Lords Sitting of 25 February 1901

EARLDOM OF NORFOLK,.
Cross Petition of Henry Duke of Norfolk, Earl of Surrey, Earl of Norfolk, Lord Maltravers, Lord Fitzalan of Clun and Oswaldestre, and Earl Marshal and Hereditary Marshal of England, Knight of the most Honourable Order of the Garter, praying (1) That he may he permitted to appear before their Lordships, by his counsel and agents, to be heard on the petition of Charles Botolph Joseph, Lord Mowbray, Lord Segrave, and Baron and Lord Stoutrton of Stourton, presented on the 21st of this instant February; and (2) That their Lordships will be pleased to signify to the Petitioner whether or not their Lordships will require him, under the circumstances of the case, to lodge a printed ease and to produce evidence of his descent from Thomas Earl of Arundel and Surrey, in 1644 to the present time, in order to prove his title to the Earldom of Norfolk, alleged to have been conferred on the said Thomas in 1644; read, and referred to the Committee for Privileges.

HER LATE MAJESTY THE QUEEN.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that he had received from the Portuguese Minister the following report of the proceedings in the House of Peers of Portugal relating to the vote of condolence on the death of Her late Majesty Queen Victoria:—
"In moving the vote of condolence the President stated that he felt sure he was faithfully interpreting the sentiments of the House in proposing that reference should he made in the minutes of the day's proceedings to the grief they felt at the death of Queen Victoria, whose long and prosperous reign was a true model of constitutional rule. Portugal could not omit to associate herself with all the manifestations of grief and sympathy shown towards England, her ancient ally, and desired to join in the deep sorrow of those who mourn the loss of a Sovereign so deeply loved by Her people, and respected by the whole world.
"The President concluded by moving the vote and authorising it to be communicated to this House.
"The Minister for Foreign Affairs in associating himself in the name of the Government with what had fallen from the President spoke in feeling terms of Her late Majesty, and he was followed in the same strain by several other Peers."

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  ARLESEY GAS BILL [H.L.]

    ASPATRIA, SILLOTH, AND DISTRICT WATER BILL [H.L.]
    BARROW-IN-FURNESS CORPORATION HILL [H.L.].
    BELFAST HARBOUR BILL [H.L.].
    BETHLEM HOSPITAL BILL [H.L.].
    BOLTON CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    BOURNEMOUTH CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    BRIDEWELL HOSPITAL BILL [ILL.].
    BRISTOL CORPORATION CEMETERY BILL [H.L.].
    BRISTOL CORPORATION (DOCKS AND RAILWAYS, ETC.) BILL [H.L.].
    BROADSTAIRS AND ST. PETER'S WATER AND IMPROVEMENT BILL [H.L.].
    CHARING CROSS, HAMMERSMITH, AND DISTRICT ELECTRIC RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]. CHESTERFIELD IMPROVEMENT BILL [H.L.].
    CHRIST'S HOSPITAL (LONDON) BILL [H.L.].
    CITY AND NORTH EAST SUBURBAN ELECTRIC RAILWAY MILL [H.L.].
    COWES PERRY BILL [H.L.].
    DONCASTER TITHE TRUST BILL [H.L.].
    DONER CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    DOVER HARBOUR BILL [H.L.].
    FOLKESTONE CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    HANDSWORTH URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [H.L.].
    HARROGATE CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    HARROGATE WATER BILL [ILL.].
    HENRY DIAPER AND COMPANY (DELIVERY WARRANTS) BILL [H.L.].
    HEYWOOD AND MIDDLETON WATER BOARD BILL [H.L.].
    ISLINGTON AND EUSTON RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    KING'S NORTON AND NORTHFIELD URBAN DISTRICT TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.].
    KING'S ROAD RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    LEEDS CHURCHES BILL [H.L.].
    Presented, and read 1a

LEEDS CORPORATION (GENERAL, POWERS) BILL [H.L.]
  LEEDS CORPORATION WATER BILL [H.L.]

    LLANELLY HARBOUR BILL [H.L.]
    LONDON (CITY) SCHOOL FOR ORPHANS OF FREEMAN BILL [H.L.].
    LOWESTOFT CORPORATION BILL [H.L]
    MANCHESTER AND LIVERPOOL ELECTRIC EXPRESS RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    MANCHESTER CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    MERSEY DOCKS AND HARBOUR BOARD BILL [H.L.].
    MERSEY DOCKS AND HARBOUR BOARD (CANADA DOCK WORKS, ETC.) BILL [H.L.].
    NORTH-EAST LONDON RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    NOTTINGHAM CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    OAKHAM WATER BILL [H.L.].
    PICCADILLY AND CITY RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    POULTON-LE-FYLDE GAS BILL [H.L.].
    PRESTATYN WATER BILL [H.L.].
    RIPON CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    RUGBY WATER AND IMPROVEMENT BILL [H.L.].
    ST. BARTHOLOMEW'S HOSPITAL BILL [H.L.].
    SALEORD CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    SHEFFIELD CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    SHIELDS BRIDGE BILL [H.L.].
    SMETHWICK CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    SOUTHPORT WATER (TRANSFER) BILL [H.L.].
    STOCKTON CORPORATION WATER BILL [H.L.].
    STRATTON AND BUDE GAS BILL [H.L.].
    STRATTON AND BUDE IMPROVEMENT BILL [H.L.].
    SUTTON-IN-ASHFIELD URBAN DISTRICT (WATER) BILL [H.L.].
    WARKWORTH HARBOUR BILL [H.L.].
    Presented, and read 1a.

AIRE AND CALDER NAVIGATION BILL [H.L.]
  ALBION STEAM COAL COMPANY BILL [H.L.]

    ALFRETON GAS BILL [H.L.]
    BATH GAS LIGHT AND COKE BILL [H.L.].
    BIDEFORD AND CLOVELLY RAILWAY (ABANDONMENT) BILL [H.L.].
    BIRMINGHAM (CITY) TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.].
    BRISTOL, CLIFTON, AND WEST OF ENGLAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY BILL [H.L.].
    BROMPTON AND PICCADILLY CIRCH RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    CARDIFF RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    CENTRAL LONDON RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    CHARING CROSS, EUSTON, AND HAMPSTEAD RAILWAY (No. 1) BILL [H.L.].
    CHARING CROSS, EUSTON, AND HAMPSTEAD RAILWAY (No. 2) BILL [H.L.].
    CHESTER GAS BILL [H.L.].
    CITY AND BRIXTON RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    CITY AND SOUTH LONDON RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    DOVER GAS BILL [H.L.].
    ELLAND GAS BILL [H.L.].
    FAVERSHAM WATER BILL [H.L.].
    FRESHWATER, YARMOUTH, AND NEWPORT RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN RAILWAY BILL [H.L]
    LLANELLY AND MYNYDD MAWR RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    LONDON, BRIGHTON, AND SOUTH COAST RAILWAY BILL [ILL.].
    LYNTON AND BARNSTAPLE RAILWAY BILL [H.L].
    NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE AND GATESHEAD GAS BILL [H.L.].
    NEWPORT (ISLE OF WIGHT) GAS BILL [H.L.].
    NEW SWINDON GAS BILL [H.L.].
    NITRATE RAILWAYS COMPANY BILL [H.L.].
    OMAGH GAS BILL [H.L.].
    OTLEY GAS BILL [H.L.].
    Presented; read 1a, and referred to the Examiners.

RHYMNEY AND ABER VALLEYS GAS AND WATER BILL [H.L.]
  ROYAL EXCHANGE ASSURANCE BILL [H.L.]

    SHEFFIELD DISTRICT GAS BILL [H.L.]
    SHREWSBURY GAS BILL [H.L.].
    SOUTH EASTERN AND LONDON, CHATHAM, AND DOVER RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    SOUTH ESSEX WATER BILL [H.L.].
    SOUTH WESTERN AND ISLE OF WIGHT JUNCTION RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    WESTON-SUPER-MARE GAS BILL [H.L.].
    WISBECH WATER BILL [H.L.].
    Presented; read 1a, and referred to the Examiners.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
Appointed: The Lords following, with the Chairman of Committees, were named of the Committee:—

D. Bedford.

D. Marlborough.

D. Northumberland.

M. Lansdowne.

E. Derby.

E. Denbigh.

E. Chesterfield.

E. Jersey.

E. Lauderdale.

E. Waldegrave.

E. Cadogan.

E. Howe.

E. Amherst.

E. Camperdown.

E. de Montalt.

E. Carrington.

E. Crewe.

V. Sidmouth.

V. Knutsford.

V. Ridley.

L Clinton.

L. Zouche of Haryngworth.

L. Balfour.

L. Boyle (E. Cork and Orrery.)

L. Ribblesdale.

L. Churchill.

L. Colchester.

L. Wigan (E. Crawford.)

L. Poltimore.

L. Kintore (E. Kintore.)

L. Belper.

L. Brougham and Vaux.

L. Fermanagh (E. Erne.)

L. Sudley (E. Arran.)

976

L. de Vesci (V. de Vesci.)

L. Herries.

L. Monkswell.

L. Colville of Culross.

L. Welby.

L. Ludlow.

All Petitions relating to Standing Orders which shall be presented during the present Session referred to the Committee unless otherwise ordered.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  SOUTH AFRICA.
  I. Supplementary Despatches.

  II. Telegram from Sir A. Milner to the Secretary of State for War, relating to reported outrage on Esau at Calvinia.

  TREATY SERIES No. 3 (1901).
  Accession of the Kingdom of Sweden to the Venice Sanitary Convention of 19th March, 1897, and to the Declaration additional thereto of 24th January, 1900. 9th December, 1900.
  MILK AND CREAM REGULATIONS.
  Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture to inquire and report upon the desirability of regulations under Section 4 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1899, for milk and cream; with Minute appointing the Committee.

  STATISTICS.
  Statistical Tables relating to the Colonial and other Possessions of the United Kingdom. Part XXIII. for the years 1897–98.
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  INEBRIATES RETREATS (RULES AS TO MANAGEMENT).
  Regulations made with the approval of the Secretary of State for the Home Department for the domestic management of the Corngreaves Hall Retreat, licensed as a retreat under the Inebriates Acts, 1879–1899. Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  CHARITABLE AGENCIES FOR THE RELIEF OF WIDOWS AND ORPHANS OF SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
  Message from the Commons, That they have come to the following resolution to which they desire the concurrence of this House, viz.:—
  "That it is expedient that a Select Committee of five Members of their House be appointed to join with a Committee of the Lords to consider the various charitable agencies now in operation, and the funds available for relieving widows and orphans of soldiers and sailors, with a view to insuring that the funds subscribed by local and private benevolence are applied to the best advantage in supplementing a scheme of Government Pensions for widows and orphans of soldiers and sailors who have lost their lives in war."
  The said Message to be taken into consideration on Friday next.

  STANDING COMMITTEE.
  Ordered, That a Standing Committee be appointed for the consideration of such Public Bills as may be committed to it by the House.

  COMMITTEE OF SELECTION FOR THE STANDING COMMITTEE.
  Appointed: The Lords following, with the Chairman of Committees, were named of the Committee:—

  E. Cowper.

  E. Stanhope.

  E. Waldegrave.

  L. Balfour.

  L. Boyle. (E. Cork and Orrery.)

  L. Ribblesdale.

  L. Kintore. (E. Kintore.)

  L. Colville of Culross.

  The Committee to meet To-morrow at Four o'clock.

  HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICES.
  Select Committee appointed: The Lords following, with the Lord Chancellor, the Lord President, the Lord Privy Seal, and the Chairman of Committees, were named of the Committee:—

  D. Richmond.

  D. Northumberland.

  M. Cholmondeley.

  M. Ripon.

  M. Breadalbane.

  978

  E. Clarendon. (L. Chamberlain.)

  E. Chesterfield.

  E Waldegrave.

  E. Mount Edgcumbe.

  E. Cawdor.

  E. Camperdown.

  E. Kimberley.

  E. de Montalt,

  E. Cranbrook.

  E. Ancaster.

  V. Cross.

  V. Peel.

  V. Knutsford.

  L. Balfour.

  L. Boyle. (E. Cork and Orrery.)

  L. Ribblesdale.

  L. Churchill.

  L. Colchester.

  L. Rosebery. (E. Rosebery.)

  L. Belper.

  L. Rowton.

  L. Tweedmouth.

  L. Monk Bretton.

  L. Colville of Culross.

  L. Macnaghten.

  L. Welby.

  COMMITTEE OF SELECTION.
  The Lords following, viz.:—

  E. Chesterfield,

  E. Waldegrave,

  L. Ribblesdale,

  L. Colville of Culross,

  with the Chairman of Committees, were appointed a Committee to select and propose to the House the names of the Five Lords to form a Select Committee for the consideration of each opposed Private Bill.

  TRAWLERS CERTIFICATES SUSPENSION BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to enable Courts to suspend the certificates of trawlers convicted of illegal trawling, was presented by the Earl of Camperdown; read 1a;; and to be printed. [No. 13.]

  EDUCATION—REGINA v. COCKERTON.
  LORD REAY: My Lords, I beg to ask the Lord President of the Council whether the Board of Education contemplate any administrative and legislative measures on the questions raised by the judgment delivered on December 20th, 1900, in Regina v. Cockerton. The judgment to which my question refers has caused a great deal of apprehension, but, if it is

  979
  closely examined, I think it will be found that the Board of Education could adapt its policy to the interpretation given to the law by the judges, with one important exception to which I shall presently allude.
  I shall first deal with elementary day schools. As regards those, it is laid down that they are intended for children, and that the limit of childhood is reached "at somewhere between sixteen and seventeen." That limit is higher than the limit of the Higher Elementary Schools' Minute, where it is fifteen, but it is lower than the limit of the Scotch Code, which is eighteen, and a good deal lower than the limit assigned to childhood by the First Lord of the Treasury. Now, is there any reason why this limit of sixteen should not be accepted by the Board of Education, and access to higher elementary schools allowed up to that age, instead of the present ago of fifteen?
  The next important point is the nature of the instruction which the judgment allows to be given in elementary schools. Upon that Mr. Justice Wills said "that, as far as mere quantum is concerned, any education may be given by the School Board, but that the one condition must always be fulfilled by the school—namely, that it is conducted in accordance with the conditions required to be fulfilled by an elementary school in order to obtain a Parliamentary grant, which, by the interpretation clause, means the Whitehall grant." It is, therefore, necessary that the instruction should be in accordance with the Code. If the Code were to provide, as the Scotch Code does, for advanced departments and for higher elementary schools with varying and elastic curricula, the difficulty would disappear, and we should then obtain a proper system of graded schools. In Scotland children over twelve years of age who have obtained a merit certificate can either proceed to advanced departments of a day school or to a higher grade school. If in the Code for England advanced departments were introduced, and provision made for higher elementary schools with curricula suitable to the needs of the district, the requirements of the judgment in this respect would be easily met, and education would then be provided for children as defined by the judgment in accordance with the Code.
  I may, perhaps, here point out that the higher elementary school is in no
  980
  sense a secondary school. It has an entirely different curriculum, and the scholars who attend it have had a different preliminary education from that which leads up to a secondary school. Therefore no question of competition between higher elementary schools and secondary schools can arise, if the Code arranges for such a curriculum as is suitable to a higher elementary school.
  The judgment severs the connection between elementary schools and the Science and Art Department. That is a decision which is only of retrospective-value, because, as there is no longer a Science and Art Department, it pronounces a divorce between two persons, one of whom is no longer alive. It is true that the Science and Art grants are a survival of the Science and Art Department; but the fact that the distribution of those grants can no longer be controlled by the Science and Art Department will make it necessary to reconsider the whole question and to decide by what branch of the Board of Education they are to be distributed and administered. Although Science and Art grants are no longer available for elementary schools, it is quite easy to compensate these schools for the loss without any increase of the estimates, by a transfer of the moneys which were hitherto given from the Science and Art grants to elementary schools to the Parliamentary grant. As regards day schools, therefore, the Board of Education can, by very simple administrative measures, obviate all the difficulties which have arisen from the judgment; no amendment of the Education Acts is needed.
  The case is different and more serious with reference to evening continuation schools. The judgment excludes adults from these schools. The number of persons over sixteen years of age in these schools managed by School Boards alone is 150,000, and to this number must be added the pupils over sixteen who attend voluntary evening continuation schools. Their exclusion is so serious a matter that I cannot for one moment imagine that the Board of Education will accept that decision. The teaching of adults in these schools is an imperative necessity, and it has been attended with too good results and is too valuable to be thus extinguished.
  A much simpler remedy for this evil than further litigation is to be found, it

  981
  seems to me, in the introduction of a very short Bill—it could he a non-contentious Bill of one clause—which would make the admission of adults to evening continuation schools legal, as it has been for many years, and thereby prevent alterations in the Departmental Evening Continuation Code which it would be very undesirable to introduce.
  It is needless to point out how the uncertainty which has arisen through the judgment affects injuriously both board schools and voluntary schools. They are both in the same plight, and the sooner the uncertainty is removed the better it will be for the cause of education. I have shown that the remedy is a very simple one, and that it is entirely in the hands of the Board of Education.
  These questions are educational questions, and they cannot be decided by courts of law. The final solution must come from the Board of Education, whatever may be the ultimate decision of the higher courts, and therefore I think the sooner it is given and further litigation, which is in many respects useless, is avoided the better it will be for continuity of the work undertaken in every case with the sanction of the Education Department. Higher elementary schools and evening continuation schools are the coping stones of the fabric of our education, and the working classes of this country, as well as the industrial and commercial classes generally, are deeply interested in the solution which I have no doubt this question will receive at the hands of the noble Duke. I beg to ask the question which stands in my name.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (The Duke of DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, the observations with which the noble Lord has prefaced his question will, no doubt, form a valuable contribution to the discussion of this important and difficult question. I do not, however, think that I can follow him exactly in all the points he has touched upon, and I do not know that there would be any advantage on the present occasion in my doing so. I shall, therefore, confine myself to giving such answer as I can to the question the noble Lord has placed upon the Paper. The noble Lord asks me whether the Board of Education contemplate any administrative and legislative measures on the questions raised by the judgment delivered on
  982
  20th December, 1900, in Regina v. Cockerton. The first answer which I have to give the noble Lord is that I am not yet in the position to know what is the situation which has been created by that judgment. The London School Board, which was virtually one of the parties in that case, has given notice of an appeal against the judgment, and until that appeal has been heard and decided by the Court of Appeal, and possibly by the House of Lords itself, it I is not possible to say what is the exact legal position.
  The noble Lord has suggested in the observations he has made that if the Board of Education promised to introduce certain administrative and legislative measures, further litigation might be avoided. I do not know whether the noble Lord in making that suggestion I was speaking as chairman of the London School Board or in his private capacity as a Member of this House. But, in whichever capacity it was made, that suggestion, I venture to say, is one with which I cannot agree. The learned judge, in giving his judgment, stated that the; questions raised were of such importance that it was, in his opinion, desirable and necessary that they should be decided by the highest legal authority—namely, the i House of Lords; and I agree in the opinion thus expressed, that this question affecting the powers and duties of school boards having been raised as it has been raised ought to be decided by the highest judicial tribunal of the land. The noble Lord has referred to the numbers of children and adults who will be affected by the judgment, and who might, if it were acted upon, be deprived of the education which they are now receiving. My right hon. friend the Vice-President of the Council has already stated in the House of Commons that, acting upon the suggestion of the learned judge, no disturbance of the present state of things will take place until the appeal has been heard; and that till that time the status quo will be maintained. No one, therefore, will be I prejudiced by any delay which may arise in waiting until the appeal is heard.
  The noble Lord has asked the Board of Education to do two things. In the first i place he has asked us to take certain administrative action and to make certain alterations in the Code. The noble Lord's position, I understand, is this. It has been laid down that any form of instruc-

  983
  tion which, under the Code, can legally receive grants from the Department can be given by the school hoards at the cost of the rates, and he asks us to modify the Code in such a manner as to legalise any instruction which has now been decided to be illegal. The noble Lord has asked for a recognition of advanced departments, as is done by the Scotch Code. The noble Lord is aware that the Code has been very extensively modified and extended in the years that have elapsed since 1870, and that it now contains a very large number and a much more extended range of instruction than it originally did. I am very far from saying that the Code in its present state is in an absolutely final condition; but I have to say that, as at present advised, we consider the Code for elementary day schools contains all that is essential to, or ought to be properly comprised within, elementary education properly so called; and I fail to see how the position of the school board will be improved by the adoption and recognition of advanced schools on the Scotch system, for, so far as I am aware, the judgment does not materially affect the action taken by the School Board in the matter of the education given in the day schools. The learned judge decided that the rates could not legally be applied to the free education of adults, and the noble Lord asks us to introduce legislation to remove that disability.
  I am not prepared on the part of the Government to promise to adopt either of the suggestions of the noble Lord. And for this reason. Last year, acting upon the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, I introduced a measure into this House for the establishment of authorities to provide and supervise secondary education in areas different from, and much more extensive than, those of the school board districts; and I am bound to say that the state of things which has been described and the state of the law which has been described in the judgment in the case referred to render it more urgent than ever that local authorities for secondary education should be established without further delay; and until Parliament has decided upon the proposals which were introduced last year by the Government, and which, I hope, will be introduced Again in the present session, it seems to me that it would be most highly inexpedient either to encourage or to admit
  984
  the school boards to make further advance in the provision of higher education of a type which was not originally contemplated by Parliament when the school boards were established.
  When Parliament has decided upon the proposals made to it, then will be the time to attempt to draw the line between the functions and powers that can be properly exorcised by the school boards and the functions and powers that will be more properly exercised in regard to secondary education by the now authorities. The demarcation of that line will be, I admit, one of extreme difficulty, considering the hold school boards have already obtained over portions of secondary education; but that will be a difficulty that will have to be faced by Parliament; and, in my opinion, it would be far better to abandon any attempt to organise secondary education upon the lines suggested by the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, and to leave the school boards in complete possession of the held not only of elementary, but of secondary education—it would be far better to leave affairs in that condition than to set up now authorities and expose them to the competition of the school boards possessing enhanced powers, such as the noble Lord proposes to give them, in addition to those they already possess, in the field of secondary education. What would be the use of the Bill which we proposed last year creating secondary education authorities, if the contention which the School Board has raised in this case were to be admitted? Mr. Justice Wills said in his judgment—
  "To argue, as has been done, that certain action on the part of the Department sets the School Board free to teach at the expense of the ratepayers adults and children indiscriminately higher mathematics, advanced chemistry, both theoretical and practical, political economy, and arts of a kind wholly beyond anything that can be taught to children, French, German, and I know not what, appears to be them ne plus ultra of extravagance. If the Acts relating to the elementary education of children are to be transformed into Acts for higher education of a kind usually given in the colleges of a University, then it must be done by Act of Parliament, and not by the stroke of the pen of a Government Department."
  I entirely agree with the opinion thus expressed by the learned judge; and I cannot on the part of the Government accept, or make any approach to accepting, that contention which has been

  985
  described by the learned judge—a contention which would make the school boards in the widest sense authorities for secondary education. If that is to be done, it cannot be done by the stroke of the pen of the Education Department: it must be done by Parliament; and if it is done by Parliament it will not be on the suggestion or the advice of His Majesty's present advisers. I do not suggest that in the observations made by the noble Lord he intended to ask us to adopt any modification of the Code, or any legislative measure which would cover the contention of the School Board thus stated by the learned judge. But he does ask us to make certain changes which would cover, so far as our action could cover it, a considerable advance in the direction of that contention. He asks us to assimilate our system to the Scotch system. But it has been over and over again pointed out in this House and in the other House of Parliament that the Scotch system differs fundamentally and legally from the English system. The Scottish school boards are empowered to provide and direct secondary as well as elementary education. There is nothing connected with secondary education in the Act which constitutes school boards in England.
  Of course this is not the proper time to discuss the relative merits of the English and Scottish systems; but I am bound to say that the assimilation which is suggested by the noble Lord is, in our opinion, contrary to the policy which we submitted to Parliament last session, and which I trust we shall have an opportunity of submitting and prosecuting in the present session. That is all the answer I am able at present to give the noble Lord, and I am extremely indebted to him for having given me the opportunity of making this brief statement of the views of His Majesty's Government on this subject.
  EARL SPENCER: My Lords, I can quite understand that there is considerable difficulty in going at length into all the different phases which this question has now entered upon. There is an appeal likely to come on, and this involves difficulties in fully discussing the whole matter now. But as the noble Duke has given his own views and the views of His Majesty's Government on this subject, I think it is only right that I
  986
  should say a few words upon it. I shall not attempt to compare the Scottish with the English system of education. I am quite aware that there is a considerable difference. But without going into that question, I would like to say this; that if the views expressed by the noble Duke are carried out, an immense How will be given to the higher kind of education which has been conducted for a very long time by a great many school board schools throughout England. It is upon that point that I wish to make some protest against the views of the noble Duke as I understand them.
  I do not for a moment say that school boards, or voluntary schools receiving Parliamentary grants, should wholesale-adopt secondary education as a part of their scheme, but I do submit that the higher grade schools which have been set up in a great many places in the north of England and in London are most admirable and useful institutions. There are a certain number of children who, after going through all the standards, are able, owing to their parents being perhaps a little better off than the others, to remain on in the school. What are they to be taught? Surely it is right that they should be allowed to be taught higher-education, which would be of great use to them in their future career. That has been done with very great success. These children might not have the time or the opportunity, unless a very elaborate scheme is made out for sending them on to secondary schools, to go to those schools, and therefore the time they remained at their schools after passing the standards would be very much wasted.
  As I understand, the noble Duke does not wish these higher grade schools to conduct their education as they have done hitherto, for fear they should complete with secondary education. If that view were carried out it would indeed be a great blow to education in many places in England. There is another point of immense importance touched by the judgment—namely, the attendance of adults at continuation schools. Now I believe these schools have been of enormous advantage throughout England, and they are no new thing at all. It was not in the original Act of 1870 that adults should be taught in continuation schools; but I believe that as far back as 1870 continuation schools for adults were established and have been allowed ever since.
  THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: At the cost of the rates?
  EARL SPENCER: Yes, I believe that has been allowed. The judgment says it is not legal to pay for them out of the rates, but still these continuation schools have been allowed for a very long time, almost from the beginning of Mr. Forster's scheme. I should very much regret if the change contemplated is carried out, because it will inflict great hardship and do a great deal of harm to education in this country. I do not know whether, if the noble Duke had been favourable to it that would have affected the question of appeal. I cannot go into that, but I think it only right to the noble Duke to say that when the Bill conies forward later in the session there may be strong opinions among those whom I represent against the views foreshadowed on behalf of the Government.
  LORD NORTON: My Lords, the noble Earl who has just sat down has stated that the views of the noble Duke, if carried out, would be a great blow to the secondary education which is now being given in elementary schools, and look entirely to a transfer of that part of education to a new Department. The noble Earl may have a different view, but it is distinctly the view of the noble Duke - that elementary schools should not exceed higher elementary education, and that provision, and a far better provision, should be made for secondary schools. The noble Earl says that there are a certain number of children in the elementary schools whose parents are able to keep them there longer and give them secondary education. But why should they not go to secondary schools? The noble Earl does not say why; he does not state any difficulty. The mixture of secondary and primary in the elementary schools has been damaging to both, and it has been an error from the first since 1870. The elementary schools immediately began to get out of the province assigned to them by Parliament.
  I think the great merit in the views as expressed by the noble Duke is that he will abandon that confusion, and make good provision distinctly for secondary education. I believe it is clearly the noble Duke's view—it certainly is my
  988
  View—that especially clever children of the working classes should be aided by scholarships publicly provided to go to secondary schools, and the education they will get there will be far better. But I think that what the noble Earl has in his mind is a totally different kind of secondary education. What is really in the minds of those who are pushing this forward as a department of elementary education is that they are looking to provide for a richer class, the children of rich manufacturers and tradesmen, who are to get at the public expense, as in elementary schools, what is practically an apprenticeship for their sons for lucrative employment. That is not the idea at all of the elementary education of 1870, and I do not believe it is now.
  If we provide a higher education we do not intend it to be at the public expense. We do not intend to relieve rich parents of the necessity and the responsibility of looking after the education of their children. I therefore feel that it would be in the interest of education and in the interest of the country to support the noble Duke in the very difficult task he has before him; to help in every way to make the education given by the school boards and elementary schools more complete, less mixed up with scientific subjects-which do not properly belong to it; and to devote ourselves in every possible way to the new Department of Secondary Education which the noble Duke proposes.
  House adjourned at quarter past Five of the clock, till Tomorrow, half-past Ten of the clock.