HL Deb 10 June 1839 vol 48 cc90-2
Lord Brougham

, having presented a petition from a Dissenting congregation of Cote, in Ox- fordshire, in favour of the national Education scheme, and asserting, that the clergy scheme the Established Church had no right to assume the exclusive education of children, stated, that he was not disposed to any longer refrain from not pressing forward his bill on education. Nothing could be more absurd than the stories going forth, that his noble Friend's minutes of council was for a great system of national education, for nothing could worse describe the plan than such a title. His bill applied itself to every part of that important question. He should, therefore, consult the convenience of the House, on the warning of the day, as their Lordships would not wish to be absent.

Bill to be brought forward on Thursday.

The Bishop of London

had several petitions to present of a contrary nature to that presented by the noble and learned Lord, against the scheme of national education. The petitioners to whom the noble and learned Lord had alluded supposed the clergy to put forward claims for the exclusive education of the people. That was a claim which was never put forward by the clergy. What the clergy had put forth was this, they claimed a right to the exclusive education of the children of the Church of England; that was the right which they claimed, and which, by God's, blessing, they would never recede from.

The Marquess of Lansdowne

said, his noble Friend in the other House had not put forward any such extravagant and absurd pretension as that adverted to by the noble and learned Lord. Such a pretension was certainly supposed to have been put forward by the Church of England. The plan proposed by his noble Friend was for the partial training of schoolmasters for the accommodation of all classes, which had been objected to by persons in high authority, and connected with the Church of England, on grounds utterly untenable, except on the ground, that the Church of England enjoyed a monopoly in educating youth. He was glad to hear from the right rev. Prelate, that he distinctly denied this. He would not then detain their Lordships by going into any detail on the subject; but he had thought it right to the right rev. Prelate to exempt him from entertaining that inordinate pretension which had been held in different places.

The Bishop of London

had not presumed to speak on behalf of the Church. He had stated his own opinion, and what he believed to be the opinion of the clergy at large. He was unwilling to bring himself forward as the representative of the Church on that occasion. What he had stated was, that the clergy of the Church of England claimed the exclusive education of the children of their own persuasion.

Petitions laid on the table.