Lords Sitting of 4 August 1854

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Militia (Scotland); Militia Pay; Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes; Militia Ballots Suspension; Public Revenue and Consolidated Fund Charges (No. 2).
2a Duchy of Cornwall Office.
Reported—Bribery, &c.; Stamp Duties.
3a Medical Graduates (University of London).

TRANSPORTATION—TICKETS OF LEAVE.
LORD ST. LEONARDS LORD ST. LEONARDS rose to call the attention of the House to the present system of granting tickets of leave to convicts. The question, "What are we to do with our convicts?" was one of the most important social questions of the day. Previous to the introduction of the system by which transportation was in effect abolished, the practice, as their Lordships were well aware, was, after keeping a convict in prison in this country for a certain time, to send him to one of our colonies under sentence of transportation, but with a ticket of leave, which assured them of the means of earning a subsistence. The advantages of this system were numerous. In the first place, the convict was cut off from his old associations, and could not therefore in the new country to which he was transported come into contact with his former comrades or be led into the commission of crime by their companionship
1294
and example. In the next place, he found himself, on his arrival in the colony, under the control and supervision of the Government of the colony to which he was consigned. He was certain of being provided for, because, if no other employment offered itself, he was employed on the public works at good wages and liberal rations. He had at the same time perfect liberty to engage in private service whenever he found an opportunity; and such an opportunity was sure to offer itself almost immediately, because the demand for labour was always much greater than the supply in the colonies to which he was sent. He was employed at a fair rate of wages, excellent rations were insured, and he had a good prospect of bettering his condition. At the same time there was no objection to the granting of those tickets of leave, inasmuch as there were numbers of persons in the colony desirous of the services of convicts, and who took them with the full knowledge of their being ticket-of-leave men. He had thus every prospect of bettering his condition; and it was not unfrequent for men who went out in this capacity to become tradesmen, or in some instances to accumulate large property. Under this system there was, therefore, no impediment to the granting of tickets of leave. They had not the effect of turning a man loose into society without any means of living, or without the Government having any check upon him. On the contrary, he was sent to a new part of the world, where he was sure at once to meet with full encouragement for his labour and with full employment. Circumstances had, however, arisen, which had rendered it necessary to abolish convict transportation, and to substitute penal servitude for it. No one could find fault with the Government of the day for this change in the mode of punishment, because as the colonists had refused any longer to receive our convicts, it was clearly impossible to send them there. It was, indeed, a little singular that while the colonists as a body refused to receive our convicts, there was always an ample demand on the part of individuals for the labour of such of these men as were sent. When the late Government was in office, the subject of the change to be made in the mode of punishment necessarily occupied much of their attention, and it was their determination still to retain transportation as far as possible. They did not, indeed, intend to

1295
attempt to force convicts upon any colonies which objected to receive them; but they desired to keep some remote island as a penal settlement, and thus to maintain both the terror and, to a limited extent, the use of transportation. Under the system adopted by the present Government, convicts, after remaining in prison for a certain time, received a licence to reside in any part of the United Kingdom or the Channel Islands, under such conditions as the Crown might think fit to prescribe, the licence being subject to revocation at the pleasure of the Crown. Now, when their Lordships considered the great difference in the state of things under which tickets of leave were formerly granted and those under which they had been granted since the late Act was passed, he thought they would see how difficult it must be to bring the old system to bear upon the new state of things. After the Act was passed there was no penal colony where a convict could be sent to, and where he would be subjected to the inducements to lead an honest life which he (Lord St. Leonards) had already described; on the contrary, he was let loose, without any check or control, into a field where the demand for labour was much less, and where no human being would employ him if it was known that he had a ticket of leave. The Government had no means of employing him on Government works. Let them just consider in what a different position an unfortunate man turned loose in this country was from one who was sent to a colony under the old system? As he had already said, such was the unhappy condition of society here, and such was the unwillingness to give employment to a convict, that he must start with a falsehood. He must conceal his real condition, and invent some story as to where he had been and what he had been doing. Nor was it only to his employer that he must give this account of his past life. No man could go to work with his fellows in any workshop or manufactory without giving an account of himself; and if he gave a false account, he was almost sure to be discovered. An unfortunate man in this position was, therefore, almost without resources, and could hardly be expected to continue in the paths of honesty. Then with regard to the course to be pursued towards these men, it was no doubt difficult for the Government to decide what should be done. As their Lordships would remember, a short time ago, considerable
1296
discussion took place with respect to the case of a convict named Brown, who had been discharged with a ticket of leave, who stated that he was dogged by the police, who prevented his getting or keeping work by telling his employers that he was a discharged convict. On inquiry, the reverse turned out to be the case, and that the man had returned to his old habit of misconduct—but contrast the situation of such a man in this country with that of the ticket-of-leave men in a convict colony. They used to be under the control and protection of the Governor, and their ticket of leave, being a proof of good behaviour, obtained them employment instead of being a disqualification for employment, as in this country. It was, however, no doubt very difficult to know what to do with respect to these unhappy men, for if they were to be protected from interference on the one hand, society must also be protected on the other. He had not the slightest intention to bring any charge against the Government for the manner in which they had administered the present system; but he certainly did wish that he could say that they appeared to have applied themselves earnestly and seriously to the discharge of the duty imposed upon them. He had lately moved for certain returns stating the number of tickets of leave granted, and the number which had been revoked; also the number of convicts who had been convicted of any crime after receiving tickets of leave. From those returns it appeared that 1,200 tickets of leave had been granted during the last year; yet it was stated that no communication had taken place between the Home Office and the prison authorities with respect to the ticket-of-leave men committed for fresh offences. It also appeared that no condition was attached to the grant of these tickets, nor any regulations made with regard to the conduct of those holding them. It was, indeed, notified to such persons that the power of the Crown to revoke these tickets would be exercised in case of misconduct, and that if they wished to retain the privilege they enjoyed they must prove themselves worthy of it, Now, if this notification was intended to be considered as a condition attached to the ticket of leave, it should have been placed on the back of it, and then the convict would always have it present to his mind whenever he looked at his ticket. But,

1297
then, in order to make this of any value, the Government must have power to carry into effect these threats—for so he must call them. But how, under the present system, could the authorities know whether these men—over whom they exercised no surveillance—led a vicious or a virtuous life? Why, when he asked for a return of the number of convicts who, after having received tickets of leave, had been since convicted of any crime, what was the answer? That the Home Office had no means of answering the question. But, who should have the means of answering the question, if the Home Office had not? It was evidently utterly impossible for the Home Office to judge of the operation of the ticket of leave, or to act upon the conditions on which it was said these tickets were granted, unless they were in a position to trace the conduct of their holders. It was the duty of the Home Office to exercise a general superintendence over the criminal jurisdiction of the country, and have an account of every conviction of ticket-of-leave man as soon as it took place. There had, in his opinion, been no system; and if there had, he should be glad to hear from the noble Duke what the system was, what the checks were, and what benefits were likely to arise from it. In round numbers there had been 1,200 tickets of leave issued since October, 1853. According to that rate 150 convicts a month had been turned loose upon society; and the question was, whether the country could absorb that amount of such a population without any provision being made for their control. He was strongly of opinion, that if a man were to have any chance in this country, they must not have a detective policeman always at his heels to warn people against trusting him; but, on the other hand, they must have some system and some means of enabling that man to earn an honest livelihood before society would generally adopt him or receive him as a labourer or servant. It appeared to him that what was necessary was, not to grant them tickets of leave, but that some place should be provided, which he believed could be provided, that would become a substitute to a certain extent for the colonies to which they were accustomed to transport them; and where the Government would have some means of providing employment for the men when they were first discharged—for it should be recollected that at present they discharged them direct from the
1298
prison gate into the general population. Let it be remembered that there was no probation, and that many a man would act well in prison, and while under control and under the eye of authority when he knew the consequences of doing so would be his emancipation, who would not, when turned loose on society, have the courage to resist his former habits and practices. What a man's conduct had been in prison was no satisfactory test of what his conduct would be when turned into society; it was necessary to have some system established by which they could have their eye on them, because they should have some check over them in letting them loose on the world. Considering the temptations and difficulties to which these ticket-of-leave men would be exposed, it was not at all surprising that they should sometimes relapse into their former habits; and he thought the man was entitled to great credit who, liberated from prison with a ticket of leave, won his way back to an honest position in society. By putting the convict through a certain state of probation they would be then able to recommend him to employment, and many a man would take a convict from the public works who would not otherwise be disposed to engage him, and when he had once got employment he might hope to redeem himself. He had received some very affecting letters from men who had been discharged with tickets of leave under the present system, and who related the difficulties they experienced in the attempts to earn an honest livelihood, and they would really very much surprise the House if he were at liberty to read them. He had a letter from a man, who, having received a ticket of leave, was desirous to go to his brother in Australia, but he was told it was contrary to the rule, and he could not go to Australia. He (Lord St. Leonards) could not see why a man who had a connection in Australia, and deserved a ticket of leave, should not be allowed to go there as well as remain in England, Ireland, or Scotland; but he was denied the liberty of going there, simply because he had a ticket of leave, and he got the ticket of leave from the very Government who denied him the permission to go. There was a case of a man whose brother proposed to give him the means of earning a livelihood by driving a cab; but when he went to Scotland-yard and asked for a licence, they said they could not give him a licence because

1299
he was a ticket-of-leave man. What was such a man to do? When he had the honour of being a Member of the late Government, nothing pressed more upon him than the difficulty to which he called their Lordships' attention, and he never could quite see his way; but he was sure that their Lordships would be of opinion that it was a question to which the Government ought to direct its most serious attention. He had no doubt the noble Duke opposite was desirous of doing all he could with reference to the adoption of some plan to remove the difficulty; but if a satisfactory plan should not be agreed upon, he (Lord St. Leopards) should think it to be his duty in the next Session to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to consider the whole question. In the meantime he hoped that the Government would take the matter into its serious attention, and prevent the necessity of such a motion on his part.s
THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE: I can assure the noble and learned Lord that it was quite unnecessary for him, in the course of the observations which he has made to the House, to say that he had no desire to make any complaint of the Government in reference to their management of this matter; the whole conduct of the noble and learned Lord in the House with reference to the ticket-of-leave question affording quite sufficient proof of that, if he had not made the statement himself. I only regret that there is no Member of the Government in this House in more immediate connection with this particular question, and able to answer more in detail and more satisfactorily the observations that have been made by the noble and learned Lord. At the same time, having held the seals of the Colonial Office, and being the individual to advise the total cessation of transportation of our convicts to the colonies with the exception of Western Australia, I do feel a special interest on that account in the success of this great and most important experiment, and undoubtedly feel a large share of responsibility attaching to it. The noble and learned Lord had stated very fairly and accurately the circumstances under which transportation had been, with reference to many of the colonies abolished, and with reference to Western Australia diminished; and he said that the late Government had under consideration the question of adopting the system of transportation in some group of islands—but I do not know
1300
whether he meant the Falkland Islands or not. In the course of the discussions which took place on this question last year, I ventured more than once to point out to your Lordships that, although you might undoubtedly continue the system of transportation, that is to say, a system of removal of culprits from this country to some other spot, it was impossible to continue the system of transportation of late years adopted so long as the communities in our colonies were unwilling to receive them. Undoubtedly you might adopt a system in the Faulkland Islands similar to that which had been carried on in Norfolk Island; but by adopting a system of transportation such as it was in the early days of that colony, and which, after a trial, was repudiated by the whole community of the colony, you would be engendering, and not correcting, crime. Such a system cannot be carried on in the Falkland Islands, or any other island belonging to this country. But I apprehend that the whole value of the system of transportation as it was carried on, existed in the very practice to which the noble and learned Lord referred, when he contrasted the system of ticket of leave in this country with the system in the colony, where he said there was a system of surveillance over the convicts intermixed with the pure population of the colony, and the population untainted by crime, with whom they might become intermixed at the termination of their period of punishment. But New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land desired to be relieved from any further importation of convicts, and the only spot now available is Western Australia. When therefore these countries repudiated the system on moral grounds, it became impossible for this country to continue transportation on the former system, and in my opinion it would be most unwise and, I may use the phrase, wicked to renew such a system under any circumstances. I do not say that in the course of time there may not arise other colonies young in origin, and extending probably over considerable districts of country, where—as West Australia does at present—for the financial advancement and establishment of the colony, they may be willing to accept convicts; and if such a state of things should arise, there will, I am sure, be no indisposition on the part of the Government to take the matter into consideration. But I cannot hold out any expectation to the country that colonies which have been already

1301
established will ever be found willing to accept convicts, and I trust that this country will never be found anxious to thrust them upon them, if such willingness to receive them does not exist. Such are the circumstances under which the present system was adopted. My noble and learned Friend stated that it was necessary in this or some other system to consider whether no new penal settlement could be established; but he was not quite correct in drawing the contrast between this country and the colonies so far as the position of the latter is concerned. My noble and learned Friend seems to be under the impression that these men, on receiving tickets of leave, are at a loss to find employment by which they might earn an honest livelihood. I do not know what particular instances have been brought to the attention of the noble and learned Lord; but he will admit that the cases drawn to his attention from the philanthropic disposition he has shown, in this House and elsewhere, on the subject, are likely to be cases of hardship, and therefore it is unfair to form an opinion from the individual letters that no doubt have been laid before him. The noble and learned Lord says that so great must be the dearth of private employment for those ticket-of-leave men, that it was desirable to establish a system of public works on which the convicts might be employed. I can assure my noble and learned Friend that it was intended, if there was any difficulty experienced in finding employment for them from private persons, that provision should be made to employ those convicts on public works until they could find employment. I can assure him that every attention has been paid to the demand for labour, with the view of employing them on public works if employment with private individuals could not be found for them; but such has not been, and is not at present, the case; and unless the necessity does arise for the adoption of a different course, I think it far better for the community at large to provide employment rather than to adopt a system of intermediate employment on public works. The noble and learned Lord said that the measure adopted by the Government was a mere gaol delivery, and that the convicts were periodically turned out of the prisons to find their way in the world, without any system having been adopted to prevent them returning to vi-
1302
cious courses, but I can assure the noble and learned Lord that he is mistaken, and when he shall read the reports that are about to be presented to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, he will see that there has been a system adopted. He seems to think that at the termination of the period of imprisonment they are merely released with those tickets of leave; but the fact is, that about a month before the time a convict is about to be released, either owing to his conduct in prison, or from the duration of his period of imprisonment having expired, a letter is invariably written by the chaplain of the gaol to individuals pointed out by the convict himself in their neighbourhood from whom he thinks it likely he might receive employment; and I am happy to say—and I say it to the honour of the individuals—those letters from the chaplains have been in the great majority of instances answered in the affirmative, and the convict has succeeded in obtaining employment. When those answers are unfavourable, steps are taken for finding employment for those individuals with other persons besides those pointed out by the convicts themselves, and up to the present time, as far as could be ascertained, the convicts who had been released had found no want of employment, with the exception of a few who have resorted to their old vicious habits. When convicts are released, they are taken by the officers of the prison to the railway and supplied with clothing suitable to the class of life they heretofore occupied and are again about to adopt, their fare is paid, and they are sent to the spot where they expect to find employment. As regards the sum to which they are entitled on their release, amounting sometimes to about 5l. or 6l., the whole of that sum is not paid to them immediately, but a part is kept in reserve and paid to them occasionally, which has the additional advantage of continuing to a certain extent, without the aid of any watch or police, a certain degree of guard over them, and shows a continuance of the interest felt in them. These are only a few of the points of what I may call the system that has been adopted, and I mention them as the best way of correcting the erroneous opinion under which the noble and learned Lord has laboured, that no system has been adopted, but that the convicts are thrown upon the wide world without a chance of procuring employment. I be-

1303
lieve the cases referred to by the noble and learned Lord, in which the convicts have resorted to their vicious habits are exceptional; and when we consider that out of 1,200 convicts who have hitherto been released, so far as we know, much less than I per cent have resorted to vicious habits—I do not mean to say that that is exactly the result, but we must argue from what we know—we must admit that that is certainly an extraordinary small proportion. It is so small that I cannot hope that it is likely to continue. It may extend on some future occasion to 15 or 16 per cent; but when the proportion is so small as at present, it would be only fair to say that the system has not met with that utter want of success which many persons anticipated at the commencement. The noble and learned Lord said there were no conditions attached to the licences granted to convicts, and he had been surprised to hear the noble and learned Lord say that it would have been right for some notice in writing to be given to the convicts. The noble and learned Lord had been misled, for the fact was, the system which the noble and learned Lord suggested had been adopted, and upon the back of the document given to the convict were certain printed conditions, under which the ticket of leave was granted. No blame attached to the noble and learned Lord for having taken this objection, and he was only happy to inform the noble and learned Lord that the case stood much better than was supposed. My noble and learned Friend has referred to the number of convicts that have been set at liberty and reconvicted; but when I last saw Colonel Jebb I put the question to him for the purpose of ascertaining the number again convicted. He said it was impossible to state accurately without investigation, and without knowing the names of the Judges and of the magistrates; but that, so far as information had been obtained, there was an extraordinarily small number of reconvictions. The noble and learned Lord has alluded to a special case, such as I am not surprised should raise a feeling of great interest in his mind; but, at the same time, it would be unfair to judge of the system from this case. The noble and learned Lord has referred to a ticket-of-leave man, who had the means of going to Australia, and he asked why he should not be allowed to go there? Why, for no other reason
1304
than this; it was felt when the Act was passed last year, that if the Government did anything from which it was to be inferred that they were doing indirectly what they would not do directly, they would be offering an insult to the colonists, and that the colonists would have a right to complain. Therefore, the tickets of leave are confined to the United Kingdom alone, and if there is to be any watch at all maintained over them, that is necessary. We have no right to let them into the world at large, or permit them to go into the Colonies or to foreign countries, and if we did, the Colonies and foreign countries would say they had a right to complain. To maintain, however slightly, a system of watchfulness over them, that watchfulness must be exercised by the authorities at home, and, therefore, it is necessary that the ticket of leave should be confined to the United Kingdom. A great objection has been urged to the system, on the ground that the convicts were left to be watched by policemen and were looked upon with suspicion, and were unable in consequence to find employment. I think it right, to remove any misconception that may exist as regards the police authorities, to assure the noble and learned Lord that instructions have been given to the policemen not to follow men who have tickets of leave, but, on the contrary, to render them facilities for obtaining employment. Whilst on the one hand it is desirable that we should keep up, as far as possible, some acquaintance with those men, it must not be done by policemen dogging them, but by the adoption of a mode with which no one is better acquainted than the noble Earl opposite, who has paid some attention to this subject, and by which we may keep up an acquaintance with those people. The noble and learned Lord may be sure that this question will not be lost sight of, and we shall have in this particular instance the assistance of a most able man, whose whole soul is wrapt up in the subject—I mean Colonel Jebb. If this great experiment can succeed in any man's hands, I am sure it will in his; and I am sure that every exertion will be made by him to justify this and the other House of Parliament in making this great experiment with respect to convicts in this country.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, he did not disbelieve that very great exertions had been made to render this experiment successful,

1305
but he despaired of its ever being made so. Though only 1,200 convicts had been as yet discharged, there were thousands convicted every year, and they must be dealt with. Was it possible to expect that year after year those exertions to obtain employment could continue and be successful? They would find in this country, as had been found in other countries where transportation was unknown, that the number of convicts would greatly multiply, and that to try to reform them in their own country would be impossible. He had no doubt that every exertion had been made, and would continue to be made, to diminish the evils of the system; but what had been stated by his noble and learned Friend with regard to persons who obtained tickets of leave was quite true—namely, either that it would be known they had been convicted, and they would not be employed, or they must conceal by a lie their own former history; and in the latter case their previous character was always liable to be discovered at any moment, and they would be obliged to fly from one part of the country to another to avoid exposure. In his (Lord Campbell's) experience, when sentence of transportation was pronounced in open court, it not only made a deep impression on the convict himself, but upon all who heard it; and that sentence exercised more influence in producing good conduct than the actual infliction of the punishment itself. On the contrary, when a prisoner was sentenced to four years' penal servitude, be viewed the sentence with comparative indifference. In the first place he did not understand what it meant, and he next flattered himself that he was not to be sent out of the country, but was to be kept imprisoned for a few years where his confinement would probably be abridged, and that in the meantime he would only have some easy work to do that would give him very little annoyance. He had another remark to make with respect to the effect of the system of transportation upon industry. It was calculated that in the Australian colonies as many as 40,000 persons who had formerly been transported were now honestly and usefully employed in situations in which they maintained their families respectably; and there could be no doubt that if these persons had remained in England they must have led a life of continued crime, bringing lasting misery upon themselves, and preying upon the property of the country.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYcon-
1306
curred in much that had fallen from the noble and learned Lord who spoke last, but thought that great difficulty surrounded the question on every side. The persons who were generally sentenced to transportation were not prisoners brought up for their first offence, but mostly belonged to a class of criminals who were thoroughly initiated into a course of vice and crime. The reform of the offender was a consideration that ought not to be overlooked, and one quite as important as was his punishment. There could be no doubt that a person who had passed through a term of penal servitude, even if disposed to lead a new life, had very great discouragement to encounter in his endeavour to gain an honest; and such persons were often compelled to resort to their old courses, and were the means of inveigling younger persons into the same vicious career. The ticket-of-leave system was, however, as the noble Duke stated, only an experiment; and he hoped that after it had had a fair and sufficient trial, the whole subject would be brought under the review of Parliament.
LORD ST. LEONARDSbriefly replied. He said that the explanation of the noble Duke was satisfactory as far as it went, and he felt assured that the question would receive additional consideration from the Government during the recess.

NATIONAL EDUCATION—ADJOURNED DEBATE (SECOND NIGHT.)
Order of the Day for resuming the adjourned Debate [July 24] on the proposed Resolution read.
Debate resumed accordingly.
LORD BROUGHAM: * My Lords, I have certainly but faint hopes of being able to fix the attention of your Lordships upon an adjourned debate, however important the subject; and the rather because when I moved these one and twenty Resolutions. I abstained from reading them, that I might spare you the fatigue of hearing the statements repeated which had formed the substance of my address to the House: They were thus only printed in the Votes; and with all my respect for your industry in performing legislative duties, I can hardly believe that you devote much time to the perusal of those records of your proceedings; so that it is very much to be questioned if any one of your Lordships has become acquainted with a single word of these Resolutions. [The Earl of ABERDEEN: Don't take that for granted.] My

1307
noble Friend opposite (the Marquess of Lansdowne) and my noble and learned Friends near him (Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justice Campbell) objected to my withdrawing the Resolutions when I had moved them, and they refused to have the previous question upon them put, lest it might be supposed that the House had disagreed with them. But as I could hardly expect so many important propositions, some of them statements of fact, others of principle, could be agreed to without further discussion, in concert with my noble Friends, the course was taken of adjourning the debate. I do not purpose to revive and continue it at present; but one of the Resolutions, the seventeenth, together with the provisions grounded upon it, in the Bill now on your table, is of such paramount importance that I must crave your indulgence while I open the great question to which it relates—that of the difficulty found to beset the subject of popular education on every side, and meeting us at each step of our progress, from the religious differences existing in this country. For my own part, I have always held the opinion, from which I will not say I have been driven by compulsion, but by compulsion I certainly have been driven most reluctantly to modify or qualify its practical application, that the true mode of educating the people is to provide the means of secular instruction, and keep religious instruction apart from it; or at least teaching in schools those truths on which all sects are agreed, and leaving those truths on which they differ to be taught by the parents of each child, the pastors of each sect.
In a community like this, filled with various religious classes, and whose religious zeal is happily so fervent—I say happily, because whatever dissensions it may engender, and whatever difficulties it may occasion, its warmth at least proves the strength and sincerity of religious conviction—it has always appeared nearly impossible to plant schools in which the children of various sects may be taught, unless their instruction is confined to secular learning, while their religious teaching is left to their parents or their pastors. But this principle by no means excludes whatever security may be required for their receiving that instruction at home, and for their attending the church to which their parents resort, supposing their attendance at the school service or school church dispensed with. This is the opinion, and with this qualifica-
1308
tion rather than exception, which I have ever held, and in common with men whose great worth was not more remarkable than the strength of their religious feelings, so that it is grounded on anything rather than indifference on this most important matter. I refer to my lamented friend the late Duke of Bedford; but I may besides cite those who also bore the foremost part in the kindred, nay, identical controversy of the British and Foreign Bible Society, Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Whitbread, Zachary Macaulay, William Smith, who differing with them on many other points, agreed on this, and agreed with them also in being a truly pious man.
At first, and I may add for very many years after the system of schools for all was introduced, it was no part of the plan that any care should be taken for religious instruction, because the difficulties were found to be all but insuperable, of combining that with secular teaching; and it was found almost equally difficult to exact any security for religious instruction out of school, unless some such instruction should be connected with the school teaching. Still, as the extreme importance of obtaining some such security was admitted on all hands, I was induced to insert a provision in the Bills of 1837, 1838, and 1839, which had received the entire approval and support of the Government (Lord Melbourne's), and I have introduced it into the Bill now on your table. It requires that all schools to be either planted, or assisted by the rate which the municipal bodies are authorised to levy, shall be open to all classes, teaching no catechism, compelling no attendance at church service, where parents either object to the catechism or the service, but requiring satisfactory proof that the religious instruction and attendance on divine service is cared for by the parents or guardians in their own way. When we consider the division of the community into so many sects, we at once perceive the absolute necessity of some such principle governing our provisions for popular education, if, indeed, we are not led at once the full length of adopting the peremptory separations of secular from religious instruction, on which, however, I repeat, the general sense of the country, and of Dissenters as well as Churchmen, has pronounced a sentence of condemnation.
But the religious divisions to which I advert are well calculated to make us feel all the difficulty of combining the two kinds

1309
of instruction in one system. On one side we have the Establishment and its schools, where the Catechism is taught, the Liturgy used, and attendance on the Church service required; and here there is no difficulty, because the hundreds of thousands of children attending these schools, and answering to the millions of Churchmen, belong to one body, all professing a religious belief which is one and the same. So it is sometimes said, there being the Dissenters on the other hand—let schools be provided for their children, where no Church Catechism, Liturgy, or attendance is required, but the instruction is given according to their dissenting views. And nothing could be more easy than such an arrangement if the sects, like the Church, were one and the same; but, unfortunately, they are five and thirty —twenty-seven British and eight foreign; there are divisions and subdivisions: thus, when we speak of Methodists as a sect, we are speaking of nine sects; for there are the two great divisions of Arminian and Calvinistic, and the Arminians are subdivided into seven, the Calvinists into two. So the Baptists are five sects, not one; and thus, when we speak of Methodists and Baptists as if they were two sects, we, in fact, are speaking of no less than fourteen, which, with the Roman Catholics, the Presbyterians, the Independents, the Unitarians, and others, make in all five and thirty different persuasions. True, some of these subdivisions only differ from each other by slight variations, or shades of diversity in opinion; and hence, if we had no experience to guide us, we might that their repugnance to each other, their determination to keep aloof, their mutual repulsion as it were, would be feeble in the like proportion. But, alas! alas! it is just the other way. The nearer they approach in doctrine and discipline, the wider is their severance in feeling; the more alike their religious belief and political structure, the more they disagree, the greater is their mutual repugnance. It seems to be the law that governs religious dissensions and spiritual animosity. The Odium Theologicum seems, like gravitation, only that it is repulsive and not attractive, to act inversely as the distance, or even in a higher proportion to the proximity of faith. To establish anything like a common action among the zealots of these sects is manifestly impossible. Nothing could satisfy, or indeed appease them, but the establishment of schools for each of
1310
the different persuasions, a thing utterly impracticable.
Happily, however, the same spirit does not prevail in all the denominations, or at least among all the members of each. There is the most satisfactory evidence that a great proportion of Dissenters avail themselves of the instruction afforded by the Church schools, and it is probable that far more of each sect send their children thither than to other dissenting seminaries. If we take the census returns framed upon the Church attendance on the 31st March, 1851, we may reckon 8,000,000 as the number of persons belonging to the Establishment; 5,700,000 as those of all the 35 sects, leaving about 4,200,000 not professing to join with any denomination. It has no doubt been said that those returns are of questionable accuracy as regards the proportion of churchmen to dissenters, and a Right Rev. Friend of mine (Bishop of Oxford) lately adduced facts to illustrate this position. But admitting all that can be alleged in support of this argument, the estimate of the number of Dissenters on which I am grounding my inference, will not be affected, because there is the margin of 4,200,000 to be distributed; and it must be granted that a certain proportion of these belong to the sects. I will allow by far the greater number to the Church, but I think were my Right Rev. Friend here, he would admit that increasing the number of 8,000,000, shown by the returns, to the extent of 9,000,000, and diminishing by that addition the 5,000,000 of Dissenters, we cannot add the whole 4,200,000 to the Church, giving it above 13,000,000. It is manifest, therefore, that nearer 6,000,000 than 5,000,000 must belong to the sects, or about 5,700,000. Now, in this population, what is the proportion of children attending schools? By the statements which I made the other evening, and for the reasons then urged, it appears that there should be about 700,000. But the returns don't show above 240,000 attending the dissenting schools, leaving more than 450,000 who must receive their education elsewhere. The great desire of Dissenters to obtain instruction for their children is undeniable; it has at all times most honourably distinguished them; they were the earliest in the field as promoters of popular education; and the number of children which I have just stated, must therefore receive education either at pri-

1311
vate seminaries or at church schools. At private seminaries, it is evident that only the children of the wealthier classes can be taught, and as these attend school much longer than others, there must on that account be an addition made to the number which was taken upon the general average for all classes. So that nearly the whole 450,000, certainly 400,000, are to be regarded as attending the National or Church Schools. This is a fact of the greatest importance, and it is hard to say whether there results from it more credit to the wise liberality of the Church or of the sects; for it shows on the one hand, that generally speaking, no attendance or instruction is enforced, which can offend conscientious scruples on matters of importance, and it proves on the other hand, that the mere name of the establishment, and the connection with it of the patrons and teachers, does not raise a prejudice sufficient to outweigh the Dissenter's desire of education for his child. We may thus derive very great comfort from observing that the good sense of the greater number both among Churchmen and sectaries, prevails over the bigoted violence of zealots, leads the one class to keep open the doors of their schools to all, by forbidding any compulsion, either as to catechism or divine service, and keeps the other class above the folly of indulging in groundless prejudices, rather against the name of an establishment than its substance.
But upon this wise forbearance, as the cardinal point, hinges the power of that establishment to benefit those without its pale. Its schools can only be accessible to all by the exclusion of whatever shuts their doors against conscientious Dissenters. Yet it is lamentable to reflect that while the Church has thus distinguished itself, those who had originally taken the lead against all exclusive views, all dogmatic tests, all observances which could by possibility introduce disqualification on religious grounds, have lately departed widely from these wise and tolerant principles. With the British and Foreign School Society, I have been intimately acquainted, I may say connected from its commencement in 1810, under another name; indeed I presided at the preliminary meeting held to found it, attended by W. Allen, Joseph Fox, Thomas Clarkson, and others, who had stood by Joseph Lancaster in his great difficulties. In the following spring, the Duke of Bedford pre-
1312
sided over its first public meeting. Under his auspices, and those of the Duke of Kent, father of Her Majesty, one of the most zealous and useful friends of the Institution, it gathered strength; and its fundamental principle, that which distinguished it from the National Society, soon after established, was the rigorous exclusion of all differences on religious grounds, the severance of secular from religious instruction, the repudiation of whatever could by any possibility operate as a test—the principle embodied in its motto of Schools for All. Judge then of my astonishment when I lately heard that steps had been taken to shut the doors of this Institution against Unitarians, and deprive them of its benefits by requiring the acceptance of religious dogmas to which they cannot assent. Among the sects to which I have adverted, the Unitarians are in point of numbers nearly the least conspicuous; they amount to little more than 60,000; but they are for the most part in easy circumstances, and for their character and habits much respected. They make great exertions for the education of their children; but their poor, though not numerous, are in want of the means of instruction, especially in some parts of the West of England. Applying to the teachers connected with the Society and its officers, the pastors of the Unitarians have found that in its schools religious doctrines are required to be taught to which no conscientious Unitarian can subscribe. To such an extent has this departure from its fundamental principles proceeded, that I hold in my hand the opinion given by two learned friends of mine, the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas when he was Attorney General, and Mr. Bolt, the eminent King's Counsel, who being consulted upon the statement of the Society itself, signed by its Secretary, pronounced without hesitation that the Society is guilty of a constant breach of trust in dealing with the funds given or bequeathed to it on the faith of its original or fundamental principles, but now applied to support schools from whence Unitarians are excluded by the religious dogmas taught, by the test thus exacted from teachers, the standard of supposed orthodoxy to which the scholar must conform; and this by the Society which plumes itself upon rejecting all manner of exclusion, arrogates to itself the peculiar function of holding schools for all, and is constituted, both in its patrons and in its members, most chiefly of Dissen-

1313
ters from the National Church. So much for the tolerance of those who charge the Church with exclusive principles; so much for the fancy that intolerance is confined to establishments.
I have heard it once and again affirmed that Unitarians are not Christians; and some in their unreflecting zeal—some even of those whom I sincerely respect—have gone so far as to call Socinianism a halfway house towards infidelity; forgetting that a half-way house, from the nature of the thing, ex vi termini, must be as well from as towards—either to infidelity, or from infidelity to Christianity; and accordingly I have known eminent converts from the superstitions of the East who were Socinians. But when misguided men of more zeal than knowledge would thus distinguish the Unitarian from the Christian, whom, I will ask, do we fondly cite as our highest authorities when we are engaged in defending our religion against its infidel adversaries? In arguing with these upon the evidences, how often has one said, "What better would you have than that which satisfied the greatest masters of science, the great luminaries of law? Who was ever a better judge of legal evidence than Hale, of moral evidence than Locke, of mathematical and physical evidence than Newton?" And yet Locke at one time laboured under grave suspicion of Unitarianism, groundless, perhaps, though he was at the least an Arian. But that Newton was a Unitarian is quite certain. [Lord CAMPBELL expressed some dissent, saying he was an Arian.] No—as thorough a Unitarian as ever attended Essex Street Chapel. My noble and learned Friend will find this clearly proved by Sir D. Brewster from examination of the Newton MSS. which, that learned person says, leave not the shadow of a doubt upon the subject. Your Lordships, indeed, are not Unitarians; I question if there be one in this House. [Lord CAMPBELL: There have been.] Certainly there have; the Duke of Grafton and others; with them we may not agree; but assuredly their errors are not to be corrected by denying that Sir Isaac Newton was a Christian, or Dr. Lardner—he to whose writings the defence of our religion owes so great an obligation, that they form a large proportion, nay the very foundation, of Dr. Paley's celebrated work. With these eminent men you may differ; you may keep aloof as wide as you will from them; but it is not by denying the Christianity of Newton and Lardner
1314
that you can turn Socinians aside from their track. Neither of their heresies nor of far greater than theirs, have I the least dread. I have no alarm for the truth—no fear of error. Let truth be left to the attacks of its enemies, error to the care of its friends, and I have no apprehension of the result. But one thing I do fear; one thing does alarm me; and that is persecuted error. That fills me with apprehension; for well I know that whether openly persecuted or secretly oppressed—cruelly treated or subjected to injustice, annoyance, and vexation—it straightway becomes formidable. Maltreatment gives it the only chance of success, makes it by degrees wear the garb of truth, and ends by usurping her place. I hope and trust that the notice taken of that grievous mistake into which the men I allude to have been betrayed—well-meaning men but overzealous, and without knowledge to temper and guide their zeal—may lead them to regain the right path from which they have strayed to correct the abuse which they have countenanced.
It is my confident hope that the Bill on your table, giving effect to the Resolution which I have been discussing, will receive the sanction of your Lordships, and that effectual means may thus be afforded, of giving where they are most wanted the blessings of education to all classes, without regard to their religious persuasion. We hear of maladies breaking out in certain districts detached one from another. The great evil of ignorance is also found to exist dispersed; and I would apply to it a sporadic remedy by giving our municipal bodies the power of planting schools at the cost of the communities subject to their government, but schools open to the children of all, whether Protestants or Catholics, Churchmen or Dissenters, and kept open by rules preventing all compulsory teaching of catechism, all compulsory attendance on divine service. This has been found easily effected in the North, upon the principles so wisely and so liberally laid down by Dr. Hook; for, at Edinburgh, I know that the children of various sects receive religious instruction in the same place at different hours, from different pastors, while they receive secular instruction at the same hours from the same teachers. But wise by the experience of my noble Friend in the Home Department (Lord Palmerston), who has unfortunately been frustrated in his attempts to improve our police, by the jea-

1315
lousy of corporate towns, I have provided that the municipalities shall have the most uncontrolled management of their schools, subject only to having the rating power withdrawn by the Education Committee of the Privy Council for a breach of the conditions on which it had been granted, such especially as the cardinal one of keeping the schools open to all classes. If they choose to change the fundamental rules, they must rely on other funds than the rate. I look forward to this measure as yielding a fair promise of successfully grappling with the religious difficulty, as it has been termed, which has hitherto obstructed our course. But I also look to my noble Friends who in the Privy Council administer the distribution of the grants for education, and I expect that they too will continue to put down all exclusive plans on the part of those who receive this aid, under what name soever they may approach the Committee, and will sternly discountenance such proceedings as I have been under the painful necessity of describing and denouncing—proceedings taken in violation of all principle, in display only of intolerant bigotry, and in furtherance of its unlawful designs.
LORD CAMPBELLmerely rose to express his disapproval of the manner in which, as his noble and learned Friend had said, the Unitarians had been persecuted. He (Lord Campbell) was not aware that Sir Isaac Newton was a Socinian; he had always believed him to have been an Arian; he believed, however, that the Socinians numbered among themselves many men of good education, of great attainments, and of irreproachable lives. Though this sect laboured under what he conceived to be a lamentable error, still they were Christians, and ought to be treated as such. Until the repeal of the Statutes of William III. Socinians had laboured under various disabilities, and were not entitled to all the privileges of the Act of Uniformity, but now they were placed on the same footing as the other religious sects, and, though hoping that they might see their error, he yet trusted that, while they continued in their error, they would be treated as Christian brethren, and not, as they had been, as something worse than infidels.
EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that, as he had on a former occasion replied to the noble and learned Lord (Lord Brougham), he should now only trouble their Lordships with a few observations. With regard to the principle laid down by the noble and
1316
learned Lord as to the propriety of not making the Catechism compulsory in the case of children of other communions or creeds in the same school, no one could feel more strongly on this than he (Earl Granville) did; as he did not think that there could be any doubt as to the immense advantages resulting in the one case, and the immense disadvantages in the other. His noble Friend could, with him, affirm that great difficulties in apportioning the grants of the Privy Council had arisen in certain small villages in which, in the schools established, the Church Catechism was made a compulsory part of the instruction of the children. In many of these instances, the Dissenters had made application for funds for the purpose of setting up a school in opposition to the Church school. This had given rise to much difficulty, as the Government thought that in these villages one school could amply supply their educational wants, and that it would be an absolute waste of money to contribute towards the establishment of two schools. The children, therefore, in many of those villages did not avail themselves of the means of education afforded to them, which they otherwise would do if instruction in the Catechism were not made compulsory. He was happy to be able to state that there were many of the schools connected with the National Schools in which the Catechism was not made compulsory. He had that evening been informed by a clergyman, who had laboured in the schools where the Catechism was compulsory, that he was much struck with the disadvantages arising from such a system, and that he was most anxious that a Bill should be introduced, that in those schools to which the Privy Council grants were made, instruction in the Catechism should not be compulsory. He would venture to make a suggestion to his noble and learned Friend with reference to school books, which at present were not so cheap nor so good as they might be, considering the great demand there was for them. The greatest improvements in school books had been introduced into Ireland by the Irish Board of Education. He would suggest that the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, or some society of that kind, might render most valuable aid to the educational cause by introducing cheap and efficient books. He believed that this would not prove unprofitable, for the Irish books sold in England lately had absolutely doubled their former sale; and,

1317
were this subject to be taken up by a society, it would give a most useful stimulus to publishers.
LORD BROUGHAMwas extremely glad that his noble Friend had in his remarks entered into the subject of the care required to keep Church schools open to all classes, and he (Lord Brougham) had, he believed, rather understated the degree in which this had been already acted upon. The statements which he had this night made from the returns seemed to show how prevalent liberal views were among the patrons and directors of Church schools. He could not, indeed, refrain from a hope, grounded upon the conduct both of Church and sects, that it might be found possible to arm municipal bodies with the absolute discretion of making rules for schools under the Bill, although he had added a provision somewhat tending to narrow this discretion. He thought it extremely possible that the Dissenters being represented as well as the Church in the town councils, a compromise might be come to, and schools with different rules supported by the rate, so that different denominations might in name, as well as in substance, be suited. Considering the number of sects, this, no doubt, would depend upon their members exercising great forbearance, as he hoped they might, for the sake of promoting education. But, for the present, he deemed it advisable to frame the Bill as he had done. He would add, that he also agreed with what had fallen from his noble Friend as to school books. The Society for Diffusing Useful Knowledge, to which his noble Friend referred, had laboured, and he might say successfully, to provide books for popular instruction, but almost entirely for adults. After many years of such exertion, and in which, as he stated the other day, it had succeeded not only in bringing down the price of books, but in causing several hundreds of works to be prepared on subjects not before treated of at all, or not treated of in a satisfactery manner, it had found that, partly by such publications of its own, and partly by the stimulus given to other societies and to individual authors, the great work seemed to be nearly done for which it had been instituted, and for two or three years past it had rested from its labours. He did not, therefore, see how it could act upon his noble Friend's very proper suggestion; but he trusted that some other society might be found to perform the highly useful duty in question.
1318
His noble Friend was quite right in referring to the caution necessary, both in justice to the bookselling trade, and in order not to frustrate the object in view, both of which considerations made it most improper for Government to interfere in publishing school books. The Useful Knowledge Society was incorporated by charter in 1837; but when he framed that charter be took care to insert a prohibition against the Society deriving any profit whatever from its publications. Accordingly the gain upon one work which yielded profit was applied to pay the expenses of other works which could only be published at a loss; but no gain whatever could be received by the Society upon the balance of the accounts. To a voluntary and unincorporated society, wholly independent of the Government, undertaking the important office of preparing and publishing good school books, there could be no objection from any quarter; and he agreed with his noble Friend that this would be most useful. The Society to which reference had been made was quite aware of this great want, and had repeatedly referred to it in the course of its publications, and of its proceedings. He rather thought a Committee had been specially appointed on the subject, either upon his own, or the Vice President (Lord Althorp's) suggestion. That no interference of the Government can be allowed in any way, is perfectly evident. The least approach to a censorship of the press, which such interference must lead to, is never on any account to be tolerated. None but the enemies of education, as well as liberty, could entertain such a project for one instant.
Debate further adjourned, sine die.

OXFORD UNIVERSITY BILL.
The Commons Amendments to the Amendments made by the Lords, together with the Commons Reasons for disagreeing to some of the said Amendments, considered (according to Order).
The Amendments made by this House to which the Commons have disagreed, not insisted on.
The Amendments made by the Commons to the Amendments made by the Lords, so far as Clause F., agreed to; and the Amendment in Clause F., to leave out ("kept Two Terms or") in Folio 2. Line 10, objected to; and, on Question agreed to; and a Message sent to the Commons, to acquaint them therewith.
House adjourned to Monday next.