriotism 706 which great statesmen for generations had sought to crush, but they had failed. They had now eighty-three Irish Nationalist representatives as against sixteen hon. Gentlemen who were still standing on the banks of the Boyne. With regard to the Gaelic League movement, it was conquering its opponents, who were being forced to teach the Irish language which they despised, and the thing was bound to go on. But to-day, as in the past, the education offered to the Irish people was essentially anti-Irish; that was proved by the fact that there was not a University College or any recognised school or class of Irish history. England taught English history to its children, and the children of France, Germany, and other countries were taught the history of their own country, and only in Ireland was Irish history banned or forgotten. What was the result? Had it been beneficial to England? Those who had been reared up in these anti-Irish institutions—had they become good Englishmen? They were bad Irishmen, but they were worse Englishmen. As a matter of fact they were citizens of no country, and there were some specimens of them in this House. He thought they had a right to ask the Chief Secretary to ponder deeply over this question and to insist that the Irish language should be taught in every school over which he had control. The Chief Secretary himself had written two volumes of Irish history which he thought might be put into the hands of Englishmen generally with great benefit to the Irish Nationalist cause. He hoped he would do what he could for the circulation of that book.
§ MR. CLANCY,in conclusion, assured the House that, speaking for the laity, they would refuse to avail themselves of any system of education, whether University, intermediate, or primary, which was anti-Irish and anti-Catholic. He warned the House that if they persisted in denying to Ireland what they wanted in this matter the result would not be to the political advantage of England.
§ MR. WYNDHAM (Dover)I think we shall have a much better chance of making some practical progress with education if we separate it altogether from other considerations. I will, therefore, not allow myself to be led away by the undoubted relation of this question to political considerations. When I came down to the House this afternoon I did not intend to speak, but that intention was altered by the speech of the hon. Member for Cambridge University. All who listened to that speech must have been deeply impressed by its logical cogency and scholarly charm. He put the case clearly and well, because he did justice to the view sincerely entertained by many that a system of mixed education is better than a system of denominational education, and because he confessed that so far as Ireland was concerned we must abandon the hope of the success of mixed education, and consider the advisability of giving denominational education. Any hon. Member of this House who happens to have been Chief Secretary for Ireland in his day must address himself to such a subject as this with a certain amount of disability, for he lays himself open to the charge "Why did you not do something yourself? "My excuse, if not my justification, is twofold. The hon. Member for East Mayo referred somewhat pointedly to a speech I made two years ago, in which I stated that in my opinion there is a great and growing disparity between the opportunities for education enjoyed by Ireland and those enjoyed by England. The hon. Member for North Camberwell later expressed his opinion that if that disparity is to be diminished we ought in Ireland to begin by way of primary education and not by way of the University. For my own part I take the opposite view, and the view which I stated two years ago is the view I hold now. Time will not admit of my proving that there is a great and growing disparity between the opportunities for education in Ireland and in England. As a Unionist, the temptation is for me to gloss over that fact. My second argument is that while I was in Ireland three separate investigations upon education were conducted and no one who read those three separate reports can 708 doubt this great disparity between the opportunities in the two countries. The hon. Member for North Camberwell said he preferred building up from the foundation. This metaphor drawn from architecture is altogether out of place in talking of education. Education must always start from the University. England enjoyed the advantages of University education for a thousand years before we thought of elementary education. If education is given by men who know what education is, that is to say, by men who have had the advantage of a University training themselves, then the advantage of that education will flow down and irrigate all ranks of life in Ireland, and I should expect greater things of intermediate and primary education. But until the opportunities for University education in Ireland are greater, it is wasting money to spend more upon the primary and intermediate systems. The hon. Member for North Camberwell dealt with primary education, but his arguments were directed more to matters of finance and not education, for he spoke of the school houses in Ireland not being good enough, and the teachers not being adequate for the needs of the schools. But that is not a question of education. As to primary education, which is acceptable to the people of Ireland it is cheap, but it is not good education. The intermediate education is not acceptable to the people of Ireland, and it is dear and bad. As to University education, I believe that that which may be obtained at Trinity College is very good, but it is not cheap and it is unacceptable to a great number of people in Ireland. In saying that I do not utter a word of criticism on Trinity College, which is a sort of sister to Oxford and Cambridge. Such a fountain of higher learning ought to be a source of national pride to any country, but it doss not follow that it meets the needs of the great majority of the population. I will accordingly leave Trinity College out of what I am going to say, with my best wishes that it may in the future produce great Irishmen who will reflect great honour upon their country. The disparity to which I have referred is more obvious in respect of higher education than of intermediate or primary education. In England, besides Oxford and 709 Cambridge, there are a number of Universities of another type. You have a multiplication of Univers ties at Liverpool Manchester, Glasgow, and Sheffield, which administer to local sentiments and local needs. I hold as strongly as ever I did that the great need of Irish education at the present moment is that Ireland should receive facilities such as are afforded in England by Universities like those of Birmingham, Live pool, Sheffield, Glasgow, and Edinburgh. That is not an object which need evoke either religious or political contention. Would it injure Trinity College? If these needs, which are different from the needs supplied by Trinity College, are satisfied, that feud will be appeased, and I believe more Irish Catholics would go to Trinity, because the men who require that class of education will not be abandoning the cause of the men who require University education of another type. I think it would improve Trinity College, and I do not think any injury would be done to the existing colleges where undenominational education is given. I think they would be improved. As has been pointed out, undenominational education has been tried and has failed everywhere except in Belfast. Mixed education has been tried at Trinity College, and has succeeded only partially. The problem is to provide in other parts of Ireland an education which is acceptable because it is denominational and within the means of those who sought to obtain it. That is a practical question, not a political or religious question. The plea for denominational education in my opinion becomes stronger the higher the grade of education. In elementary education, which is confined perhaps to reading, writing and arithmetic, a strong case can be made out for even secularisation, but when you come to the higher branches of learning it is only fair that the son of any parent should have the denominational view as well as other views of religion and philosophy placed before him. Hon. Gentleman opposite desire that education should be undenominational. But unless the education provided is acceptable and within the people's means there will be no higher education in Ireland in adequate quantity, and intermediate 710 and primary education will be largely wasted. If the Chief Secretary attempts to deal with the question of Irish education I will do my best not to embarrass him either by what I say or by what I leave unsaid.
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BRYCE,) Aberdeen, S.The debate has covered so wide a range that it will be impossible for me to deal with all the points which have been raised in the limited time at my disposal. The debate has been remarkable for some eloquent contributions from hon. Members who I hope will often join in our debates. Let me express first of all the pleasure with which I am sure we all listened to the vigorous and luminous speech of the hon. Member for North Galway. Let me also express my admiration of the speech made by the hon. Member for Cambridge University, a maiden speech which I have seldom heard equalled in this House, for it was remarkable not only for its elevation of tone, but also for its singular beauty. It is extremely difficult for me to-night to attempt to cover such a wide field, I and I must apologise for my imperfect knowledge of many of the subjects which have been brought forward. I? have endeavoured since I took office to acquire some knowledge of the extremely difficult and complicated system of education in Ireland. Perhaps the best thing I can do under the circumstances is to deal briefly with the points raised, and then pass on and express my views on the general question of education in Ireland. The first and certainly one of the most important is the question of teachers' salaries. There is no doubt that the salaries of teachers are inadequate. They are, as the hon. Member for North Camber-well pointed out, very much below the salaries of teacher in England and Scotland. That is largely due to a fact to which I shall presently advert—the small size of the schools. The schools in Ireland are very much smaller than the schools in England and Scotland. It is the more regrettable on account of that excellence of the Irish teachers to which the hon. Member for North Camberwell referred. Some years ago I had 711 occasion, as a member of a Royal Commission, to inquire into the endowed schools of England, and I found that a number of Irish teachers were employed in them, and I was much struck with the excellence of their work. I was told how glad the people there were to get teachers from Ireland. It was because they had the art of throwing sympathy into their work, and getting the best work out of their pupils. The result is that the best Irish teachers are apt to be drawn away to England, as they can get better salaries and better chances of promotion there. Complaints have also been made as to the system under which money is awarded to Ireland under the Equivalent Grant, and the way in which money is taken from Ireland out of the Irish Development Grant instead of being taken from the National Exchequer. It would be quite impossible for me to enter into that dark labyrinth of the relation of Irish finance to the Imperial Treasury, and especially the relation of the Imperial Treasury to Irish education. Successive Irish and British Governments in the course of the last fifty years have tied a series of knots which it is almost impossible to unravel, and I do not see that anything short of systematic inquiry can clear up the difficulties. I can assure the House that light must be let into it, and that the whole of the relations of the British Treasury to the Irish educational system requires, I think, to be made more intelligible, more practical, and more conducive to the benefit of Irish education than they are at the present moment. As regards the question of salaries and pensions I must be content for the moment to say that I fully admit the teachers have a case for consideration. It does not rest with me, as the House knows, to grant the demand. These demands have practically to be settled between the National Board and the Treasury, and the Irish Government is somewhat in the position of Bismarck's honest broker between these two authorities. But the Irish Government will give a sympathetic support to the National Board in all it may do to obtain funds for educational purposes. I pass from that to the question of building grants. There also, no doubt, there has been a great and 712 regrettable delay. It happened very unfortunately that the matter was on the point of being settled when the late Government went out of office, and for two months after that it was impossible for the present Government to take it up effectively. I am glad to say, however, that an arrangement is on the eve of being made which I hope will put the matter on a better footing, and on the Estimates of this year there is a grant of £35,000 proposed for school buildings, and of that £5,000 is to be free to be applied in any way outside pre-existing arrangements to which the National Board may wish to have it applied. It is estimated that not more than that £35,000 can be practically applied within the coming financial year. At the end of that year, of course, further grants will have to be made, and I will do my best to see that those grants meet what I admit to be urgent and pressing needs.
Reference was made by the hon. Member for East Kerry to the rule which goes by the name of 127b. I cannot attempt to enter into detail in regard to that. That is a rule which is intended to secure that the education of tender children shall be chiefly conducted by mistresses. That is a point on which all educational experience in England, Scotland, on the Continent, and above all in the United States is in favour, namely, of having that education conducted by women, and I cannot believe that Ireland is an exception to the experience of other nations. The hon. Member for East Kerry went out of his way to make an attack on Dr. Starkie. Dr. Starkie is one of the most able civil servants in Ireland and I do not think anyone doubts his ability. Even the hon. Member did not doubt his ability, but he complained that Dr. Starkie had read a paper in Belfast in which he exposed somewhat freely the existing defects in Irish education. In regard to his statement to the British Association, I do not think that as a patriotic Irishman Dr. Starkie was debarred from stating those facts merely because there were some visitors from England and Scotland present. I hope on the contrary that what Dr. Starkie said there will have the effect of making visitors from England and Scotland realise how much England and Scotland ought to do for Ireland in 713 educational matters. I may say the same thing with regard to what was said by Mr. Horace Plunkett, who, whatever opinion may be entertained as to the working of his department — a matter on which I do not enter now because it is going to be the subject of an inquiry—has certainly shown a warm and patriotic zeal for the material prosperity of his country. I pass to another question which was raised by the hon. Member for Kerry and was also touched upon by the hon. Member for North Camberwell—the civil rights of teachers. The hon. Member for North Camberwell read a number of rules which restrict the actions which Irish teachers may take in regard to going to political meetings and taking part in political controversies. It must be remembered that school teachers in Ireland are members of the Civil Service to a greater extent than they can be said to be either in England or Scotland. They are all paid by the State. I do not therefore think they can expect to have quite the same freedom as ordinary private citizens of taking part in politics, because everybody knows that civil servants in England do not take the same part that ordinary private citizens do. But the rules, though unduly stringent, are in point of fact not enforced. Teachers in Ireland enjoy a good deal more practical freedom than might be gathered from the statement made by the hon. Member for East Kerry.
§ MR. MURPHYindicated dissent.
§ MR. BRYCEI do not know the nature of the case referred to by the hon. Member, but, of course, it can easily be understood that for a teacher to be concerned in the local government of the area where he is a teacher might be open to some difficulty. But not knowing the particulars of the case, or how far that principle finds application in it, I cannot say more.
Let me say a word about the Gaelic language. I am entirely in sympathy with the desire to promote the study of the Irish tongue. I think it impossible to suppose that it can ever encroach on the study of English. It is the duty of the education authorities not to infringe on the study of the necessary subjects of elementary instruction, but, subject to that, I believe it to be a good thing 714 for the Irish people that they should take a patriotic interest in their own tongue, which is ennobled by a rich and very interesting literature, with a peculiar imaginative quality of its own, and is associated in their minds with the traditions of their country, which I hope they all desire that they should cherish. I look upon the Gaelic revival with nothing but sympathy, and I hope that such provisions may be made as will give encouragement to the study of Irish in the Irish schools. I do not think that the plan under which the Irish language was taught was satisfactory. I do not think it gave satisfactory results, and I am in communication with the Treasury on the subject of framing a plan which I hope will give due encouragement to the teaching of the language, and be attended with satisfactory results. The Treasury has received in a sympathetic spirit the proposals I have made to them: I hope to be able before long to announce the result of these negotiations.
Some reference has also been made to the grants made by the Intermediate Education Board. It is quite true that these grants had to be cut down, and I sympathised with the hon. Member for North Galway when he said it was a little hard that the only way in which Irishmen could get education was by drinking more. It is particularly hard because the more education you get the less you want to drink. I am told that the study of Irish and the influence of the Gaelic League has been everywhere accompanied by a diminution in intemperance. I think the subject of the grants by the Intermediate Education Board does require to be inquired into. I agree also that the cost of administration in connection with that Board is a great deal too high. It is an extravagant proportion of the total funds at its disposal to spend so large a sum as £20,000 in the actual work of administration and examination.
These are only a few of the many points on which I should have liked to dwell in detail. I think I shall do better to pass to some general considerations. Let me state briefly what seem to be the salient defects in Irish education at present. I am afraid I must say of Irish education, on a survey of it as a whole 715 what Mephistopheles said in Goethe's Faust about human nature—Ich finde es herzlich, schlecht ("I find it heartily bad.") There is no branch of Irish education which can be pronounced to be satisfactory. I begin with the defects of primary education. The Irish schools are much too small, and the payments to the teacher are low partly because the schools are so small. In Ireland there are 9,000 primary schools, and in England, 30,000, but the proportion to the population of Ireland and the population of England is one-seventh. There are more than three-fifths of the primary schools in Ireland where the average attendance is less than fifty. Of course it is impossible that these small schools should pay such good salaries or give such efficient instruction as larger schools. The number of schools in Ireland with only one teacher is inordinately large, and it is in consequence of that that there has been so little promotion and so very little relation between the size of the school and the teacher's pay. A school with an attendance not exceeding fifty pays to the teacher as much as an English teacher receives, but an Irish teacher in a larger school, with greater work, and where there ought to be promotion, is paid very much worse than an English teacher. The report of the Commissioners on National Education of 1901 shows that the smallness of the schools in Ireland is due mainly to two causes which certainly ought to be removed. One is that the population is sparse in the country districts, and the other is the objection on the part of the Roman Catholic clergy to boys and girls being taught together, and the disinclination of the various denominaations to use each other's schools. In the north of Ireland most of those small schools owe their origin to the claims of the various Protestant denominations to have schools provided at the cost of the State for each of them. The amalgamation of the schools is desirable so that there may be two teachers in each. I refer particularly to the existence of small Protestant schools maintained by different denominations in the north of Ireland. I understand, but I do not argue at this moment, why Protestant and Catholics desire to have separate 716 schools. We shall hear more than enough of that before long, but with regard to the different Protestant denominations —Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Methodist, and so on—what possible reason is there why they should keep up separate schools? It is the sheerest waste of labour and money. I respectfully appeal to hon. Members from the north of Ireland, some Presbyterian and some Episcopalian, to consider whether they cannot induce the members of their respective denominations to get rid of this waste of labour and waste of money.
Now I come to the case of buildings. It is one great evil in the Irish schools that the buildings are so inferior, and the matter is more serious than has been mentioned in the House. One result of the insanitary buildings is that when any epidemic disease breaks out all the children in the school take it at once, and these epidemics break out far more frequently than in English and Scotch schools. The consequence is that the work of the school is disorganised, much time is lost, and the educational results obtained in the year are perhaps only half what they should be. That brings me to another branch of the school system—the irregular attendance and the want of compulsion. There is a very partial compulsion in Ireland under the Act of 1892. Under that Act school attendance committees were appointed, but compulsion was very imperfectly applied. Not only is attendance extremely irregular, but the hours are short. I remember that I as a boy, I am sorry to say, went to school at nine o'clock and continued there until two or three. We got at least five hours good hard schooling every day. That was in Scotland. But in some Irish schools the children do not attend until half-past ten or eleven o'clock, and leave at two, the average of school time being two and-half or three hours. [Cries of "No, no."] I do not say it is the case everywhere, but it is so in many instances. Add to this the irregular attendances, and the interruptions from epidemics, and it is quite plain how educational results have been comparatively poor. [An HON. MEMBER: Long distances.] Yes, no doubt the difficulties are great, and it is a country where, I think, the people do not get up so early as they ought to do. But these are curable defects, and they would be largely 717 remedied if the education was better, the schools more comfortable and attractive, and the teachers had greater encouragement. There is another great defect which militates against the efforts of the best teachers in Ireland. There is a want of local interest and local co-operation which when it exists does very much for schools, and which certainly has been one of the principal causes of the excellent results obtained in Scotland and England. I do not say anything against the managers of the Irish schools. Many of them, I think, have a difficult task. They stand alone in districts in the north and the south in communities where the doctor and the priest are almost the only educated men. The priest in many cases makes the best efforts in his power to bring the children to school. I have had a great deal of testimony as to the effort which the priests make, and as to the support they give to the schoolmasters, but, of course, it is a great drawback not to have an active local public opinion. One of the best things that could be done for the schools of Ireland would be to create something like a body of local managers, or something like local government which would endeavour to give an interest in the school. I am well aware of the enormous difficulty of the task. I am prescribing this as a counsel of perfection. I cannot say that at present I see my way to perfect such a scheme. It has been constantly suggested that the schools ought to be supported out of the local rates, but having regard to the poverty of Ireland it would be very difficult to impose on the local rates a burden equivalent to the school rates in England, and unless you have local contributions you lack one of the most powerful motives for bringing in the people to assist in the work of the schools. I do not despair of some remedy, but I do not think it can be done by any legislation which can be proposed to this Parliament. It must also I think be added that the centralisation of Irish education, the practice of referring everything to the National Board which appoints and pays the teachers, has an unfortunate effect on the system. A highly centralised system of that kind is obliged to become rigid; it cannot have the flexibility of the English and (Scottish systems. Therefore I should not only like to see the people associated with the work, but I should 718 wish for less centralisation than we have at the present time.
Now I pass to intermediate education. It fulfils one of the most important functions in the country. It ought to provide for the whole of secondary education. What is the Board of Intermediate Education? It is only an examining body awarding grants to schools and pupils on the results of passes—in other words it, holds out prizes which can be obtained by crammers, and which I am afraid are very often obtained by crammers. That is the fault not of the board, but of the legislation which called the system into existence, and the system is utterly wrong. What you want to do is to foster the schools, to encourage the best teachers, and to give them the benefit of enlightened inspection. It is also completely disjoined from technical education, which is under the Agricultural Department. I entirely agree with the hon. Member for East Mayo as to the danger of setting children to work on technical subjects when they are only imperfectly grounded in primary subjects and the earlier part of secondary education. I desire nothing more than to see a complete review of technical instruction as given in Ireland in order to bring it into proper relation to primary and secondary education, and to see that it is not commenced to be given until pupils are properly fitted to receive it.
From this I come to University education, upon which a good deal of our time has been occupied during the discussion. There has been a universal consensus of opinion that the system in Ireland is altogether unsatisfactory. There are not two opinions upon that. The Royal University has been severely condemned, and I would be the last to differ from the general opinion, for in 1880, when the last step was taken to destroy the old Queen's University and to substitute the Royal University, I was almost the only person who opposed the scheme, maintaining that it would necessarily have the results which experience has shown it has had. The most effective condemnation has been given by the Royal University itself, which has recently passed a resolution with unanimity saying that experience had shown that as an examining board it was entirely unsatisfactory and that it ought to be turned into a teaching University.
719 Many appeals have been made as to what could be done for University education in Ireland. I am sorry to say that I am not in a position to make any statement on that subject, and for two reasons. In the first place, the Government have not yet been long enough in office since the general election to enable them to formulate a policy upon a subject of such confused difficulty; and, in the second place, they feel and everybody feels that this is a case in which there is no use proposing a scheme until they have reasonable prospect of carrying it. The shore is strewn with the wrecks of previous attempts to deal with this question. We all remember the famous attempt of Mr. Gladstone in 1873, the attempt made when the Royal University was created, which is admitted now to be a failure; then there was the attempt made by the Leader of the Opposition seven or eight years ago when he was on the brink of launching a new Irish University scheme, but was obliged to abandon it because he could not obtain sufficient support; and we all remember that three years ago the right hon. Member for Dover was also on the brink of launching a scheme, but recoiled from the difficulties before his path. With these warnings before us, I think the House will see that it would not be prudent for any Government to propose a scheme until they were assured that the scheme had some chance of being accepted and carried. I agree with the Leader of the Opposition in thinking that this is a reform which ought to be effected, I will not say with the general consent of all Parties, for that is too much to expect, but with the support of different elements of public opinion in the country which would enable the Government to carry it through. I assure hon. Gentlemen opposite that this subject is engaging the constant attention of the Government. I do not despair. I hope it may be found possible to reconcile the conflicting views which have caused so long and lamentable a delay. I quite agree in the urgency of the case, and I subscribe to the view of the hon. Member for Cambridge University about the supreme importance of Ireland's having University education. I believe that nothing would do more to pacify men's minds in Ireland, 720 and also to enable Irishmen to work out in the best and wisest way any scheme of self-government that may be entrusted to them. Therefore, I can assure the House that this subject will not be lost sight of for a moment.
Having endeavoured to show what are the chief difficulties of the existing system, I hope I may be permitted to pass now to the reforms that can be introduced. I have been a little disappointed at the absence of practical suggestions. The evils of the existing system have been pointed out, but I have had no suggestions which I can submit to the Irish National Board of Education for carrying out reforms. I will enumerate some which occur to me. One is the consolidation of the small schools. Another is the improvement of school buildings. A third is the association of the people in the locality with the work of the school. A fourth is the improvement of the attendance, and, if possible, an attempt to make the so-called compulsory system more effective. I am not saying that these things are easy. But they ought to be done if they can be done, and some day they will have to be clone. Another reform is the union in one system of primary and secondary education. No one can look at Irish Education without feeling that the National Board and the Intermediate Board ought to be consolidated, and technical education ought to be brought into better organic relation with primary and secondary education. At present there does not exist in Ireland the means, which has so long existed in Scotland, of enabling promising children to rise from the primary schools through the secondary schools to the Universities. That is one of the very first things to be done, and I do not see how it can be done while we have the control of primary and secondary education placed under different bodies. We want one education department for Ireland, but how are we to get that? If we were to create an education department for Ireland like the English Education Department and place it under the control of the Irish Government, it would be said that we were bringing another thing into the Castle, and all the prejudice which is supposed to attach to the Castle would immediately attach to the education department. That prejudice is, I think, 721 not altogether deserved, for there are in Dublin Castle a great many able and competent men. But I entirely understand that point of view, and I do not say that I have not some sympathy with it. It may be said, Why not have an elected responsible body? But how can you create an elected responsible body in Ireland for education only? If you go so far as that you will have to go a great deal further. [" Hear, hear," from the IRISH Benches, and cries of "Home Rule."] That at once raises the whole problem. And if I were to suggest what would seem to be one of the most obvious remedies, and bring this Irish education department under the control of the Irish Government, there would be great objections to that. Hon. Members from England and Scotland do not know that the Irish Government has no control over the board of education. All that the Lord Lieutenant and the Chief Secretary can do is to disallow certain rules from having immediate effect. And in regard to the Intermediate Education Board we have even less power. That brings me to the point that the want of money is one of the great difficulties in the way of effecting some of the most necessary reforms. I rather sympathise with the view of Irish Members that it is a pity to draw on the Development Grant except for the purposes of education. It was rather unfortunate that it was drawn upon for other purposes, though these were at the time important and urgent. All I can do is to plead for a liberal treatment of Irish education, for without more money I do not suppose much more can be done than at present. But another difficulty is the great division of opinion that prevails in regard to education and which makes the matter more interlaced with the religious controversy than it is in England. There is hardly a branch of education into which some element of political or religious controversy may not enter. And therefore one asks, when one comes to consider what ought to be done in Ireland, what is the public opinion to which we are to appeal? In England we can appeal to public opinion and get a pretty fair judgment) but in Ireland it is a great deal more difficult to learn, because, owing to the want of local government, owing to the whole 722 history of Ireland, public opinion is not accustomed to express itself with the same fulness and freedom on all these questions apart from politics that it does in England. And yet we can do nothing in Ireland without having public opinion behind us. Then, how are we to effect these reforms? The most obvious thing would be to pass legislation in the Imperial Parliament. I suppose I shall be told by some Members of the House that legislation in the Imperial Parliament upon a purely Irish subject would be received, rightly or wrongly, with a certain measure of suspicion. It will be said, and said with truth, that the Imperial Parliament does not know the facts, and it will be asked how can the Imperial Parliament legislate for Ireland knowing so little about the conditions of Ireland? It may be said, why should not the Imperial Parliament pass such legislation as the Irish Members ask them to pass? Well, but the Imperial Parliament does not want to legislate in the dark, and I do not know that it can be expected to do so. I do not think it is fair to ask English Members to vote blindly upon very important questions, and perhaps be ruled by the opinions of the Irish Members, without knowing about the facts with which they are faced. We would not dream of legislating in this Parliament for India, and yet there are many branches of Irish administration and many facts in Irish society, facts social and moral, about which the average English Member does not know much more than he does about India. Scotland is practically allowed to legislate for herself, and if I were asked why, I should say—study the history of Ireland and Scotland since the succession of the Hanoverian dynasty. I will frankly say that I do not think that Irish opinion is by any means ripe for all the reforms which higher education needs, and I am certain that there are some things which ought to be done for Irish education which Irish opinion would not dictate. Yet I would be very sorry to impose those reforms on Ireland by the superior will and strength of Parliament. I think that the reforms when they come ought to be willingly accepted by the people of Ireland. I need not draw the moral. Those who follow Irish affairs 723 there will find a great many opportunities of applying the morals which I have endeavoured to set before the House.
I do not despair of the position. The first thing needed by any one who proposes to administer Ireland is an abundant stock of optimism, and I would be very sorry to preach counsels of despair. After all, things were a great deal worse in many respects in Ireland fifty or 100 years ago, and I do not see why the progress attained in other directions should not be attained in education also. There are some things that I hope we may begin upon at once. I hope that we may begin to improve the position of teachers and the state of the schools, and also to consider by what means the different education authorities may be consolidated. But there are other things which I can not hold out much hope will be done at once by legislation in this House. But I do not see any reason why with good will and a spirit of compromise on all sides something should not be done to settle the problem of University education. At all events it is always something that we should know what the defects are and what are the difficulties which we have to confront. The great trouble in Ireland has been that she has so long been governed on a sort of hand-to-mouth policy and by temporary expedients. The question of education is certainly for Ireland of supreme importance, whether you begin its reform at the top or the bottom. Ireland has a damp climate unfavourable to arable cultivation. She is very imperfectly supplied with rich mineral deposits which have done so much for the prosperity of England and Scotland; and consequently, owing to the unhappy history of the last three centuries, she has fallen behind her sister countries of England and Scotland. But she has one great asset and that is the intellectual capacity of her people, I believe that there is no people in Europe more fond of learning, more anxious for knowledge, or with a readier intelligence than the Irish. Is it not tragic that so little use has been made of this aptitude? There is an Irish legend that off the coast of Clare lay a happy and beautiful island which once a year was visible 724 above the waste of the Atlantic, but which the people could never approach. That is the symbol of the possibilities that are denied to Ireland by the present waste of her great intellectual capacity. That capacity it should be one of the first objects of statesmanship to develop as far as possible. It is the duty of this country to give the natural gifts of the Irish people, from which she has reaped so much advantage, their fitting training and due opportunity; and any efforts so made or money so spent would be for the common good of Great Britain and Ireland.
§ MR. WALTER LONG (Dublin, S.)We ought to thank the right hon. Gentleman for the very frank and fair statement that he has made to the House. At the same time, those who have listened to the right hon. Gentleman must have come to the conclusion that the debate has not brought much nearer the realisations of those hopes that have been expressed that evening. The right hon. Gentleman has approached the main question with benevolence, but he has not held out any hope of its immediate solution.
§ MR. BRYCEI guarded myself against making any statement for the present; but I said nothing about the future.
§ MR. WALTER LONGAt present there is no answer to be made; and I think that that is a justification of the view taken by the hon. Member for North Camberwell. My right hon. friend the Member for Dover says that the only way is to deal with the University question first, but I submit that we must deal with facts as we find them, and it would be a disaster for Ireland if, owing to the difficulties of dealing with the University question, action in regard to elementary and intermediate education, which are of the greatest possible importance, were to be postponed. It was with view to dealing with some of these difficulties in connection with intermediate education that I had arranged a conference of education authorities so as to prevent overlapping. Has that conference reported?
§ MR. BRYCEThere was a Report, but I must confess that it did not seeem to carry the thing much further; and I am afraid that the system of co-operation will not get rid of the difficulties which arise from the existence of three independent authorities.
§ MR. WALTER LONGI think it would be within the discretion of the right hon. Gentleman to present the Report of that Conference to the House. I was very glad to hear the right hon. Gentleman defend Dr. Starkie and Sir Horace Plunkett. I had the honour to work with Dr. Starkie for some months, and I know that Dr. Starkie deserves the highest praise, as having at all times devoted himself to the cause of education with the single object of advancing education in Ireland. He may have taken a wrong course, but whether he was right or wrong his one object has always been the advancement of education in every way, and to that object he has devoted himself with rare industry and ability. As regards Sir Horace Plunkett, the right hon. Gentleman has defended him from a charge which never ought to have been brought against him, Whatever his failings may be, and, like everybody else, he no doubt has failings, nobody who knows him can doubt that he has spent his life in the service of Ireland without regard to personal advancement, advantage or popularity. In that course he has sacrificed the political career to which he might properly have looked forward, and in regard to his patronage, he has always acted in the most honourable and straightforward manner and bestowed it in such a way as to secure the best servants for the State. I think it is a great pity that any reflection should have been made upon one who has served his country so admirably. Something has been said as to what the late Government did with regard to the teaching of Irish in schools, and with regard to Rule 127 (b). I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he said in regard to both those subjects, because it has been said that the action of the late Government was intended to put an end to the teaching of Irish. That is not the case, and is not an accurate 726 representation of what we did, because Irish can still be taught in the schools in the ordinary way in ordinary school hours. What we did was this. An experiment had been tried under which a small sum was allowed by the Treasury for extra fees which are not paid in England, Scotland or Wales. They were, however, tried as an experiment in Ireland, and they grew to a very large amount. I found when I came to discuss this subject with my advisers what the right hon. Gentleman has said to-night, that while everybody who has any knowledge of Irish education is ready with criticism and condemnations, they are not ready with suggestions for the practical improvement of education. I found that one of the greatest difficulties in connection with Irish education was the number and smallness of schools. The problem I had to face was this: was it better to allow this controversy to go on in connection with the teaching of Irish, or was it not better to come to an arrangement with the Treasury under which the money which they grant for the Irish Development Grant should go to what is of infinitely more value, viz., that in our small mixed schools, where children vary from the age of fourteen to the infant there should be assistant mistresses who would be able to take over and train the small children, who could not unless they had these assistant mistresses possibly be trained at all? The late Irish Government, therefore, took the right course in the best interests of the children, and I believe that the alteration made in the Irish system will prove to be a real blessing to Irish education. As to rule 127(b), the action of the National Board of Education was approved on account of the information the Government were able to obtain that in every country, including America and the Roman Catholic schools in this country, the principle has been adopted. It was in the interest of education and it led to the better general training and education of Irish children. The Irish University question has been discussed with great moderation and a high elevation of tone. There have been suggestions, however that the opposition to the establishment of an Irish university is based on a narrow-minded prejudice and bigotry. 727 I believe that in the House, in the country, and in Ireland itself, a much wider division of opinion exists on this question than has been revealed by the debate. In fairness it ought to be allowed that those who view the question with doubt, apprehension, or direct opposition, base their views on grounds as just and right as those who advocate the establishment of such a university. It is not a question of bigotry. ["Oh."] Hon. Members below the grangway who say "oh" refuse to recognise the fact that on the Continent in other Roman Catholic countries this step has not been taken. What is the basis of their own demand? It is that Trinity College, Dublin, has, under the control of a Protestant body, become a great Protestant institution, and their own proposal is to establish a university in which the atmosphere shall be of a different kind. No one can rest content with the present condition of things. No one can say that the benefits of university training can for all time be denied to the great body of young Irishmen, but, nevertheless, all must feel that, if a solution is to be found, it can only be by concessions and advances made on both sides. I ask that there should be justice and fair play for those who have opposed this proposal, not because they take a narrow view of the situation, certainly not because they desire to do any injustice to their own Catholic fellow countrymen, but because they believe, upon educational grounds, that it is not a real advance and that any fresh provision ought to be on purely non-sectarian lines, and be governed by academic traditions. I put in this plea on behalf of many in Great Britain and Ireland who earnestly and conscientiously hold these views, who have an honest desire to deal with the question so that justice shall be' done to the young men who desire university advantages, but who nevertheless bold strong views based upon real convictions, views which will not be moved by attacks upon them on the ground that they are the product of prejudice, or passion, or narrow-mindedness. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his frank and fair speech, although I rather protest against the sting in the tail of it, in which he talked about 728 pointing the moral to his hon. friends behind him. The right hon. Gentleman appeared to me to take up a non possumus attitude and to say to his hon. friends—
I leave it to you; read the moral, and act accordingly.If that is so, I do not think the right hon. Gentleman has taken quite a fair opportunity of preaching that doctrine to the House, because if he believes that Home Rule is the solution of all these difficulties let him have the courage of his opinions and put them to the test. If the right hon. Gentleman has no policy, let him not fall back on the Home Rule suggestion as the remedy to be taken failing the one he can present, and let him realise that, while it is easy to find fault with the present situation, the solution is one of intense difficulty. The Nationalist remedy for the situation is Home Rule. That is a proposal which will be resisted to the last by the Unionist Party; but if any practical scheme is put forward it will meet with neither factious nor unfair opposition.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)said he rose only to record the fact that to those who occupied the Nationalist benches the debate had been eminently satisfactory. He thought there was no reason to continue it. He thought the debate marked a milestone on the road of Irish progress. He appealed to his hon. friend to withdraw the amendment.
§ MR. MURPHYsaid that after the remarks which had been made by his hon. friend he would withdraw his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Main Question again proposed.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAY (Shoreditch, Hoxton)said he was anxious to raise some questions connected with the administration of the Home Office. He complained that the charge for licences to cab drivers in the Metropolis had been increased by half-a-crown. The number of men engaged in driving licensed vehicles for hire in the Metropolis was 30,000, and a good many of 729 them were his constituents. The Secretary of State on the 26th of December last year signed a document demanding from cab drivers an increased fee for their licences. At the last election it was said that the increase of the fee was due to the action of his right hon friend the late Home Secretary, but a little examination of the subject showed that the action of his right hon. friend was confined to that of making an inquiry and circulating a proposal for a new bylaw. The present Home Secretary on the eve of an election—and he did not hesitate to say that he had a very definite purpose—selected Boxing Day, when he might have been better employed, to increase the charge for licences issued to cab drivers in the Metropolis.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE,) Leeds, W.I rise to order, because the statement of the hon. Member is perfectly untrue.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAYThe statement is perfectly true, because I hold in my hands the document signed by the right hon. Gentleman.
§ MR. GLADSTONEThe hon. Member knows that I had to sign these orders, which had been drawn up by my predecessor, and which I found in print.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAYsaid that if it were not open to the right hon. Gentleman to exercise his responsibility as a Minister in this matter, how was it that he issued instructions changing the operation of the Aliens Act?
§ MR. GLADSTONEI also had to sign the orders under that Act which I found in print, and after they had been working badly for some months I altered one of them.
§ MR. CLAUDE HAYsaid the right hon. Gentleman was trying to mix up the Aliens Act with this matter. The present Government had a knack when it suited them of adopting the actions of their predecessors, and refusing to adopt them when it did not suit them. The right hon. Gentleman having signed the document increasing the licence fee allowed the Secretary to the Board of Education to write a letter in which he said that the late Home Secretary was responsible for the Order, and not the present Home Secretary, who signed it. Then there was the question of the Aliens Act. They had no explanation of why the limit in regard to the carrying of immigrants on ships had been raised from twelve to twenty, and it looked as if that action had been taken in order that the Home Secretary might defeat the statute and burden the poor in the East End of London with the keep of human beings who had been refused by every other civilised nation.
Whereupon Mr. GEORGE WHITELEY rose in his place, and claimed to mover "That the Question be now put."
§ Question, "That the Question be now put," put, and agreed to.
§ Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put accordingly, and agreed to.