NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND).

HL Deb 03 May 1849 vol 104 cc1140-62

The BISHOP of CASHEL

said, that he had to present two petitions: one signed by 42,000 Protestants in Ireland, who prayed that they might have a share in the money given for the promotion of education; and who expressed their belief that as they paid their portion of the sum raised for that purpose, they ought to have a share in its distribution. The ground on which the petitioners put forward their prayer was, that as the establishment of one uniform system of education throughout the empire had been given up, and as every denomination of Christians in England obtained aid from the Government in the promotion of education, the Protestants of Ireland ought not to be the only class in Her Majesty's dominions excluded from that advantage. He had also to present a similar petition, signed by between 1,300 and 1,400 clergymen of the Established Church in England and Ireland; and he wished to take that opportunity of stating that when he had given notice that that petition would contain 1,600 signatures, he had overstated the number, in consequence of his having supposed that it would been signed by all the clergymen who had attached their names to a similar petition addressed to the House of Commons. The actual number of signatures to the petition, he had to repeat, was between 1,300 and 1,400. He confessed that he considered that subject to be a most important one, for it was manifest that nothing was more calculated to prove beneficial to a country than a sound and efficient system of education. The movement which had of late years been made in that direction had originated in an earnest desire on the part of some of the leading public men of this country to increase the quantity and to improve the quality of the education of the people. In order to accomplish that most praiseworthy object they had formed the idea that it would be desirable to establish a great central institution which should preside over a system of national education. That was the plan which had been first adopted, and which had, he believed, been taken from the system pursued in Franco, and in other States on the Continent; and it was on that plan that the national board in Ireland had, as he understood, been established. Many attempts had been made to carry out that general system in this country; and, in the year 1839, a Minute of the Council for the establishment of a normal school had been issued as a first step towards the attainment of that object; but in the very same year that that first step had been taken, it had been found that the plan was impracticable. An arrangement had there-fore been come to under which the national funds for educational purposes were to be divided between two voluntary associations—the National Society and the British and Foreign School Society. When the present Administration had last come into power, they turned their attention to the subject, and he had no doubt but that they had considered the question of the establishment of one uniform system of education with some prepossession in its favour; but they had found that they could not carry out such a project, and when they brought forward their plan in the year 1847, they deliberately abandoned that project. The language which several Members of Her Majesty's Government were reported to have used upon that subject, was exceedingly strong. The noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdowne) was reported to have said— It would be extremely desirable, indeed, to have all sects educated under the one roof, as was suggested. [Hear, from Lord BEAUMONT.] But he would ask the noble Lord whether, from his own experience, he judged that such a scheme would be a practicable one? Language of a similar character had been held by Lord John Russell. But the fullest and the clearest statement upon the subject was that which had been made by Sir George Grey. That right hon. Gentleman had said— The noble Lord (Lord Morpeth) had said that there were three courses open to the Government; but he thought there were only two. He did not believe it would be possible for any Government to propose that the education of the people should be placed entirely in the hands of the Established Church. The two courses, then, open to the Government were the course proposed by the hon. and learned Member for Bath, and the course that had been adopted. The one was to establish entirely a new system of education, disregarding the divisions in the country upon matters of religion—disregarding the schools established in connexion with different denominations, and endeavouring to bring all the children together into one system of education, by which they could grow up in harmony, peace, and good-will. Such a plan would be impracticable—it would meet with no cordial acceptance by any one denomination of Christians, or by that House. He agreed with the hon. Member for Nottingham, that the earnest religious feeling of the people of this country would oppose an absolute bar to combined education, because it could be only effected by the exclusion of all religion. He knew that all did not intend to exclude religion from their schools, but thought it might be introduced through different religious teachers; such a proposition would not, however, diminish one iota of the opposition. Then, what was the other plan proposed and acted on by the Government? The principle on which the measure, if he might so term it, was framed, was not to establish any now system, but to improve the present schools—the Government proposed to raise the character of the education that is given in existing schools, and improve the position of, and raise the standard of acquirement in, the schoolmasters. What had been done during the last few years, since Parliament had agreed to grant money for the purposes of education? Those grants had been applied for the purpose of building schools in connexion with the various denominations; and that being the case, the Government thought it time to consider how the character and quality of education might be raised in those schools without endeavouring to supersede the existing agents at work in any of them. The right hon. Gentleman bad, therefore, admitted, that a general system of education would be impracticable, that it would be unpopular, and that it would be objectionable, because it would exclude certain religious parties. The Government had, consequently, determined on abandoning any attempt to establish a uniform system and had resolved, instead of that, to give aid for educational purposes to the Protestant members of the several religious denominations—to the followers of the Church, to the Wesleyans, and to the different bodies of Dissenters; and, finally, they had, in the year 1847, brought forward a Minute of Council, by which they had provided means for enabling the Roman Catholics of England to educate the members of their Church, without any interference on the part of the State with their religious opinions. The following were the rules laid down in that Minute:—

1. "1. That the Roman Catholic Poor School Committee be the ordinary channel of such general inquiries as may be desirable as to any school applying for aid as a Roman Catholic school.
2. "2. That Roman Catholic schools receiving aid from the Parliamentary grant be open to inspection; but that the inspectors shall report respecting the secular instruction only.
3. "3. That the inspectors of such schools be not appointed without the previous concurrence of the Roman Catholic Parochial School Committee.
4. "4. That no gratuity, stipend, or augmentation of salary be awarded to schoolmasters or assistant teachers who are in holy orders; but that their Lordships reserve to themselves the power of making an exception in the case of training schools and of model schools connected therewith."

The project for the formation of a great uniform system of national education in this country had, therefore, been deliberately discarded. Now, that fact, in his opinion, put the question of education in Ireland on a totally different footing from that in which it had previously stood. What he then asked was, that the project of a uniform system should be set aside for the Protestants of Ireland, as it had been set aside for the professors of every form of religion in this country. The Protestants of Ireland asked that they should not be excluded from that liberality which had been extended to every other portion of Her Majesty's subjects. They did not seek to introduce any new system; they did not wish to set aside a great uniform system which some persons so highly valued, and which would, no doubt, if practicable, be extremely desirable, as it would unite together the members of every creed in cordiality and affection. But the system of uniformity had been already broken into fragments; and the Protestants of Ireland at present only demanded that they should participate in the advantages enjoyed by every other portion of their fellow-subjects. Now, he could not think that that was an extravagant or an unreasonable demand. Her Majesty's Ministers admitted that a general system of education throughout the empire was unpopular, and that it could not be fairly carried into effect. Now, the Protestants of Ireland entertained the same opinion upon the subject; and it was on that account that they sought to escape the control of the National Board of Education in that country. But he felt it necessary to state the objections which they entertained to the existing system. They complained that that system trenched on their conscientious religious opinions. He would ask this question: Were there greater facilities for united education between Protestant and Roman Catholics, than between the members of the Church of England and the members of the various Dissenting bodies? Surely there were not; and if there was any difficulty in bringing together the children of Churchmen and of Dissenters for the purpose of educating them in the same schools, a still greater difficulty must exist in the ease of Protestant and Roman Catholic children. In fact, there was at the very outset of the question a peculiar and an insuperable difficulty in the way of the united education of Protestants and Roman Catholics, arising out of the fact that while Protestants of every denomination accepted the Bible as a book which should be laid open to all classes, Protestants and Roman Catholics unfortunately differed upon that preliminary step towards a system of combined education. He would not discuss the question whether Protestants or Roman Catholics were right in their views upon that subject; but there could be no doubt of the fact, that while all Protestants were agreed that whoever took away the Scriptures from the people deprived them of their birthright and their undoubted privilege, the Roman Catholic Church believed that the Scriptures ought not to be put into the hands of the great mass of mankind. That was the doctrine distinctly laid down in the bull Unigenitus, which had been issued for the purpose of denouncing the doctrine set forth by some of the Jansenists—who were among the best men that had ever belonged to the Roman Catholic Church—that the Bible ought to be placed in the hands of the people. In the bull Unigenitus, the following propositions were taken from a book entitled The New Testament in French, with Moral Reflections upon each Verse, &c. Printed at Paris, 1699. The reading of the Holy Scriptures is for all men.—Acts viii. 28. To take the New Testament from the hands of Christians, or to shut it against them, is to close the mouth of Christ against them, by taking away from them that means of understanding him.—Matt. v. 2. The bull contained the following comment upon those propositions:— The opinions, therefore, of the abovementioned cardinals and theologians having been both heard by word of mouth and exhibited to us in writing; and, above all, the aid of Divine illumination having been implored by private and public prayers, appointed for this end, we respectively declare, condemn, and reprobate by this our perpetually-enduring constitution all and singular the above-inserted propositions as false, captious, ill-sounding, offensive to pious ears, scandalous, pernicious, rash, injurious to the Church and its usages, contumelious not only towards the Church, but also towards the secular powers, seditious, impious, blasphemous, suspected of heresy, and savouring of heresy itself; favouring, moreover, heretics and heresies, and also schism; as erroneous, nearly allied to heresy, often condemned, and finally even heretical, and also various heresies manifestly introducing novelties, and chiefly those which are in the infamous propositions of the Jansenists, taken in that sense in which they were condemned. Now, as that was the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, it was manifest that whenever Protestants and Roman Catholics should attempt to form a system of united education, they would be met by a preliminary difficulty, which must occur between them earlier than any objection that could arise between the members of the various Protestant communions. Let the House remember that all clergymen of the Established Church must have made, previously to their ordination, a declaration to the effect that they believed that the Holy Scriptures contained all doctrine necessary for eternal salvation through faith in Christ, and that they would teach nothing which they were not persuaded could be proved by the same. So that it was clear that the ministers of the Protestant Church were only acting in conformity with their solemnly-avowed principles, when they said that they could not give their support to schools in which they were not allowed to put the Scriptures into the hands of children, who might otherwise be for years in those schools without having seen or even heard God's holy word. He felt it necessary to state, as some misapprehension prevailed upon the subject, what were the rules of the Board with regard to the holy Scriptures. Those rules were as follows:— The ordinary school business, during which all children, of whatever denomination they may be, are required to attend, is to embrace a specified number of hours each day. The patrons of the several schools have the right of appointing such religious instruction as they may think proper to be given therein, provided that each school be open to children of all communions; that due regard be had to parental right and authority; that, accordingly, no child be compelled to receive, or be present at, any religious instruction to which his parents or guardians object; and that the time for giving it be so fixed that no child shall be thereby in effect excluded directly or indirectly from the other advantages which the school affords. Subject to this, religious instruction may be given either during the school hours, or otherwise. The reading of the Scriptures, either in the Protestant or Douay version, as well as teaching of Catchisms, comes within the rule as to religious instruction. The rule applies to public prayer. The Commissioners do not insist on the Scripture lessons being read in any of the national schools, nor do they allow them to be read during the time of secular or literary instruction in any school attended by children whose parents or guardians object to their being read. In such cases the Commissioners prohibit the use of them, except at the times of religious instruction, when the persons giving it may use these lessons or not as they think proper. It was provided that during a certain number of hours the children should not be compelled to be present at, or to engage in, any religious instruction, while any version of the Bible came within the designation "religious instruction." Now, there was no mode of complying with such a rule except by excluding the reading of the Scriptures during those hours; and that was the real meaning of the rule. The reading of "the extracts" was also prohibited, and even in more express terms, for it was stated that that reading should not be allowed. The views of the Commissioners would, perhaps, be still more apparent from the following letter, addressed, by their secretary, Mr. Kelly, to the Presbyterians:— The rule that the hours from two till three of each day except Saturday shall be employed in reading and instruction in the Holy Scriptures, is quite compatible with the regulations of the Commissioners, provided that such children only as are directed by their parents to attend be then allowed to continue in the school, and that all others do then retire. And with respect to the exercise on Saturday, it also is compatible with their rules, provided that those children shall attend only upon that day whose parents direct that they shall join in reading or receiving instruction in the Holy Scriptures, so that an opportunity be thus afforded for all others to receive such religious instruction at that time as their parents or guardians shall provide for them. As you mention that you occasionally visit the school, to mark the progress and administer such instruction as the circumstances and capacity of the children may require, the Commissioners desire me to observe, that it is of the essence of their rules that religious instruction should be given only at the time specially appointed for that purpose; and that children whose parents do not direct them to be present at it should previously retire. The Commissioners having thus explained their views, and anticipating that you will conform to them, direct me to signify their readiness to make a grant towards the support of the Temple Meeting-house School on your returning the paper, which I herewith transmit, properly filled and signed. It appeared from that letter, that in the Presbyterian schools clergymen had no power to put the Scriptures into the hands of children, as their parents or guardians could pursue whatever course upon the matter they might think fit. Now to such an arrangement as that, a large portion of the clergy of the Established Church in Ireland, and upwards of 40,000 Irish Protestants, conscientiously objected. He asked that something might then be done for them, so that the assistance of the State would be extended for educational purposes to every denomination of Christiana. He would ask why the conscientious scruples of Irish Protestants upon that subject should not be respected, as well as the scruples of any other portion of Her Majesty's subjects? That was the whole of the question. He need not stop to argue whether they were right, but would ask whether there was any reason why their conscientious objections should not be considered, as well as those of any other class of Her Majesty's subjects. He knew no reason except one which he would presently speak of. The present First Lord of the Treasury had once stated in a letter that one reason for not giving support to the Protestants of the Church of Ireland was the wealth of that Church. He should be sorry to say anything un-courteous or uncivil respecting that noble Lord, but he could not conceive any sincerity in giving that answer; because, if the Government had been of opinion that the wealth of that Church was sufficient, not only to support its clergy, but also schools, they ought, by legal enactment, to have forced them to do so. But in order to refute that assertion, he would refer to an instance: in his own diocese there was a benefice, the population of which was 13,000, and the annual rent-charge only 48l. Would any one say that that sum was sufficient for the support of an incumbent, and for the maintenance of a school? Another reason why he did not think the answer of the noble Lord sincere was, that, with all the supposed wealth of the Church, no objection was made to assist a richly beneficed clergyman and his schools out of the public funds, provided he complied with the orders of the Board. If he would only give up his principles, they would advance him the money. As illustrative of the mode in which the Government sought to drive men from their principles, he might mention the case of a clergyman in the county of Limerick, who had taken an active part in superintending the distribution of the funds sent over from England for the relief of the poor. That clergyman had, by his just performance of his duties, become obnoxious to the people, and threats were used against his life and the lives of his family. Anxious to exchange his benefice, he wrote to the Government, stating that he wanted no greater emoluments, but he desired to be sent to a place where his life would be safe, and he wished to know whether they would sanction the change. To his first request no answer was returned; but on applying again, the private secretary of the Lord Lieutenant wrote to him to know what he thought of the National Board. He had no wish to say anything against the Lord Lieutenant, to whom they were all greatly indebted, but such was the answer of his private secretary. Afterwards, when the clergyman in question wrote that he was an enemy to the National Board, they informed him that they could not consider his application. Why did Government act in this way towards the Protestants of Ireland? Why should not the Church Education Society be allowed a medium of communication similar to that which was accorded to the Roman Catholics in England by the Minutes of Council? Why should not the Church be inspector of its schools? If its schools were placed under the Board, they must be inspected by persons in whom churchmen could place no reliance, and who would act rather in a spirit of hostility than of fairness. The rule regarding Roman Catholic inspectors was, that they might inquire as to literary and educational points, but that they were to make no remarks about religious instruction. They might teach what they pleased—all or none of the Scriptures; but if the inspectors of the Protestant schools under the National Board should discover that the Scriptures were taught in the schools, and that some of the parents of the scholars objected, then the school was no more entitled to assistance? It was said, the persons who were to he sent as inspectors to the Roman Catholic schools, were persons to be approved of by the Roman Catholic School Committee; whereas the Protestants must take inspectors in whose appointment they had no voice— men who would come to them in a spirit of hostility. And what was the rule of the Roman Catholic schools? They were to inspect the scholars as to their literary advancement, but they were to make no remark as to their religious instruction. They might or might not teach the children the Scriptures as they liked—that did not stand in the way of their getting assistance. But if they came to the Protestant schools, and found the Scriptures were taught in school hours, when some of the parents of the children objected to it, that school was no longer to receive assistance. Was that, he asked, acting in a spirit of fairness to Protestants; and why should they be so treated? This conduct implied an imputation on them, as if the Protestants of Ireland had done something that disqualified them from receiving assistance for their education. This was rather a painful part of the subject; it was painful to make any comparison between Protestants and Catholics; but he (the Bishop of Cashel) would not be acting fairly towards the petitioners if he did not plead their cause, and show they were not deserving of such treatment. There was nothing in the conduct of Protestants to show that they should be ill-treated. It could not he said that they were ill-treated in consequence of any doctrine they held, neither could it be alleged that they were ill-treated because they had evinced any want of loyalty, or because they were bad members of society; they had strong proofs to show that no such imputation could be urged against them. There was a panel furnished some time since for the county of Tipperary, consisting of 280 Protestants, and eighty Roman Catholics; and a strong memorial having been sent to their excellent Lord Lieutenant on the subject, he was obliged to justify the Roman Catholic Attorney General for setting aside the few Roman Catholics on it. He stated they were set aside not because they were Roman Catholics, but that being Roman Catholics they were repealers, they were disaffected; but that was not said of Protestants—it was not said that they were repealers, or disloyal, or not likely to give a fair verdict. There were disturbances in Waterford; and the mayor, himself a Roman Catholic, called upon the inhabitants to come forward to be sworn as special constables. There were 27,000 inhabitants in Watorford—22,000 Roman Catholics, and 5,000 Protestants. Out of that number there were 280 special constables sworn, of whom eighteen only were Roman Catholics, the remaining 262 being Protestants. Those Protestants came forward to defend the lives and properties of Her Majesty's subjects; and surely they should not be thrown aside, and told that no assistance should be given to them to teach their children to fear God and honour the Queen. At the time of the ridiculous rebellion at Ballingarry, on the part of Mr. Smith O'Brien, and a miserable following of 500 or 600 men, something was said to the disparagement of the wriest of the parish, and, unfortunately for himself, the priest wrote a defence of himself. He was reminded by that defence of the saying, "Oh, that mine enemy would write a book!" He said it was his fixed resolution not to interfere at all in this outbreak, but to look on with indifference. That passage was contained in the exculpatory letter which the priest wrote of himself, for fear worse might be thought of him. The right rev. Prelate read a letter written by the Rev. P. Fitzgerald. In contrast to this he might mention the case of a clergyman (the Rev. Mr. Meddlecott) of the Established Church. He resided in Waterford, and in September last, on being informed that the country was up, and an attack about to he made on the police barracks, he went and informed them of it. He found in the barracks six policemen, five of whom were Roman Catholics; and it ought to their honour to be stated, and one Protestant. They all stated their determination to defend themselves, and not to give up their arms. In a short time an attack was made by 500 or 600 of the people, but they were repulsed by the six police, with two killed and several wounded. It could never be otherwise than for the good of the empire to have men educated in the principles which inspired the loyalty of the individuals to whom he had referred. He thought there could be no dispute now-a-days about the value of Protestantism. On this point they had recently had a testimony which, coming from an unexpected quarter and from an eminent person, who lately was a Member of the present Administration, was of some weight—the more especially as he had formerly taken a conspicuous part in the debate respecting the Irish Church. [Mr. Maeaulay, from whose History of England the right rev. Prelate read an extract.] Before concluding, he wished to notice one or two facts not generally known in this country. It was usually said that the great evil of Ireland was over-population. But it was not known that the most densely peopled parts of Ireland were the most flourishing, and those in which the people were most prosperous. The number of acres, arable and otherwise, in the different parts, and the proportion to the population, was as follows. In Munster, 6,064,000 acres, 3,874,000 of which were arable; population, 2,396,000—more than one and a half arable acre to one soul. Ulster, 6,475,000 acres, 3,407,000 of which were arable; population, 2,386,000—less than one and a half arable acre to one soul. Armagh, 380,000 acres, 265,000 of which were arable; population, 232,000—more than one (not one and a quarter) arable acre to each soul. Mayo, 1,363,000 acres, 497,000 of which were arable, population, 388,000—more than one and a quarter arable acre to each soul. The proportion of those who could read and write, and of offences in different provinces, was as follows. Munster, 367,000 could read and write; 541,000 could not read and write. Ulster, 412,000 could read and write; 358,000 could not read and write. Offences within the year: Ulster, 1,465; Munster, 3,279; Connaught, 3,314. There was a wonderful difference produced amongst the people by education. In the south the good effects of education were seen, and in that respect the Protestants in Cork were far superior to those in the north. It was not only wrong in principle to keep down education among the Protestants, but it was inexpedient, it was fighting against the true interests of the country. The Protestants of Ireland ought to be allowed the full benefit of education, and to have the opportunity of extending it to their neighbours. He called upon their Lordships by the respect they had for the Word of God—by the regard they must have to the best interests of the people—by the desire they must entertain to promote the social and real interests of the country, that they would give a favourable hearing to the petitioners, and show themselves disposed to give to the Protestants of Ireland the same assistance for the purposes of education which was given to every other class of Her Majesty's subjects.

The ARCHBISHOP of DUBLIN

observed, that so far from wishing to oppose the Motion "that these petitions do lie on the table," he would be glad to welcome an inquiry by commissioners appointed for the purpose, into the whole system of national education in Ireland, because he was convinced that a great portion of the opposition to the principle arose from a misapprehension of facts. It was strange that this should be so, after the matter had been so frequently discussed and examined into; but he would be prepared to prove that the facts differed materially from what they had been represented to be, and that the commissioners, if appointed, would find that extraordinary delusions prevailed, not only in Ireland, but in England even, as to matters of fact. He would not stop to dwell upon the difference that existed between the systems of education adopted at the English and Irish universities, but he would only advert to the circumstance that in neither country had the principle been adopted of one system of education for the rich, and another for the poor. In the English colleges, the full benefits of education were not extended to all alike; but at Trinity College, Dublin, Roman Catholics and Dissenters could come in and receive the benefits of education upon equal terms. If that system were to he left unaltered, and the system of the education of the poor changed, so as to have separate schools established for each religious denomination, they would be setting up one system of education for the gentry and another for the poor. He would not go into the question as to whether that might or might not be advisable; but he hoped no ground would be afforded for saying they were more intolerant in their dealings with the lower than with the higher classes. Roman Catholics and Dissenters were admitted to Trinity College, Dublin, upon equal terms, to receive secular instruction, and they could also take degrees; and, in fact, the greater part of the Irish clergy and gentry received their education within its walls. This circumstance made it hard for him to believe that Protestants could entertain conscientious objections to allow their humbler fellow-subjects to receive the benefits of education upon the same terms on which they had themselves received it. He was convinced that a very large portion of the objections which had been raised to the system of education laid down in the national schools, arose from a misapprehension of many particulars, and from a very incorrect use of language. He believed that many Protestants laboured under the impression that the Scriptures were excluded from these schools. Now, to speak plainly this was not a fact. The Scriptures were only excluded in this sense that the teacher was not permitted to force religious instruction upon any adult student, contrary to his religious convictions, or upon any child contrary to the religious convictions of its parents. He must say he could not sympathise with or respect the conscientious scruples of a person who objected to have his children educated under such circumstances, while at the same time he wished to have a particular kind of instruction forced upon the children of another person. It would, he thought, amount to great profanation to urge a person to receive the communion of a church in the faith of which he did not believe, and the doctrines of which he did not practise. This was the very last way in which they ought to show their reverence to the Word of God. There was a rule at all the national schools that the children were to receive religious instruction, and that certain stated hours were to be devoted to that purpose. Would it therefore be consistent with propriety and good order that a lesson in Euclid or Virgil was to be suddenly interrupted, and that a person were to say, "I think you had better stop now and let me read the Bible." The only restriction practised in the national schools was that to which he had alluded. There was sufficient time allowed for religious instruction, but there was no time for what might be called "coercive Scripture." They were taught in that Book to which reference had been made so often by the right rev. Prelate who had presented the petition, that we ought" to do unto others as we would wish others to do unto us; "and who, be would ask, would like his child to be compelled to learn the Koran, or the dogmas of some religion in which he did not believe? He contended that we had no right to force the practice of our religion upon any person against his convictions, or to have recourse to any means to induce a person to profess a religion in which he did not believe. He was also convinced that, if the persons who had subscribed their names to the petition were aware of what they were asking for, they would, themselves, deprecate the introduction of any such scheme, for there were many hundred parishes in Ireland in which, if it were carried out, the children of Protestants would be either left without any instruction at all, or compelled to receive it under the control of a Catholic priest. If there were several schools in a town, so that the children of all religious denominations could receive the benefits of instruction in an establishment conducted by persons of their own faith, then the case would be different; but in Ireland there were hundreds of parishes in which the Protestants of the humbler classes were in a very small minority. In many parishes there were only six or seven Protestant children, and in many others not a dozen; and it would be impossible to have a school for the accommodation of so small a number. Therefore, if the wishes of the petitioners were carried out, the minority would have to be left without instruction, or be compelled to go to a school purely and exclusively Roman Catholic, It was true that in some cases it might so happen that the Catholics would be in the minority, and be compelled to remain uninstructed, or go to a Protestant school. This, he was sure, was not the desire either of the Protestants or of the Catholics of Ireland; for both would deeply abhor a system that would preclude their children from receiving secular education, unless it was to be accompanied with religious instruction in a faith in which they did not believe. He was convinced that, if the major part of the petitioners were aware of the consequences of breaking up the existing schools, and making separate establishments, they would shrink from it for their own sakes. To show that he was justified in stating that the greatest ignorance and misapprehension existed with reference to the religious instruction imparted in the national schools, he might be permitted to mention a case which came under his own cognisance. It was that of a Protestant clergyman of great respectability and high character, and who was, moreover, on tolerably friendly terms with the Catholic clergyman of the parish. This gentleman, notwithstanding that a national school was established in his parish, and that the Scripture Extracts used in it had been published sixteen yars, was, until lately corrected in his erroneous impression, labouring under the idea that the Extracts were taken from the Douay version of the Bible, and that this had been done to suit the wishes of the Roman Catholics! This gentleman had never had the curiosity to compare the Extracts with the Douay version, and, strange to relate, he had never met with a Protestant friend to enlighten him on the subject. As another instance of the ignorance which existed in Ireland on the subject of the national education system, he might be permitted to allude to this fact, that in many quarters of the country the opinion still prevailed amongst intelligent Protestants that the words "Do penance," which had been introduced instead of the word "repentance" into some of the selections from Scripture sixteen years ago, but which had been expunged immediately afterwards, were still to be found in the text. In conclusion, he would only observe, that if it should be proposed to appoint commissioners to inquire into the working and practical effect of the national system, he should not be disposed to offer any opposition to such a proceeding, provided the inquiry were conducted in a manner which would enlighten the public as to the true circumstances of the case. He should not be at all disposed to resist such an investigation; for if it were carried on in a becoming spirit, he was persuaded that the result would be that many well-meaning persons who had signed the present petition would be brought to see that they had done so in utter ignorance of the true state of things. If it should appear that the members of the present Board of Commissioners had not done their duty in a satisfactory manner, he—speaking for one of them—would be very glad to be succeeded in office by a man more competent than himself. The most laborious, painful, and indeed he would add, odious, duty of a Commissioner of Education, he had undertaken with a view to the public good in Ireland, and not at all in the expectation of acquiring favour for himself; and if it should be found that he had not been so fortunate as to discharge his duty in a satisfactory manner, he would very much rejoice to have his shoulders relieved of the burden.

The BISHOP of LONDON

He had had the happiness of a long and intimate acquaintance with the most rev. Prelate who had just resumed his seat, and he gave him full credit for the untiring zeal with which he had on all occasions discharged the important duties he had undertaken in connexion with the national system of education in Ireland. However, while he willingly made this admission, he was obliged in candour to express his dissent from many of the doctrines propounded that evening by the most rev. Prelate. He could not agree with the most rev. Prelate in principle, nor, he feared he must add, in detail, so far as the present question was concerned. It was easy to make an allegation to the effect that the persons who had signed the important petition which was then lying upon their Lordships' table, had done so in utter ignorance of the true state of the facts; but surely it required more than an ordinary amount of credulity to make one place reliance on any such assertion. Who were the men who had signed that petition? From 1,400 to 1,500 of them were clergymen of the Established Church in Ireland—men who, it was to be supposed, were not only deeply conversant with the theory of the system, but were competent to speak of its actual results from practical observation. Was it to be imagined that such men could be ignorant of the real operation of the system they condemned? He did not think that the idea could obtain credence for a moment. The members of the Church Education Society did not want to drag the children of Roman Catholics to Protestant schools. All they wanted to do was, to protect Protestant parents from the intolerable oppression of being obliged to send their children to schools which were virtually and to all intents and purposes Roman Catholic schools. The great majority of the schools in the north of Ireland were, if he was informed aright, Presbyterian schools, while the majority of those in the south were Roman Catholic; but then, the majority of the population being Roman Catholic, it might with truth be said that the stream of public bounty flowed for the most part towards the Roman Catholic children. They had heard a great deal about justice to Ireland; but it was time that justice should at length be done to the Church in Ireland. He did not think that that Church had been fairly dealt with of late years with respect to the great question of national education. In 1832 he opposed the present system of national education, on the ground that it was not based on the Scriptures. The same objection applied to it still. The prelates and clergy of the Established Church in Ireland claimed on behalf of that Church the right to give to the children of all those who were entrusted to their spiritual care the Scriptures whole, unabridged, and undivided; and if he resided in Ireland, and had a care of souls, he certainly Would not send the children of his flock to schools where not only they themselves, but the other children with whom they associated, would be debarred from the benefit of scriptural instruction. The majority of the prelates and parochial clergy of Ireland, in spite of all the efforts which were so perseveringly made to make them look with favour on the national system, had, to their own temporal detriment, and to the utter ruin of their hopes of promotion, persisted in offering it an uncompromising opposition; and this argued an honesty of purpose and a sincerity of conviction which entitled their opposition to greater consideration than the most rev. Prelate (the Archbishop of Dublin) appeared disposed to award to it. He was sure the noble Lord, who might be said to be the parent of the present system, would not be displeased if he ventured to direct his attention to these facts, that in the year 1832 the Synod of Ulster agreed to a resolution declaring that it was their decided conviction that in a Christian country the Bible entire and unmutilated ought to be the only basis of religious education; and that a Presbyterian minister of eminence had used language yet more forcible and unqualified in a pamphlet, in which he vindicated the conduct of the Synod. Such being the tone adopted by the Presbyterians of Ireland, surely it ought not to be wondered at that the clergymen of the Established Church in that country should use language equally uncompromising, and pursue a course equally independent. He gave the Irish clergy who advocated scriptural education the fullest credit for the course they had adopted. It manifested the truest sincerity on their part, and the utmost possible singleness of purpose, for it could not be forgotten that every discouragement was given by those in authority to those who regarded the national system with disfavour, and that encouragement was only accorded to those who approved of it, and endeavoured to carry it into operation. He entirely concurred with the petitioners in thinking that the only way to insure a Christian education for the Irish population was to have a separate system for each class of religionists, so that one might not interfere with another. The most rev. Prelate (the Archbishop of Dublin) had endeavoured to justify the national system of education, on the ground that it was analogous in principle to that adopted at Trinity College, in Dublin; but be did not think that any true analogy could be established between the cases. No such rule prevailed in Trinity College with respect to the use of the Scriptures as was enforced by the Board of Education; and it should, moreover, be remembered that the students of Trinity College were not under the immediate influence of the Roman Catholic priests, as the scholars in the national schools usually were. He was most decidedly of opinion that their Lordships were bound to give to the prayer of the present petition their most serious consideration.

The EARL of WINCHILSEA

said, when he considered the difficulties the Protestants of Ireland had to contend with, in availing themselves of the system of education advocated by a nominally Protestant Government, he could not help coming to the conclusion that the means adopted by them with regard to national education must necessarily—from the system adopted and the numbers attending it—increase the members of the Church of Rome. When he considered that the property of the Established Church had suffered considerable diminution of late years—that the moans of the clergy were fearfully reduced by the large reductions that had taken place in their incomes, owing to the alteration in the value of tithes—when he considered that the whole patronage of the Government was conferred upon those persons connected with the Church who supported the national system of education, although they had bound themselves to promote to the best of their power the religions and scriptural education of those entrusted to their care—he feared that the Government was determined to follow out in Ireland a system which had been already productive of the most lamentable results. Little, however, did he expect to hear in that House a Bishop of his own Church get up and say that a petition, signed by 1,300 or 1,400 clergymen of the Church of England—that a body of men who lived in the hearts and affections of every sound Protestant, and of every sound member of the Church of Christ in that country—little did he think that he should hear such a body of men charged with having put their names to a petition which they did not understand. These petitioners prayed that a different system might be adopted with regard to the grants of public money given for educational purposes in Ireland. The petitioners were not averse to granting the Roman Catholics the means of educating their children; but what they complained of was, that they, the Protestants, were compelled to violate their consciences by sending their children to those schools. All that he asked for the members of the Church of England was, that they should have fair play. He did not object to the Government giving to the Roman Catholics, and to every other denomination, grants of public money for the purposes of education. He would not force any man to change his religious opinions; but this he would say, that he sincerely trusted the clergy of his own Church would never be compelled to act in direct opposition to, and to violate, their consciences and feelings, by being compelled to adopt the present system. He trusted their Lordships would take the petition into their consideration, and give it the attention it deserved.

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE

said, I do not object to the petition being laid upon the table; but at the same time I must say—without going at length into the various considerations which have been urged in the course of this debate—that I think I ought to state, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, that I cannot hold out hopes of any alteration being made in the system of education which has now been adopted with respect to Ireland for fifteen or sixteen years—and adopted, too, after the fullest consideration. Neither can I hold out any expectation that Her Majesty's Government have, any more than I, as an individual, altered the opinion formed at the time the system was first introduced, that the case of Ireland, on the subject of education, ought to be treated in a totally different manner to that of this country. The grants for education were made for the poor; and the great mass of the poor in Ireland being of the Roman Catholic persuasion, by no other measure could a superior degree of education be substituted for that imperfect, and worse than imperfect—that mischievous system of education that was previously in use. By no other means than by a system to which the priests of that communion need not object, could the benefit of education be extended to the poorest of Her Majesty's subjects in that part of the realm. I now hear it said that we might make specific grants for the education of Roman Catholics. I am glad to hear the noble Earl who hast just sat down does not object—

The EARL of WINCHILSEA

I did not mean to say that.

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE

I am glad to hear that the noble Earl would now make no opposition—

The EARL of WINCHILSEA

Do not misunderstand me. I did not mean that such a proposition in that shape would have my opposition.

The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE

The words of the noble Earl certainly led directly to that conclusion. But I am not prepared to say when, after so long a trial, the experiment has been found to effect the great object it was intended to accomplish, namely, the better education of the great mass of the people, and when it has succeeded so completely, that we will now adopt a totally different and a more partial system—a system of division which would withhold from the poorest class, the Roman Catholic poor, the benefits of education altogether. I am not prepared to forego the advantages we have already received, to introduce a plan which would set school against school—would introduce perpetual rivalry into every parish—set priest against clergymen—bigot against bigot—and give an impetus to that religious hostility which even now so unhappily prevails in Ireland. I am sure your Lordships would not give assistance to the Protestant, without giving at the same time assistance to the Catholic. I strongly object to exclusive benefits being given to either. I know there are some who would prefer that. The right rev. Prelates who have now left the House (the Bishops of London and Cashel) are, I believe, of that opinion; and conceive that they would benefit the Protestant religion by introducing these elements of strife. They have a powerful ally in the titular Archbishop of Ireland (Dr. M'Hale). That man of peace and concord is anxious to join with them in doing justice to both creeds, and professes, with them, to be alarmed at the introduction of the Scriptures, which, notwithstanding they are falsely said to be excluded, have practically found such an introduction into these schools as to alarm that right reverend person. He has said, day after day, "give me exclusive schools, if you will; but do not let my Roman Catholics be betrayed into places where the Scriptures are taught." We, however, are not prepared to do that. I think the peace of Ireland is more likely to be maintained by continuing a system common to all, which was introduced sixteen years ago, which has been supported by successive Governments, which has gone on, year after year, extending its benefits and attracting to it, if not a majority, many of the most pious and respectable of the Protestant clergy—attracting to it also a body which I do not undervalue, the Presbyterians of the north of Ireland—persons not less attached to their religion than the right rev. Prelates are to theirs—persons who would not think themselves called upon to take the advice of the right rev. Prelate who spoke last, as to what conduct would best promote the interests of their religion—persons who would feel themselves sufficiently capable to form a judgment of their own upon the subject, and who are not disposed to withdraw their assent, which was deliberately given, to that system when it came to be explained to them. It possesses, then, the approval of the Presbyterian body—the confidence of the Roman Catholics—the support of the most respectable of the Protestant clergy—the sanction of the Synod of Ulster—and it has now upwards of 500,000 children under its instruction. Of course the great majority of these are Roman Catholics; of course they are essentially Roman Catholic schools; but that is because the country is essentially Roman Catholic. How could any system of education in a Roman Catholic country be other than Roman Catholic? The schools must be Roman Catholic, because they are Roman Catholics who go to them; but in no other sense are they so. In all these schools there is instruction in the Scriptures, but it is not given in the hours devoted to secular instruction. I wish that in every school and college in this country, the pupils were taught as much of the Scriptures. I am sure, that if not formally, they are practically; the Scriptures are here much less taught than in those schools. I must again say, this is a system not now on trial, but one which has been tried; and that it has now half a million of the population under its operation. I say, that the system which at certain hours permits the children to be taught the Scriptures by ministers of all religions who may choose to teach them, has been attended with the happiest effects as to religion generally. I am not prepared to disturb that footing. I am not anxious to introduce the elements of discord where peace prevails. The Protestant children may be educated in the Protestant religion under their own ministers; but if they do not choose to do that, they are the richest portion of the population, and have other means of obtaining that education which, under this system, we are anxious to convey to the cottages of the poorest. The request of the petitioners has been made before, more than once, and it has been as often refused. By that refusal I am now prepared to abide. I can hold out no hopes of this question being reconsidered. I think we should be perfectly unjustified in disturbing a system which, your Lordships will perceive, by the report that I have laid on the table of the House to-day, has been so successful.

Petitions ordered to he laid on the table.

House adjourned until To-morrow.