HL Deb 11 August 1807 vol 9 cc1175-8
Lord Holland

moved the second reading of this bill.

Lord Hawkesbury

said, he should move, that the bill, instead of being read a second time now, be read a second time this day 3 months: first, because he thought the preamble of the bill absolute nonsense; secondly, because many of the motives alleged for introducing it, as well as the allegations upon which it was founded, were not true in the extent alleged, and were, in many respects, highly objectionable; and, thirdly, because the subject was one which, in its various bearings, called for more serious and deliberate discussion than was practicable at the present period of the session, to justify their lordships in its adoption. He would not deny, that education to the lower orders of the community, in the extent proposed, under proper directions and limitations, might be desirable; but he could not agree with the framers of the bill, that education, blended with morality, was more extended amongst the lower classes of the Scotch population, than amongst those of this country; for, however superior the Scotch might be in the former, he could not admit their superiority in the latter. He objected also to the bill, because it did not propose to place instruction more upon a religious footing; and though it was certainly less objectionable now than in its original form, which rendered the plans it proposed compulsory upon the parishes throughout the kingdom, yet the modification was, in his view, not much less inadmissible; for it placed the adoption of such schools at the sole discretion of the majority of parishioners in number, without any reasonable discrimination of rank and property, in the parish, which certainly ought, in such a matter, to have their proportionate weight, and the want of which would be a subject of constant dispute and division.

Lord Holland

thought the bill, in the form it had reached this house, was so totally devoid of all possible ground for objection, that he was surprized at the hostility of his noble friend. He did not think the preamble liable to the objection that it was nonsense. In substance, at least, it was indisputably true; and the mere error of a single word might be remedied in a committee. He should have thought it an insult to the understanding of the house to go into elaborate arguments, for the purpose of proving that educating the people would improve their morals and their comforts; and as to the argument of want of time to discuss so important a subject at this period of the session, this was one among the many instances which had already occurred to falsify the pompous assertions of his majesty's ministers, and the public papers in their interest, that the late dissolution could cause no material interruption to the public business, nor impede any of those great and salutary public measures to which the country looked, and of which this bill was certainly one.

Lord Redesdale

disapproved highly of the bill in its present shape, though, with his noble friend, he cherished the principle, that a good system of education properly regulated would be of great public utility. His principal objection to the present bill seemed to be the little reference it had, in his view of it, to the religious establishments of the country. Such a principle should, in considerations of the kind, be kept primarily in view. To some of the provisions of the bill he also strongly objected. The enactments had no reference to the extent of the parish. Some parishes, particularly in the northern counties, were 25 miles long, and 14 or 15 broad. A great number of the parishioners, therefore, could reap no possible benefit from the establishment of one school. Besides, the bill would go to interfere with several scholastic establishments of private institution, which were now productive of great benefit in different parts of the country. In Ireland there was a legal provision, which, he regretted, was so ill attended to; that the parish ministers should either themselves keep a school, or appoint a Schoolmaster directly for the instruction of the parishes. In that case, the instructors were, either directly, or indirectly, the ministers of the established religion. This principle was not sufficiently attended to in the present bill, and was, with him, a strong ground for its rejection. Almost all its provisions were likely to be productive of much practical mischief, if the bill passed in its present shape, without the least probability of its being attended with any new benefit. Viewing the bill in this light, he must agree with the noble secretary of state, who moved that the consideration of it be postponed.

The Lord Chancellor

opposed the bill in its present shape, though he was by no means unfriendly to the principle of diffusing instruction as generally and as widely as possible. He was fully sensible of the benefits arising from the system of education in Scotland, and as he himself was one of the borderers on that part of the country, he felt himself indebted to that system for the benefit of his own education: still, he could not approve of the present bill, because it was miserably deficient in the means of accomplishing the great object which it seemed to have in view. Besides, it tended to a departure from the great principle of instruction in this country, by taking it in a great measure out of the superintendance and controul of the clergy. Nor were these his only objections; in whatever shape any bill of the kind might appear, he never would agree to any that left matters of this nature to be judged or and decided by the majority of the inhabitants of a parish. To what confusion might not such a mode of decision open a door? Would it not give rise to all the mischiefs of an election, among the majority of the inhabitants of every parish, of whatever description of people they might be composed? What endless litigations! Had there not been, not long since, an example of it in the election of a minister for the parish of Clerkenwell; and had not that contention lasted 7 years at the bar of this house? He had also to object to the clause, which gave to the court of chancery the disposal of the money for these establishments, when it amounted to a certain sum. It should be recollected, how such sums so entrusted were sweated in that court, and how in the end, when the oyster came to be divided, the real owner got nothing but the shells. He could never, therefore, assent to the bill in its present form.

The Archbishop of Canterbury

trusted he should not be considered as hostile to the principle of diffusing instruction among the poor, although he should oppose the further progress of this measure. In his opinion, the framers of it had no conception of the vastness of the task they had undertaken. Something widely different, indeed, must be done to further and accomplish the object which they seemed to have in view. He had himself bestowed of late no small degree of attention upon this subject, and he proposed to himself to follow it up to a certain extent. His enquiries had already embraced a large district, and for the satisfaction of the house he could affirm, that the advantages of education were extended more generally than it appeared to be thought, and he would venture to say, that in the parish alone in which he resided, these advantages extended to no less a number than 4000. Perhaps, when his plan was more matured, he should have the honour of submitting it to their lordships. In the mean time, he must agree with the noble and learned lords who preceded him, and who truly observed, that the provisions of the bill left little or no controul to the minister in his parish. This would go to subvert the first principles of education in this country, which had hitherto been, and he trusted would continue to be, under the controul and auspices of the establishment, and their lordships would feel how dangerous it might be to innovate in such matters. Their lordships' prudence would, no doubt, guard against innovations that might shake the foundation of our religion, and it would be a chief object of their vigilance and care, "ut castâ maneant in religione nepotes."

Earl Stanhope

was sorry to differ from the right reverend prelate, and several other persons in that house, on wat he must call the abominable principle, that no part of the population of this country ought to receive education unless in the tenets of the established church. Was it reasonable or just to say that the children of catholics, presbyterians, quakers, and all the other innumerable sects of dissenters from the established church in this country, were to be debarred all sources of public education, supported by public benevolence, unless they were to become converts to our established religion? Would the right rev. prelate contend, that because the catholic religion was the established one in Canada, no poor Protestants should be educated there unless he was allowed to be brought up a catholic. The noble lord upon the woolsack objected to this bill, lest it might lead to litigation in the court of chancery; he himself had no very great wish to promote litigations in that court; be once had a suit in the chancery of Ireland, which had lasted only 42 years; he had once voted upon an appeal in that house from a chancery suit in England, which had only lasted 500 years, and he was of opinion that the tedious progress and procrastinated decisions of that court, were well described by the story of a man, who, insettling a contest between two beggars aboutan oyster, took the fish to himself, and gave a shell to each of the parties. But, while he entertained no such fears for the result of this bill, he could not see that its purpose had any thing to do with sects of religion. It was merely to teach its objects spelling, reading, writing, and arithmetic for purposes useful in life; and in a manufacturing country like this, when so much of excellence in our productions depended on a clear understanding and some degree of mathematical and mechanical knowledge, which it was impossible to attain without first receiving the rudiments and foundation this bill proposed, the superiority of workmen with some education, over those who had none, must be sensibly felt by all the great manufacturers in the country. His lordship was for committing the bill, rendering it as perfect as possible, sending it forth to the public in that shape, and taking it up again for completion in the next session.—The question was then put on lord Hawkesbury's motion and carried without a division.