THE EARL OF CARNARVONpresented a Petition of certain Trustees of Dr. Morgan's Foundation at Bridgwater against the scheme of the Endowed Schools Commissioners with respect to that Foundation. The Petitioners stated:—In the year 1723, Dr. Morgan, an inhabitant of Bridgwater, founded a charity for the education of 30 boys. One of the strongest provisions of the founder's will was that which insisted upon the scholars receiving an education in accordance with the teaching and 492 doctrines of the Church of England as by law established; and he also enjoined that the same principle should apply to the whole management of the charity. Several changes had, however, taken place. At the commencement of the present century, after the passing of the Tests and Corporation Act, the Court of Chancery made a change in the general system of the school; and fresh trustees were appointed; but the Court took particular care that those gentlemen should be members of the Church of England. Later on, in 1857, a scheme was put forth under the authority of the noble and learned Lord the Master of the Rolls. Under that scheme the whole system of the school was carefully revised, but Church of England teaching was maintained as rigidly as before; for the trustees, master, and boys on the foundation were required to be members of the Established Church; attendance at Church on Sundays was enforced, and the whole educational arrangements were subject to the principles of the Church. Under that system he believed the school had continued to flourish; and though no "conscience clause" had been introduced Dissenters had had free recourse to the school, and no complaint of the management had been made. But the Endowed Schools Commissioners had taken the school in hand, and had prepared a scheme which, he regretted to say, created an entire revolution of the will of Dr. Morgan. The scheme, indeed, recited that the schools should be conducted on the principles of the Church of England; but there were no provisions for seeing this. The Governing Body were not to be members exclusively of the Church of England; a portion were to be selected by the Town Council, which included Dissenters as well as Churchmen; no qualification was assigned to the master; the boys were to be entirely free in reference to any particular religious teaching; and, lastly, the Head Master and trustees were to define and settle among themselves what the religious teaching should be. So that, whatever might be the intent of his noble Friend (the Marquess of Ripon) and his Colleagues, this recital of their scheme amounted to a total perversion of and departure from the spirit, if not the letter, of Dr. Morgan's foundation. What were the results of this scheme of the Commissioners? The local privileges 493 of particular classes who had claims on the charity were swept away; and in this respect he maintained that the Commissioners infringed upon the spirit of the 11th section of the Endowed Schools Act, which provided that in case of local or other privileges due regard should be paid to the educational interests of such classes. Their scheme also contravened the 19th clause of the Act, which provided that no provision should be made respecting religious instruction, attendance at public worship, or the religious belief of the Governing Body, without the consent of the Governing Body—and he doubted whether the trustees had sanctioned this scheme, for the Petition had been signed by a portion of them. The result of this departure from the provisions of the founder's will would be greatly to diminish the teaching and education of the Church of England, inasmuch as the school board at Bridgwater contemplated, in consequence of the proposed change, the formation of a now rate-aided school, where exclusive Church of England teaching would, of course, become absolutely impossible. Had there been any maladministration of the charity—any complaint or reproach directed against its management—there might possibly have been some justification for a change; but the circumstances connected with the charity remained practically the same as they were at the time of Dr. Morgan's decease. He hoped the Commissioners did not adopt the principles laid down by Mr. Hobhouse, who appeared to hold foundations of this nature in slight esteem, attributing to them more harm than good. A man with such opinions was hardly fit to exercise judicial functions in this matter, and the general application of his views would lead to wholesale confiscation. After the experience we now had of Nonconformists and Churchmen uniting to promote the primary education of the poor, he, for one, could not believe that the former, who had a deep interest in this matter of charities, were prepared to lend their sanction to the principles enunciated in the scheme of the Commissioners. The principle was equally applicable to Nonconformist endowments, of which there were a good many in the neighbourhood of Bridgwater. Proximus ardet Ucalegon—and unless the Nonconformists united with Churchmen on such a question they 494 would be the next sufferers. He admitted the necessity of variations from the founder's intentions to meet the altered circumstances of the times; but he objected to those intentions being absolutely set aside, as unjust to the charities and likely to prejudice the cause of education.
§ THE MARQUESS OF RIPONsaid, it was impossible under the Act that the Commissioners could have strictly maintained the founder's will with regard to Church of England membership and teaching. He thought the noble Earl had overlooked the provisions of the Endowed Schools Act, which left the Commissioners no option but to open the school to Nonconformists under a conscience clause. On this point they had no discretion. As to the Governing Body, the four members to be elected by the Town Council and the school board might possibly be Dissenters, though he should hope those bodies would see the inconvenience, not to say impropriety, of selecting Nonconformists trustees for a Church of England school; but, even if they did so, the Church of England trustees would always be a large majority. There were six ex officio governors, four of whom must necessarily be Churchmen, as they were the occupants of ecclesiastical offices; and six others were named, all members of the Church of England. The latter were to be reduced by death to four, who would be co-opted governors—that was, persons elected by the whole body—and they would, therefore, in all probability, be Churchmen. The noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) had spoken slightingly of the recital; but in his opinion they governed the whole scheme, and no religious teaching could be given except that of the Church of England, Nonconformists parents being able to claim exemption from this for their children. He could not see, therefore, that the Church of England character of the school was superseded. As to local privileges, the only thing which could be done under the 11th section of the Act was to improve the school generally, and it was a great improvement to throw a school open and subject the local scholars to competition with others. No want was so great as that of good schools for the lower portion of the middle classes, and except in exceptional cases endowed schools should not be devoted to primary 495 instruction. He attached great value to the 19th section; but having, since his return to this country, examined the scheme, it did not appear to him to contravene it. The religious instruction obviously could not be defined in the scheme, unless the Commissioners came to terms with the Governing Body. There must in those cases be difficulties on both sides. The object was to make these ancient endowments as largely useful as possible, and by throwing open the school, though contrary to the intentions of the founder, to all denominations, the Commissioners were simply acting conformably with the Act; while the new Governing Body would give the inhabitants a fair guarantee that the school would be made generally beneficial to the town.
§ LORD CAIRNSsaid, that considerable inconvenience would arise from the discussion of this question at the present stage, and that the proper time for raising the question would be when the scheme was laid upon the Table in pursuance of the Act. He also desired to say that a conversation of this hind must not be taken to represent the opinion of their Lordship's House; and that if the question ultimately came before them he hoped one particular view expressed by the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Ripon) would not escape discussion. A great number of educational endowments had hitherto been used for the purpose of primary education in particular localities; but by the Act of last Session there was to be a justification that did not otherwise exist for diverting endowments which had hitherto been properly used for primary education, to promote intermediate education. In particular localities, under particular circumstances, education endowments might be better used for intermediate education than for primary education; but he wished public opinion to be formed on that point, and that not because a Bill had been passed for primary education the public were to lose the advantage of primary education which had hitherto been provided for them wholly or in part through the medium of endowments.
EARL NELSONsaid, that after what had been stated by the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Ripon) he would not refer to the special scheme that he imagined was before their Lordships. One 496 general principle appeared to run through all these schemes, but they must be careful to confine endowments to the classes for which they were intended, and as far as could be to the neighbourhood, though it appeared to him there was a risk of their departing from that proper and just arrangement. In this scheme certain advantages were to be given to elementary education, and at first it would appear it was intended to confine it to the class for which it was intended; but he was afraid, after what had been stated, there was a risk of the endowment made for one class being used for the benefit of the class above them—which would be very unjust.
§ LORD LYTTELTONsaid, he did not know what Parliament was likely to do with the various schemes which would be laid before them in the course of this and next year; but if every scheme was to be made the subject of a special debate the time of Parliament would be greatly occupied. In his opinion, the general questions of the relation between endowments and elementary education, of local or other privileges, and the amount of deference to be paid to founders' wills, would be more conveniently discussed this day week, on the Motion of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) respecting Emanuel Hospital. As to this particular case, the new trustees would be guilty of an express breach of trust, for which they could be called to account by a proper tribunal, if they did not take care that the children were instructed in the doctrines of the Church of England. It was true his brother Commissioners and himself had not gone into the details of religious teaching, but had simply provided that it should be given at the discretion of the governors and Head Master; but the general words of the first paragraph governed the whole scheme, and no other religious teaching than that of the Church of England could be given. The Commissioners had only obeyed the injunctions of the Act in admitting Dissenting children as day scholars under a conscience clause; and as to local privileges, they held that the best thing for the educational interests of the class who had hitherto enjoyed the benefits of a foundation—especially in a small place like Bridgwater—was to establish a thoroughly good school, and to throw it open freely to all who could 497 avail themselves of it. With regard to Clause 19 of the Act, the Commissioners held themselves bound to give it a strict construction. The whole tendency and spirit of the Act was, in the view of the Commissioners, to give the largest freedom to the local managers and authorities in the conduct of the school, and especially in respect to its religious conduct. In the Ilminster school case, which was well known to lawyers, the school was held to be strictly a Church of England one, and the Court of Chancery was called upon to re-constitute the school, and to nominate the first Governing Body, and it was ashed—as the Endowed School Commissioners were asked in the present instance to do—to lay down the regulation that nobody should be in the Governing Body who was not a member of the Church of England. The Ilminster school was subject to a conscience clause, and the Court of Chancery said it was a question whether a certain portion of the Governing Body should not consist of members of other religious denominations besides the Church of England, and the Court decided that the question should be left open. It might well be that the best plan would be that a majority—and a decided majority—of the trustees should belong to the Church of England, and that there should also be a certain number of Dissenting trustees to watch over the interests of the Dissenting children admitted by law to the benefits of the school. All that the Commissioners said, however, was that they felt themselves bound not to go beyond the terms of the Act in a case of that kind. In Bridgwater there existed ample provision for the elementary education of the poor; and there was a great need for the means of education for the class just above those for whom that education was intended. For that particular class it was now proposed that there should be a church school, teaching the doctrines of the Church of England: and if there was any class which had been more than another withdrawn from the influence of that Church it was that very lower-middle class for which they were providing in this scheme. Without now entering into the question of the effect which ought to be given to the will of the founders, he would only state that the Commissioners were simply bound by the Act of Parliament which 498 they were directed to administer; and there was no sanctity and no perpetuity attributed to the will of the founders by that Act, except what would be found in the Preamble, in which they were told to carry into effect the main designs of the founders, which were construed to be the putting of a liberal education within the reach of the children, not of any one class, but of all classes. He should be prepared on the future occasion to which he had referred to argue more generally the question of the respect which ought to be paid to founders' wills, as well as various other points which could then be more conveniently dealt with.
§ Petition ordered to lie on the Table.