3
10
46
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/9a3f4b1d919a7ef247f92b0499e59429.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=n9FN09qMJGLSmPT8kBYuuHD1ndINa51uZ7R0%7EN1l3%7E2%7EPVTDCvJU5qnQYadO-kNKVjpDOm1CucazcvXobN0kBE8I1Gk4X-x8%7EejS%7ElWSzS5CVxkunHSzv4fvAm8kr568-l1ZpWWkxl-NBGCQH1jWAWo-KyMy-Sal3NvWhJF7%7EpkRs5qgzznYhxiZgFnEzaKuojrMuQlKiFeRkgU-I5zROVuZQpf3QQ-ewOzIUT7blsDi3gP4rwAot8sHWpyDEnCI4FTfAz-6fLq27jP%7EGXy0n-BhRnlZLiO3Oc7SfyCS%7EplBCNqLOMBR5n5O0YHtfPkazAtaax330uElKcnPVTkg4w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
9d10d5d9943bc37d8a3ca8c9f2e3988d
PDF Text
Text
METHOD OF EDUCATION:
A. 1ST ADDRESS
INTRODUCTORY TO THE SESSION 1859-60
♦
OF THE
ST. LOUIS MEDICAL COLLEGE,
BY
J. H. WATTERS, M.D.,
Professor of Physiology and Medical Jurisprudence.
ST. LOUIS:
GEORGE KNAPP & CO., PRINTERS.
1 8 59.
��METHOD OF EDUCATION:
An Address Introductory to the Session 1859-60 of the St. Louis Medical
College. By J. H. WATTERS, M.D., Professor of Physiology and Med
ical Jurisprudence.
Gentlemen,—Under favorable auspices we meet to-night to
celebrate the opening of our eighteenth session, and in behalf of
the faculty I welcome you as students to these halls dedicated to
medical education.
The ardent aspirations of the young of a country to fit them
selves for useful and honorable activities, brings happiness not
only to the individual, but secures life, intelligence and refine
ment to society—stability, power and influence to the state. It is
this which engenders and fosters the very vitality, spirit and soul
of a community. General society — yes, our whole country—is
interested in this assemblage of young men gathered hither from
the various parts of our extensive and prosperous valley, all in
spired with a common desire to be enabled to render a reasonable
answer to the problem of life. Some answer, whether it be rea
sonable or not, must be given by every man. It is not optional,
but the necessity is implied in the very existence of a rational be
ing : it is not a request, but an imperative demand. Should one
think to avoid it by silence or refusal to act, he deceives himself;
for his very silence and supineness become contempt, and contain
already his answer.
Man is by nature most munificently gifted; but his character and
activities are the apswer he renders to the question, “ what will he
do with it”—with his life, his mind, his reason, his image of God?
The various grades of characters, from the lowest besotted dregs
of society to the highest and noblest men, present merely the dif
ferent uses made of nature’s high gifts. Consider now
“ The wisest of the sages of the earth
That ever from the stores of reason drew
Science, and truth, and virtue’s dreadless tone
�6
and now reflect upon this solemn fact, that
“ Him, every slave now dragging through the filth
Of some corrupted city his sad life,
Pining with famine, swoln with luxury,
Blunting the keenness of his spiritual sense
With narrow schemings and unworthy cares,
Or, madly rushing through all violent crime,
To move the deep stagnation of his soul,—
Might imitate and equal.”
We hear in our youth too much cant about “ poor weak human
nature, the flesh, and the deviland those who would throw
upon the shoulders of these imaginary personalities the necessary
and legitimate results of individual slothfulness, inactivity, and re
fusal to use what has been given, would obliterate what little of
the image of God is yet visible in humanity, and would put a stop
to progress—not by bold and open opposition, which would be ac
companied with corresponding reaction, but by smothering and
destroying the already enfeebled energy and spirit.
That each individual may use his talents and powers in the best
and most reasonable way possible, is the object of all education,
whether literary, professional, scientific, or religious. In other
words, the object of education is to enable man, in his activities,
to harmonize with the Infinite, the Universal, the Absolute. It is
only as his activities do harmonize and thus cooperate with the
Infinite, that man is emancipated and exalted; while in so far as
they are discordant, man militates against God, and in the con
flict is always vanquished, degraded and enslaved. This proposi
tion is universal, and extends in its application through the whole
range of human activities. And, gentlemen, as you propose to as
sume the responsible vocation of physicians, the object of your
professional studies is that you may be enabled so to act upon
physical nature as to cure disease and relieve suffering. This,
too, can be done only by cooperating with the universal and abso
lute in perfect obedience to the physical laws; which laws are to
us the outward expression or representation, in space and time, of
universal reason. If our acts are not in obedience to these laws,
our medications, like the prayers of the wicked, are an abomina
tion. It is a common saying that nature cures disease, and that
the physician’s province is to assist nature. While this expression
admits of very liberal interpretations, yet literally it is most false.
Man under no circumstances assists nature; this is neither his
province nor prerogative : it is his highest privilege to use nature.
But how are we to use nature ? By what method are we enabled
�7
to take advantage of her laws ? In other words, what relation has
education to success, science to art? This is the question I pro
pose discussing to-night; and while I address you, gentlemen,
especially, as medical students, the method by which you will be
enabled to attain the objects of your calling, is the method of
every human activity whatever—of your social and political rela
tions no less than professional.
As the object of all education is to enable man to harmonize his
activities with the Infinite, the Universal, the Absolute, this object
can be attained only so far as we know the Infinite, the Universal,
the Absolute. I am aware that there are those high in authority
who contend that the capacity for this knowledge is not vouch
safed to man. If this be so, then indeed are we most miserably
circumstanced. What! here—possessing hopes, desires, aspira
tions, longings for something better—condemned to disappoint
ment and ignoble defeat upon every side, except in so far as our
activities are in harmony with the Infinite, and yet having no ca
pacity to know that Infinite by whom we are judged and to whom
we are subject! This can not be so: else man could not adapt
means to ends; the result of his spontaneity would be altogether
accidental; his fortune would not be in his own hands. It is not so:
the development of science condemns it; our railroads, telegraphs,
and manufactures, and all the arts, condemn it; our social, politi
cal and religious relations condemn it; all culture and progress
condemn it. As the result of every human activity is determined
by its relation to the Infinite, the relation which any people bear
to the Infinite is expressed not only in their moral, social, political
and religious condition, but also as well in their machinery, their'
manufactures, their agriculture, their navigation, their architecture,
their painting, their sculpture, their poetry, their ornaments, their
dress, in all their activities and in every expression of their sponta
neity. All advancement and progress of the individual, of society,
of humanity, is proof that we have the faculty to know the Abso
lute to which we are subject, as all success is but an expression of
this knowledge, and a resulting harmony between our activities
and the Infinite.
But man is guided in his activities by his intelligence, and mind
is in its very nature active, spontaneous, self-determinate. Know
ledge, therefore, must be the determination of the mind itself, else
the spontaneity and self-determination of mind would be super
seded and abrogated by knowledge, which is absurd. Consequent
ly, the mind must possess the faculty of determining itself harmo
niously with the Universal and Absolutewhether you agree to
�8
designate this power of the mind thus to determine itself, as know
ledge of the Universal and Absolute, or not, matters nothing, so far
as the question under discussion is concerned—By what method
is man enabled to harmonize his activities with the Infinite, the
Universal, the Absolute ? This faculty is reason. Reason being
one and absolute to man, to nature, and to God, it is most appa
rent, that, so far as our activities harmonize with reason, they must
in that very fact harmonize with the Universe and with God.
Therefore, the method by which the object of all education is to
be attained, is the method by which we are enabled to harmonize
our activities with .Reason. This proposition, gentlemen, embod
ies the central idea which I hope to present to you to-night in an
intelligible manner. You yill observe the important point, that
in this proposition we have substituted Jieason for the Infi
nite, the Universal, the Absolute. I know full well, that, in
making this substitution here in a public lecture, I am in no little
danger of being understood as making man equal with God. But
if there were no danger here, there would be little or no occasion
for this lecture ; and if, on account of this danger, I had chosen
another theme, or had treated this in a manner to conform to the
more general and popular notions, I would in that have been hug
ging my own shackles; whereas my theme this night is, How are
we freed, emancipated, exalted? A just man has not his freedom
curtailed by just laws in so far as he cognizes justice, because the
law unto himself frees him from the external laws; that is, the ex
ternal laws cease to bind and restrain him just in so far as from his
own self-determination he would fulfil them. Just so, and for the
same reason, a reasonable man has not his freedom annulled by
the laws of reason in so far as he knows reason. As one in his own
spontaneity determines himself according to reason, he ceases to
be restrained by the external laws of reason. If all moral and
physical laws be laws of reason, then indeed can man be delivered
from the dominion of necessity only so far as reason in him be
comes self-conscious. We believe in Divine Omnipotence; that
in the Infinite “we live, and move, and have our beingthat with
out Him we can not think a good thought or do a good act; and
yet we believe that man is free and justly accountable. The truth
and consistency of these two positions is all I contend for in the
substitution I have made of Reason for the Infinite, the Absolute,
the Universal. He who believes in human freedom can not but
believe that man possesses the faculty of determining liimsflf in
harmony with the Universal; for in so far as man is determined
by anywhat not himself, he is necessitated and not free. He who
�9
believes in human freedom and also in Divine Omnipotence and
Omniscience, must believe these twq positions consistent; unless,
indeed, he be himself a slave, clinging in blind fanaticism to the
very chains which bind him. And what does he mean by consist
ency except their mutual harmony with reason? And when he
acknowledges that two truths must be consistent, in this necessity
he recognizes reason as the universal umpire, authoritative to man,
to nature, and to God.
If, therefore, the object of all education is to enable us to har
monize our activities with reason, then the method we seek is the
method of reason becoming self-conscious, or, in other words, it is
the method of reason coming to a knowledge of itself. This is
perfectly clear, that in order that we may harmonize our activities
with reason we must know reason. But the reason alone can
know reason; consequently we can know reason only as the reason
becomes self-conscious. Did you ever see a little child held before
a looking-glass ? Through its senses it cognizes the phenomenon
and through its understanding it is convinced of duality,—it peeps
behind the glass fully expecting to find another child. But as it
comes to know itself, with apparent rapture it recognizes itself
in the image. Not the senses, nor yet the understanding, but only
reason can know and comprehend reason. The spontaneity of man
may be under the dominion of the senses, or of the understanding,
or of the passions; but as these are all finite and related to the in
finite only in and through reason, when they guide, the blind lead
the blind and both fall into the ditch together. But when oui*
spontaneity is guided by reason, the outward expressions of this
spontaneity—our activities, our works—must harmonize with rea
son, with nature, and with God. The great problem of humanity,
therefore, is to identify our spontaneity in each, every and all of
its various possibilities with self-conscious reason. Our question,
therefore, as to the method by which the object of education is to
be attained is now reduced to this form: What is the method of
the reason in becoming self-conscious ?
As we are students of nature, and as in this department especial
ly we hope to assist in the great struggle of humanity, and to leave
the world the better of our having lived, (if this be not our ambi
tion we are unworthy of humanity,) I shall seek this method only
as expressed in the more developed sciences. And we may hope
to get some insight thus, because Science is the formal recognition
of reason. Do not allow yourselves to anticipate me here, and to
object in your thoughts to this position, that the physical sciences
treat of nature and her laws, and, consequently, that a knowledge
�10
of these laws can be obtained only through observation and ex
periment. Be patient one moment and we will consider this matter
together. It is admitted that observation and experiment are ne
cessary conditions to a knowledge of nature and her laws, but you
must admit also that you neither see, feel, taste, nor smell the physi
cal sciences. It is true you put ores and compounds into the
crucible, but you neither put therein nor take hence the science of
chemistry; it is true certain angles and distances must be obtained
by observation, but the transit instrument and the telescope are not
wonderfully devised machines for the manufacture of the science
of astronomy; you may examine and peep, but the science is not
there—you can not get it thus. What, then, is the relation between
observation and science ? This question is sub judice, and until
decided it might be well to suspend our anticipated objection.
Physical science is rendered possible only in and through the
identity of the laws of nature and the laws of thought. This is
a self-evident proposition; for if nature could in her mode of
action be whimsical or unreasonable, where, I ask, would be the
criterion whereby we could know nature or determine her mode
of action ? There would be none, and we would necessarily be ut
terly in the dark. If there be physical science at all, therefore, the
laws of nature must be identical with the laws of thought, and
Science must be the recognized identity. The senses do not and
can not give us science; observation and experiment can only give
phenomena. Physical science exists only so far as reason has come
to a recognition of itself in the phenomenal. That is, so far as we
have science reason must have become the criterion whereby na
ture is recognized as laws of thought. But reason can become
the criterion only in so far as it becomes self-conscious, or as it
knows itself. Consequently, we may hope by an examination and
careful analysis of the sciences, to learn something of the method
whereby the object of all education is to be attained; in other
words, of the method of reason in becoming self-conscious or in
recognizing itself. Though we may thus only obtain a partial in
sight, yet even this is not to be altogether despised.
As mathematics is more developed and more generally under
stood than any other science, we will direct our attention to it
especially. And let it be understood that our object here is not
to reduce all science to what has been termed the mathematical
method, but rather to seek in the mathematics the method of the
reason in becoming self-conscious, as all science (mathematics, of
course, included) has been shown to be the reason coming to know
and recognize itself. As my object, as a teacher, is always more to
�11
excite thought than to amuse,—to draw out the mind rather than
to instil dogmas, I hope you will excuse me for selecting for your
consideration a subject requiring so much study. My excuse is
that the principles involved in this subject, though they may seem
abstract, are most practical, forming as they do the very foundation
of all knowledge and all success.
Mathematics as a science starts with certain primary proposi
tions, which are divided usually into two classes—Definitions and
Axioms. But what mean these propositions ? whence came they,
and where is the authority for the use made of them in mathemat
ics ? If we can obtain correct answers to these questions, we will
have approached very near what we seek: but do not be uneasy, I do
not intend to lead you over the paths already well worn by the Sen
sationalists and Idealists. First let me call your attention to this most
important consideration— That there can be no existence, law, mode
of action, or phenomenon, without limitations; for all these im
ply determinations, and there can be no determinations without lim
itations. This is self-evident and absolute; think of it one moment.
There can be no this and that without a difference, and there can be
no difference without limitations. To vision, pure light would be
equivalent to pure darkness; there can be no seeing without a
mingling of the two—without shades or colors. Power is equiva
lent to no power without resistance; you can not lift yourself by
the hair; as Archimedes could not find a pou std, or place to fix
his machine, he could not move the earth. The equation sign
stands forever between absolute motion and no motion; the an
cients did not recognize the parallel lines, and they attached the
predicate no motion to the earth. And our physical sciences (so
called) now are mostly legerdemain to induce the student, by com
plicating the process, to believe he has succeeded in lifting him
self ; in lieu of the earth, physical science is placed on the back of
a tortoise. As there could be nothing to know, therefore, without
limitations, so there could be no knowing. As all things and phe
nomena depend upon the union of opposites, as of motion and rest,
of power and resistance, of light and darkness; so science is based
upon the union of opposites necessarily. As what is to be known
has its existence in this union, evidently the knowing must be bas
ed upon it. Now pure space, like pure light, is without limits, and
consequently is without determination. There is no this, as deter
mined from that; there is no here and no there; no outside and
no inside; no circumference, and no centre. As, for vision pure
light must be united with its opposite—darkness, so the science
of geometry must be based upon the union of the pure idea space
�12
and its opposite. Now, what stands opposed to space as darkness
is opposed to light? You at once recognize it as the point. The
point is not space, but it is related to space as its opposite, as its
negation, as its limitation. We are now prepared to understand
the meaning of the Definitions upon which geometry is based.
These definitions are the limitations of space by its opposite—the
point;—the motion of a point may be said to generate a line; the
motion of a line, to generate a surface; the motion of a surface, to
generate a solid. So, while pure space is without limitations or
determinations, yet united with its opposite we have definitions as
the bases of science. We now have a here and a there, a this and
a that. By this union we have a straight line, a curved line, a tri
angle, a square, a polygon, a circle, an ellipse, a parabola, an hy
perbola, a polyedron, a prism, a parallelopipedon, a sphere, an ellip
soid, &c. &c.
But before investigating further the meaning of the definitions
of mathematics, we must investigate whence they came; a know
ledge of their origin will contribute to the understanding of their
nature. You are aware that many contend that all our knowledge,
including of course mathematical definitions and axioms, is deri
ved from sensation; and that others contend, no less confidently,
for the existence of innate ideas, and for this origin of all know
ledge. It is not pertinent to our present object to meddle with
either of these systems. We have seen that all determination is
through limitation; that is, if all limitation were removed from
any thing, all determination would be removed; and what would
be left would be equivalent to nought—is nothing—the thing
would no longer have existence. But do you say something would
still be left ? Think one moment; your something left being with
out determinations, wherein, I ask, is its difference from nothing ?
You call it something, I call it nothing, and you can not apply a
predicate to your something which I can not also apply to my
nothing; if you can, then your “something left” has limitations
which is contrary to the hypothesis. It is perfectly apparent,
therefore, if we know not the limitations, we know not the thing;
and that, in so far as we know the limitations, we know the thing
in itself—the thing having an existence only in these limitations.
Therefore, if things in themselves were not related to us, we could
never know them; if there were no bond of union between nature
and ourselves, all things in nature by which we are surrounded
would be to us as though they were not,—we would be uncon
scious of their existence. Consequently, if we know nature at all,
(and no one will be likely to deny this,) there must be some means
�13
of our knowing or becoming conscious of the limitations of things
in themselves. But how can the mind know or become conscious
of that which is outside of itself? This is the difficult but most
important question. If we admit the duality of nature and mind,
must we admit that the mind can get outside of itself to know na
ture ? This would be a manifest absurdity, for nothing can get
outside of itself. Then, to admit a knowledge of nature, are we
compelled to do away with the duality, and to become out and out
materialists on the one hand, or idealists on the other ? I think
not. Then, if the mind can not get out of itself, how can the mind
know nature if duality be admitted ? I think I see one, and only
one possible solution of this problem; for, in admitting that the
mind can not get out of itself, we admit that our knowledge of na
ture comes from the mind knowing itself. This is the problem:
Admitting the duality of nature and mind, and that the mind can
not get out of itself, how can the mind know nature ?
It is admitted that we have some knowledge of nature, and, con
sequently, that there must be some relation between mind and
the external world. Now if we admit duality, the only possible
relation is that of mutual limitation; that is, in so far as nature and
mind are distinct and dual, they must reciprocally exclude and ne
gate each other. And in so far as they are distinct, the only pos
sible relation they can have on the side of their duality must be
xthe mutual limitation through this reciprocal exclusion and nega
tion. This is the only possible relation upon the admission of dual
ity, because neither could get outside of itself, which would of
course be necessary for any other relation. Consequently, this re
lation, so far from requiring the denial, is in virtue of the duality;
and, as this is the only possible relation consistent with duality, this
must be the avenue to a knowledge of nature; or else, we must de
ny either the duality, or, the possibility of such knowledge. These
three are the only possible alternatives:—You must either do away
with the duality and become materialists on the one side, or ideal
ists on the other; or else, admitting the duality, you must deny
the possibility of a knowledge of nature; or else, admitting both
the duality and a possibility of a knowledge of nature, you must
find in the mutual exclusion and limitation the condition of this
knowledge. Endorsing this last alternative, we must endeavor to see
how nature and mind mutually excluding and limiting each other, is
the avenue to a knowledge of nature. We are not now concerned
with the inquiry how nature and mind limit each other, but our
present inquiry starts with the fact that they must limit each other,
upon the admission of duality. This is the solution: Nature and
�14
mind mutually excluding and limiting each other, in so far as the
mind cognizes its own limitation, in that act, being limited by na
ture, it recognizes the limitation of nature. To illustrate: suppose
A and B own adjacent farms; A, in knowing the limitations of his,
knows, in that very fact, the limitations of B’s so far as they mutu
ally limit each other; just so, the mind, in knowing its own limita
tions, knows the limitations of nature so far as they exclude and
limit each other. Thus the mind knows nature in knowing itself.
This is the only possible solution; but we need no other as this is in
every respect most satisfactory, containing within itself evidence
of its truth, and is therefore worthy of all acceptation, even though
we were not forced to adopt it, or else either materialism or ideal
ism, or the doctrine that all knowledge of nature is impossible.
But, at first glance, all this may seem to have little to do with the
Definitions of mathematics. Upon reflection, however, I suspect it
will be found to have somewhat to do not only with mathematics
but with our political, social and even religious condition, with the
steam engine and weaver’s shuttle and doctor’s pill, and even with
our bread and butter.
But to continue;—all knowledge, therefore, including mathema
tics and the natural sciences, is the mind knowing itself. If this
be so, you may ask, how do we know that nature is actual and
real? You may say, “upon the admission of the duality of nature
and mind, and, that they mutually limit each other, it is clear
enough that the mind, in knowing itself, knows nature in so far as
they thus limit each other; but, if the mind only knows itself, how
do you get the duality ? How does the mind know that an actual
nature stands over against it limiting it; and that these limitations
of itself, which only it knows, have an external condition at all ?”
This knowledge comes through sensation, which gives us a con
sciousness of objectivity. This will be clear, I think, if you will
call to mind a point already discussed at some length. As we have
seen that all existence and phenomena depend upon the union of
opposites, as of motion and rest, of power and resistance, of light
and darkness, so all consciousness implies duality. Consequently,
consciousness in the line of our spontaneity—that is, a limitation
where we know there is no internal limitation—gives us objectiv
ity authoritatively. The primary condition of our knowledge of
the existence of nature, as opposed to and as limiting mind, is mo
tion. But I must not dwell upon this part of my subject.
On the other hand again, one disposed to sensationalism will ob
ject,—“this is all nonsense to talk about the mind knowing nature
by knowing itself,—I see and feel objects themselves, but I do not
�15
know the mind,—I can not see it!” I grant you your position fully—
that you see and feel objects, and that you know mind very little;
probably if you could only get it under a microscope, or into a cruci
ble, you would know it better. But I thank you for your objection
just here in close juxtaposition with the one of the idealist already
considered; as we have to steer here between Scylla and Charybdis,
we must keep in mind their localities. In reply to idealism just now,
it was maintained that objectivity is given authoritatively in sensa
tion, in that all consciousness implies duality,—the union of op
posites. This seems to the senses to approach dangerously close
to you, O voracious Charybdis! who would draw all knowledge
into th£ abyss of sensationalism. You say you do not know mind,
but that you know nature, objects, matter, which are given in
sensation. Hence you peep at nature; you make observations and
experiments; you turn her round to make her present herself to
your senses on as many sides as possible; probably you may use
a microscope to assist the senses; you note down very carefully
the results—what you see; you classify this and call it Physical
Science ! And to be so lucky as to see something fir§t, say a new
fossil, and to describe it and classify it, entitles one to endless fame
in the history of Science ! Can it be that now, in the latter half of
the nineteenth century, such a gross and bungling counterfeit is
palmed upon humanity so currently! You say you know little or
nothing of mind because you can not see it,—this I have granted
without the slightest mental reservation; but you say you know
nature and objects around you because you see them and feel
them! Hold! you feel the fire and say it is hot; you see the rose
and say it is red; you taste sugar and say it is sweet. But the
sugar is not sweet, the rose is not red, the fire is not hot; these are
but sensations which you objectify and put into things which you
say you know in sensation. Now you must acknowledge that you
know not the things you imagine you see, and you say that you
know not mind as you can not see it;—what, then, do you know ?
Your physical science is no science, containing as it does the two
factors—the things seen and the individual seeing—most hetero
geneously mixed up, neither known, both undetermined, and one
of them (the individual seeing) extremely variable. Call this
Science! It is mockery, it is trifling with common sense to palm
such stuff off as science.
We have seen that the mind can know nature only in knowing
itself, and, consequently, that the mind can know nature only in so
far as they mutually limit each other. Now the grossest sensa
tionalist acts upon this position; for when he says the rose is red,
�16
that sugar is sweet, that fii’e is hot, he actually makes his own
limitations in sensation the limitations of things; and the more re
fined of the class who say, “we can know nothing of nature except
the phenomena,” in this fully endorse the same position. The real
difference between these and me is not here therefore, but rather
in this, that they would restrict mind to sensation, or at most to
the understanding. They, no less than I, acknowledge their own
limitations as all they know of nature or indeed can know. But
it may be asked,—“ if the limitations of mind are the means of our
knowing things, or all of nature that we can know, are we not right
in objectifying our sensations?” Certainly we are right; if we
wished to, we could not help seeing the rose as red, feeling* the fire
as hot, and tasting sugar as sweet. But I do most solemnly pro
test against the currency of this, or of any classification or gen
eralization of what is given in sensation, as science either of na
ture or mind. It is not science, because the mind does not Tcnow
and recognize itself in what is given in sensation. It cognizes
only the sensation, the feeling, the redness, the heat, the sweet
ness, &c., which are cognized as well by beasts; for no doubt
they see the grass as green and feel the fire as hot as well as we.
In the language of Scripture,—“The ox knoweth his owner, and
the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, my people doth
not consider.” The mere cognition of phenomena is not know
ledge either of the thing or of mind; and although phenomena are
an essential condition of physical science, it is a gross blunder to
suppose we can get knowledge or science by an accumulation,
classification, and generalization of no-knowledge, no-science. You
can not hang your coat on the shadow of a nail; it will not sustain
it, try it as often as you please. From all we have said, it follows
most manifestly that, as the thing exists only in its limitations as
we have seen, and as the limitations of nature are the limitations of
reason, physical science can only exist in this,—the reason becoming
self-conscious and recognizing itself in what is given in sensation.
This is a most difficult process, but it alone is worthy of humanity
and of our highest ambition; the reason in becoming self-conscious
pulls down the “wall of partition,” and admits us into the very
presence of the Infinite, the Universal, the Absolute. It alone can
make us free indeed, not by doing away with the external law, but
by enabling us in our own spontaneity to fulfil the law; which is the
object of all education, and should be of all human aspiration.
But, as we have seen, the mind can not get out of itself, and yet,
what has been given in sensation you have thrown from you and
already put in the thing, or rather, have made it the thing. IIow
�17
are you to get it back into mind again, to enable the reason to re
cognize itself in it? It is absolutely necessary, as you see, to get in
terms of the reasoning the limitations given first in sensation. The
only possibility left now for science, is for the reason to go out and
limit itself by the limitations of sense made object. To illustrate:
suppose you wish to get a cast containing the limitations or form
of a given object; you first take an impression in plaster; you now
make it the object of 'which you take an impression in a given
metal; you now have in metal the limitations of the original ob
ject. So you first take an impression of nature in the terms of ex
ternal sense, you now make this the object and take an impression
of it in terms of the reason. You now have, not science, but the
first condition of science; you have the object in terms of the rea
son,—but the science is the reason coming to know and recognize
itself in this its own object. As the thing in itself exists in those
same limitations which you now have in terms of the reason, the
reason in knowing itself in its own object, knows the thing in itself.
The object of reason thus obtained is always an idea limited by its
opposite,—as we have already seen the “definitions” upon which
geometry is based consist of the idea Space limited by its opposite.
Now we see whence the definitions come, and understand clearly
what they are. We now have some insight, I think, back to where
science must begin, if it begin at all. The definitions upon which
geometry is based, are, in distinction from the objects of sense, ob
jects of reason : they are ideal, not sensual. The words, point, line,
triangle, &c., are but signs to represent to the understanding the lim
itations of the idea; consequently, when I say a triangle is a figure
bounded by three straight lines, I give only a verbal definition of the
word triangle; but the word defined is only a sigu of the Conception.
So when I draw a triangle on the blackboard, the diagram is only a
sensual representation. The real, which the verbal definition and
diagram represent, is the ideal object—the object of reason. There
are many who think they study mathematics, who never grasp the
real definitions, but only the shadow as given in sensations. All these
ever reach are forms and rules. When they get a little older and
dabble in philosophy, they tell us mathematics is based upon hy
potheses and even absurdities; for, say they, “nothing can have
position which has neithei- length, breadth, nor thickness, as the
the mathematician predicates of & point.” This only shows that
the objector himself does not see the point, and it is to be feared
he never will see it, because not given in sensation.
The science of mathematics, in all its various branches, from the
determining the product of two and two, to the highest achieve
�18
ments of Newton or LaPlace, is constituted of the expressions of
the reason in the act of coming to know itself in the various limit
ations of the idea Quantity. This definition follows from what has
already been sufficiently insisted upon, but I will try to make it
even more clear. The data of every mathematical problem must
limit the problem, or it can not be solved. This involves, if clearly
understood, the most that I have said to-night. Every standard
measure of real things must be given both in sensation and in rea
son ; that is, it must be both cognized in sensation and recognized
by the reason. For instance, when I say a foot is one straight line
twelve inches long, here the straight line and numbers one and
twelve are recognized limitations of reason, whereas foot and inch
are cognized limitations of objects. All the standard measures are
such as as are both cognized and recognized together, and hence
used with the least possible effort. But all which is necessary is
that the data should limit both the thing and the idea. Hence, on
the side of sensation I may use inch, foot, yard, pole, or any stand
ard, provided I cognize it; so on the side of reason I am not
restricted to straight line, but may use triangle, square, circle, &c.,
&c., provided they can be both cognized and recognized. Hence
you see the application of the whole of mathematics to physical
science in regard to its quantitative determinations. Though I
can not measure the height of a steeple with a straight line, a foot
stick, I can measure it with a triangle. Here the cognition and
recognition are not together, and apparently in the same act of
mind, as when a foot rule is used, since we can not recognize the
triangle in all its properties by a simple act of the reason. Hence,
when we get the base line, or one side of the triangle, in units of
feet, and the angles in units of degrees—all of which are both cog
nized and recognized—we neglect for a time the side of sensation,
that the reason may recognize itself in the triangle; and when we
thus recognize the other leg of the triangle in units—terms Of the
reason—we then put back these units into feet from which we took
them, and now both cognize and recognize the height of the stee
ple at once; that is, we know it. This is an illustration of every
application of mathematics to physical science.
But the different sciences may involve different ideas; quantity
is not the only idea involved in the physical sciences. The ancient
Greeks did not, for obvious reasons, succeed in developing a science
of other ideas as they did of the idea quantity, and with us other
ideas have but little to do with assumed knowledge, with sci
ence. We do not recognize the Platonic “Idea” as the very
life of all science, of all knowledge and all success; and it is
�19
fashionable in these days to declare, both implicitly and expli
citly, that the Organon of Bacon has superseded the Organon of
Aristotle. As both sensation and reason are essential to physical
science—the one to give the condition, the other the essence and
life—it is difficult to comprehend how the one can supersede the
other, except upon the assumption that reason is nonessential to
science. But if, as we have seen, science consists in the reason
knowing and recognizing itself, then this judgment can be but a
sign of ourselves, that sense has superseded reason in us;—
“ Doth the harmony
In the sweet lute-strings belong
To the purchaser, who, dull of ear, doth keep
The instrument ? True, she hath bought tjhz right
To strike it into fragments,—yet no art /
To wake its silvery tones, and melt with/bliss
Of thrilling song! Truth to the wise exists,
And beauty for the feeling heart.”
I now find that many points are left untouched which I intend
ed to discuss, and which would be necessary to give unity to the
subject; but I find time will not permit, and I must hasten to a
conclusion. Let me remark, however, that Axioms are but expres
sions in terms of the understanding of the living-force of the rea
son of each individual. How erroneous, therefore, is the definition
that an axiom is that which all men receive as absolutely true. An
axiom is an absolute and universal truth, but it may not be recog
nized by all men. If I had sufficient energy of thought or living
force of self-conscious reason, the proposition that the square of the
hypothenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two
sides of a right-angled triangle, would become an axiom; but as I
have not this, and as the mind can not transcend itself, I have to
use the lever of method. But as all this is but the carrying out of
what has already been said, I need not dwell upon it. This living
energy of reason was so great in Plato, Shakspeare, and Goethe,
that they could lift greater weights directly than most men could
with all the appliances of levers and pullies.
We have seen that, as the mind can not get out of itself, (and
this position is implicitly admitted by all, though it may be expli
citly denied,) it can know only through a knowledge of itself. We
have seen that we can know physical nature even, only because
nature exists in its limitations, and these limitations are identical
with the limitations of mind or the laws of thought. And God being
Infinite Mind, in whose image we are created, the mind knows God
only in so far as it becomes self-conscious or knows itself. “ God
�20
is a Spirit, and they who worship Him must worship Him in spi
rit and in truth.” But we have seen, also, that the mind can know
itself only in self-conscious reason, and that reason hence is the
only criterion of truth. It is sad to reflect how little self-conscious
reason there is in the world, in humanity. Though reason is the
only criterion of truth, and it alone can exalt us and free us, by en
abling us to unite and cooperate with the Universal and Absolute,
yet, do we not see this our only hope condemned and upbraided
even in the pulpit, driven from the state, and trampled down and
spit upon by politics, and treated little better by science, so-called ?
When this is gone, what have we left? Nothing but individual
tape-strings! Oh, yes! they all talk loudly about the “ Higher
Law,” and say “ do right! do right I” And you ask them, what is
the Higher Law? what is right?—and they immediately and with
the most impudent assurance present their individual tape-strings,
and commence straightway measuring! measuring! But by what
authority are these stamped? By the senses, the feelings, the pas
sions. But each individual has a different standard stamped by
the same authority, except where what is called education induces
many to use the same string. And what power is umpire in these
irrepressible conflicts thus inevitably induced ? God is out of the
question, as reason has been dethroned, apd nothing is left but
physical force. Hence family, political and religious discord and
strife—one tape-string in conflict with another; no self-conscious
reason, no knowledge of the Absolute. If you direct your mind
through the whole range of human activities, you find labels ac
cording to these tape-strings stuck on every thing—the most sa
cred no less than secular. And this is called Knowledge! Truth!
Higher Law! And Education, in all its various departments, is,
in the main, the drilling into the young these lifeless forms, these
shams, these midnight apparitions, these labels arranged in order
to suit the easy method of the sensational understanding. Oh! it
is sad to behold how grossly humanity is engulfed into the senses.
We boast that we are the lords of creation; which means, that we
can bridle the horse, and that we will ultimately exterminate the
lion: for, the spirit of humanity is indicated, not in the question,
how shall we use those gifts to us which have not been vouchsafed
to beasts ? but rather, how shall we make up our deficit in beastly
gifts ?—“ What shall we eat ? what shall we drink ? and where
withal shall we be clothed?”
�St. Louis Medical College,
November 1st, 1859.
’
Prof. J. H. Watters.
Dear Sir,
At a meeting held by the Class, J. T. Marsh in the
chair, it was unanimously resolved, that a committee be appointed for the pur- •
pose of requesting from you permission to publish your Introductory Address,
delivered before the Class, in College Hall, on the evening of October 31st.
Hoping that the above resolve may receive your approbation, a favorable reply
will meet with the thanks of the Class, and of yours,
Respectfully,
J. L. WILCOX,
GRATZ A. MOSES,
CHAS. KNOWER,
JOHN THOMPSON,
J. C. HICKERSON.
St. Louis, Nov. 2, 1859.
Dear Sirs,
The manuscript of my lecture is at your service ; please present
to the Class my acknowledgment of the compliment,
And believe me, as ever,
Your attached friend,
J. H. WATTERS.
To Messrs. Wilcox, Moses, Knower, Thompson, Hickerson.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Method of education: an address introductory to the session 1859-60 of the St. Louis Medical College
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Watters, J. H.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: St. Louis
Collation: 20 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
George Knapp & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1869
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5184
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Medicine
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Method of education: an address introductory to the session 1859-60 of the St. Louis Medical College), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Education
Medicine
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/afff370f758e1fd9395141932c4e3733.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=DclGm4FQPlT8YMNo%7E8z7eNFJ8F80X%7EcpQf0vD7gZGMoczzRR4TE-dKKxRtDLuQq%7EK0mIHlnlwWgGs1e5NYlE073ANr5Y9ObcEIBKjl4vDpb3kZbH2VkHGNtvPCp-aoL77nYT%7Ehfz65APMbnv%7ElgRG7NxoFYu2e3yrixNNSREu9xfT-raqyKSEpdECQrTJtXLxmoc6flO%7E2xjwzn-MQMDZiYBKoJ0%7EZe30j1MI65WIO44Bw-P9oPxi-qOF8VyxCgcavJ8efROaQYQiudsW0hvaT7K%7EYioFccaJ1Zau%7EqmBuTChq9%7EbcIwqdT6Xnv9mIWgTllH4wQkGWDZ8l1eih35lQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
0c199536f46ad2b3ae53bb58b07ca47b
PDF Text
Text
ibMe Class (^bnatmi.
WHAT TO AIM AT, AS WELL AS HOW TO AIM.
BY
WILLIAM ELLIS.
�MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.
WHAT TO AIM AT, AS WELL AS HOW TO AIM.
N hearing that a Commission was
about to issue to inquire into the
state of “Middle-Class Education,”
one’s thoughts could not but revert
to the previous Commissions for in
quiring into the state of “Popular Education,”
and of our “ Public Schools,” and to the reports
consequent upon them.
Searching and laborious as these inquiries were,
and able as were the reports, it has always ap
peared to us, that they would have been much
more effective and useful, had there been an in
troductory exposition of the purposes for which
education is desirable. We will not say that these
purposes were not perceived and admitted by the
Commissioners; but, if they were, the avowal of
them was repressed, and the reports might have
been just what they were, had the Commissioners
never bestowed a thought upon what we conceive
to be the reason of our being at any pains about
education at all.
Whether our attempts to improve the education
of the children of the poorer classes have of late
been too ambitious—whether we have not been
doing actual mischief by “ over-education” (what
ever that term may mean)—whether we shall
have accomplished all that is desirable, when we
shall have secured for these children instruction
in reading, writing, and arithmetic—whether in
our public schools the time of the boy is not too
exclusively devoted to the classics and mathe
matics—whether more importance should not be
attached to the knowledge of some modern lan
guages—whether a little attention should not be
bestowed upon physical science—and whether
the subjects taught, whatever they may be, are
taught in the way best adapted to secure profi
ciency in the learners, are all matters which have
been handled by the Commissioners, but, as we
think, less effectively than they might have been,
if examined and discussed throughout, with the
aid of the light and guidance to be obtained by
keeping constantly in view the purposes for which
the work of education of any kind ought to be
engaged in.
As regards the relative claims of the ancient
and modern languages, it would be premature to
discuss them till it has been settled whether the
study of objects and phenomena should precede
and accompany the study of language, or follow
after it. If objects and phenomena are to have
precedence, modern languages might command a
preference, in as much as they alone supply the
names and explanations of the larger part of the
objects and phenomena, which in these days
principally engage our attention; and these lan
guages are more immediately needful in the in
tercourse among nations. But if instruction in
objects and phenomena is to be put aside, whetner
temporarily or for ever, for the study of language,
we suspect that our preference would be bestowed
upon the ancient languages, in as much as they
are more difficult to learn, and are seldom learned
so as to be conversed in, and hence scholars are
less liable to suffer from a flow of words in advance
of ideas. This is not to be despised as one of the
collateral advantages of teaching ancient rather
than modern languages. For the opportunity of
accumulating stores of words irrespective of any
ideas to be represented by them, is one of the
greatest dangers to which the juvenile intellect
can be exposed; as a facility in pouring them
forth is one of the greatest impediments in the
way of curing those who are afflicted with confu
sion or bewilderment of understanding.
In considering the question, how far the study
of language should be allowed to precede the
study of objects and phenomena, it will not be
lost sight of that the objects and phenomena
which are treated of in the books out of which
the young are expected to acquire practice in
reading, to learn construction of sentences, and
to study models of style, are men, and their con
duct, and manners. Narratives, histories, biogra
phies, and poetry are made up of words denotative
of the dispositions, attainments, and actions of
men—which words are made more or less to im
ply approbation and disapprobation, whether upon
grounds which will stand examination, is often a
mattei' of contention among men of great experi
ence. Boys may read and write, and construe
and parse the phrases in which these words occur.
Can they judge whether the words are appropri
ately used ? Take such words as virtue, honour,
prudence, liberty, despotism, perseverance, obsti
nacy, earnestness, bigotry, consistency, orthodoxy,
�MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.
heresy, conversion, perversion, generosity, fidelity,
parsimony, justice, and mercy; is it desirable that
learners should be encouraged to deal freely in
their youthful compositions with terms intended
to express approbation and disapprobation, the
grounds of which they may not only be incapable
of understanding, but careless to inquire into ?
There are teachers, men excellent in many
respects, and accomplished scholars too, who seem
to act upon the notion that inquirers, such as
ourselves, who have never taken a part in school
work, are not qualified to form or express a judg
ment upon what professional educators are doing.
We cannot proclaim too loudly our dissent from
this doctrine. Even if we are not competent to
judge of the means by which the ends of educa
tion may best be attained, we are competent to
judge what those ends are. Stated broadly, few
people (teachers included) would hesitate to admit
that they ought gladly to welcome anynewarrangements, or modifications of existing arrangements,
calculated to bring about an increase of well-being.
Teachers who resist attempts to inquire into their
proceedings, insist, by implication, that education
in their hands is doing all that can be expected
from it in behalf of the advancement of well-being.
They tell us, that the distinguished promoters of
education in the olden times were no less desirous
than ourselves of improving society, and were
well qualified for directing the work which they
originated, and that it would ill become us to call
in question that which has earned the approval,
and even the veneration of all subsequent teachers,
and of the scholars educated under them.
These objections, founded as they are upon the
tacit assumption that the arrangements for educa
tion of olden times are so near perfection, as not
to be susceptible of improvement—as not to war
rant inquiry, lest inquiry should lead to change
which should not be improvement,—suggest some
rather startling comparisons and reflections. Can
it be true, that the profession of educator, acknow
ledged to be one requiring attainments of the
highest order, should have reached perfection at
a time when all other professions were so far
removed from it as later improvements have
shown them to have been? People engaged in
all professions and branches of business, educators
included, are, we will say, contributing their ser
vices to the best of their ability towards the im
provement of society. Their predecessors were
aidingin the same work. In every department of
industry, unless we except education, although
the end sought for is, as heretofore, human well
being, the means by which it is sought are now
very different.
3
We are not more anxious for artificial light
than our ancestors were; but we are better pro
vided with it, because we have substituted coalgas for oil and tallow candles. In like manner,
with no greater anxiety than before, for rapid
and safe travelling, we have abandoned posting
and fast coaches for the locomotive and the rail
way. With the same purposes as before, the
semaphore has been made to give way to the
electric telegraph, and we obtain the motive power
to propel our ships across the ocean, not from
the fickle and intractable wind, but from steam
extracted from the very water which floats them.
The scholars, divines, and other educators of
the people, do not rank themselves, as far as we
have become acquainted with their sentiments,
nor are they ranked by others, below the classes
who have succeeded in providing us so much
better than formerly with light, and locomotion,
and intercommunication. According to them,
and quite in conformity with our own views, the
highest order of intelligence, and the highest
order of moral excellence, ought to be found
among those who are entrusted with the duty
of forming the minds and characters of others.
But surely it may reasonably be doubted whether
the higher attainments of educators can have
sprung into perfection at a time when the inferior
attainments were still so incompletely developed.
Why, then, should there be any backwardness
among educators, we will not say, in admitting
that the system and methods adopted and adhered
to by them ought to be changed, but in allowing
us to inquire whether they have attained perfec
tion in their own most arduous vocation—that of
bringing to bear with the greatest skill the highest
knowledge, for the purpose of fitting the young
to work out and enjoy well-being?
An inquiry into prevailing education, with a
view to ascertain how far it is accomplishing all
that can be expected from it, can be scarcely
approached with much prospect of striking out
anything of practical utility, unless it be preceded
by a correct appreciation of the state of society, in
which the education is actually at work. It may
then be possible to form some estimate of the
influence for good which education has hitherto
exerted over the well-being thus far enjoyed, and
of how much more it might be made to exercise
in future, and to point out some of the changes
by which this greater good is to be effected.
We will set out by proposing two questions,
about the answers to which there can be no
difference of opinion : —
1. Are the present inhabitants of this country,
as compared with their predecessors, on the whole
�4
MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.
better informed, and more capable of applying their
knowledge so as to promote well-being, and hence
in the enjoyment of a happier state of existence ?
2. Is the present state of existence, chequered
as we see it, with pleasure and pain, joy and
sorrow, hope and fear, susceptible of improvement,
that is, open to improvement through anyexertions
of which men themselves are capable ?
W e assume that there is a perfect unanimity
upon the answers to these questions, and that the
answers are in the affirmative ; and in so doing,
we are not forgetful that less than a century ago,
the superiority of the savage to the civilized state
was maintained with great vehemenc.e by advo
cates of considerable ability, who had many
adherents. But the remarkable increase of know
ledge, and the still more remarkable increase of
aptitude in applying knowledge to purposes of
well-being in these latter days, have swept before
them all predilections in favour of barbarism, and
the ingenious sophisms on which they rested.
Unanimity begins to disappear when means
are proposed for bringing about that improved
state of existence which is admitted to be possible ;
and it is to the consideration of these means that
we wish to invite attention. As, however, it is ac
cepted as an established fact, that our present state
of existence is an improvement upon the past, the
knowledge, if obtainable, of the means by which
that improvement was effected, may help us in our
endeavours to learn how those who are disposed
to engage in the work, may hope to bring about
the further improvement agreed to be possible.
There can be little doubt, if proposals were
widely circulated, inviting expositions of the
means by which the inhabitants of Great Britain
have acquired a so much more comfortable state
of existence than that which was enjoyed by the
inhabitants of this island previous to the invasion
of the Romans, that the expositions tendered
would vary greatly in many respects. And yet,
we fancy, accordance or similarity in some respects
would be traceable in them all. Not one would
deny that the earth is made to produce greater
crops, and to sustain greater numbers of sheep
and cattle; that, with the assistance of wind,
water, and steam, the raw products of the soil are
worked up into a greater quantity and variety of
fabrics adapted to give comfort, health, and plea
sure ; that our means of transport, locomotion,
and communication are superior; our supplies
of fuel, water, and light are more abundant; and
that we are better provided with the means of
preserving health, and of keeping off or mitigating
the painful consequences of accidents and disease.
As little would it be denied that modern supe
riority in the matters named, and in many others
is partly a consequence of the greater extent of
our knowledge, of the continued accumulation
of knowledge upon knowledge, and of the substi
tution of real knowledge for that which had been
mistaken for it.
When from the possession of knowledge, we
pass on to that of readiness or aptitude in applying
it, doubts may be felt whether there has been any
or much advance in that. It might be contended
that the greatly increased produce of industry
which we enjoy, is sufficiently accounted for by
the increase of our knowledge, and that there is
no justification for claiming more than the same
readiness and aptitude in applying our increased
knowledge, than were to be seen in the application
of our lesser knowledge. We will defer awhile
any attempt to decide between the supporters of
these opposite views. Other investigations which
we have to make, may help us to a right decision
upon this question. We shall be satisfied for the
present with the admission, which cannot be
withheld, that knowledge, combined with the capa
city of applying it in the production of the
necessaries and comforts of life, is more advanced,
and also more generally diffused, than it ever was
at any former period ; and to confirm the truth of
this statement, we need but point to the greater
abundance of wealth.
Wealth, however, is not well-being. It is only
a means of well-being. But we must bear in
mind that although it is only one among many
means of well-being, it is an indispensable one,
since well-being without wealth is impossible.
Nevertheless, how far wealth will contribute to
well-being must depend upon the manner in which
it is used or consumed.
The terms in common use to denote many kinds
of ill-conduct, such as profligacy, dissipation,
debauchery, uncharitableness, and gambling, all
point to the ill-conduct, not of individuals, de
void, but of individuals possessed of wealth.
They indicate a belief that wealth, an indispen
sable element of well-being, may be converted
into an instrument for the production of misery.
Not only may a large income, which the heir to
it could not have earned, and has not the capa
city to use, help him to no well-being; it may
hurry him into misery. Experience has shown
us that increased wages in particular channels of
industry, resulting from other causes than the
increased attainments of workmen, have not
assisted them to become better parents, or better
conducted men in other respects. While, then,
we accept wealth as an indispensable element in
well-being, we ought not to forget that wealth
�MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.
must be accompanied by the capacity to use it, if
a state of well-being is to be enjoyed.
\ An inquiry into the causes of increased well
being really becomes, if we would avoid wild and
unmeaning dissertation, an inquiry into the causes
of increased'-wealth, and of increased capacity in
using it so Zs to produce increased well-being.
The number of the inhabitants of Great Britain is
more than ten-fold what it was in the earlier
periph. of its history, and its wealth is more than a
hymdrcd-fold. How has this change been brought
yabout? What causes preceded it? We maybe
r baffled in our attempts to trace the remoter
causes, but we can only hope to get back to them
through the proximate causes. Accordingly, we
had better search for the proximate causes in
the first instance. Among the antecedents and
concomitants of this change, we see many that
are acting as heretofore. The causes of change
• are not to be found in them. As far as we
can learn, the island is not larger, the soil
not more fertile, the powers of water, wind, steam,
and electricity, are not greater, minerals not more
abundant, nor are the various substances scattered
over the land more susceptible of disintegration
and recombination, so as, in the form of a gas, to
suspend sensation, or, in the form of a microscope
or telescope, to bring us acquainted with objects
invisible to the naked eye. If, then, the elements
and forces of nature which prevail around us are
the same as heretofore, except as modified and
directed by human agency, the cause of the differ
ence observable in man’s state of existence must
be sought for in man himself.
And there it will not be sought in vain. For
it cannot be doubted that the men of this genera
tion have more knowledge, with the capacity of
applying it in the production of wealth, than the
men of any previous generation. The more we
reflect upon the increased knowledge of modern
times, with the capacity of using it for the pur
poses of production, the more satisfied shall we
be that we have hit upon the principal, if not the
only, cause of the marked difference between the
present and past states of existence. Powerful
as this cause is, we recognise it in its character
of a proximate cause only, and one which invites
us to continue our search into its cause or causes
among the antecedents which our records of the
past have preserved for us.
At this point attention ought to be steadily fixed
upon what, at first sight, might be considered an in
superable impediment, if not to the progressive, at
least to the rapid uprising of the human race in
the scale of existence. It is needful not only that
man should know more and more, but that the
5
old knowledge should be imparted to the ignorant
new comers, who are destined, in an uninterrupted
stream, to take the place of those already instructed.
The children born among us, with our present
advanced knowledge, are quite as ignorant as
those born two thousand years ago. The causes
which produce such very different men and women
out of the children born among us now from those
of former days, must be sought for in the external
influences brought to bear upon the children. It
would scarcely be contended by anybody, if our
children were to be transplanted at birth to some
distant land to be reared by savages, that they
would grow up to be men and women capable of
participating in the orderly and systematic work
as now conducted under the direction of those who
are most distinguished for knowledge and aptitude.
Our present improved state of well-being implies
not only increase of knowledge and aptitude, but
also opportunities for the ignorant and incapable
continually pouring in upon us to become as
intelligent and capable as those whom they are
destined to replace. How far these opportunities
are the result of contrivances specially intended
to impart knowledge and aptitude, how far they
present themselves undesignedly as inevitable con
sequences of past knowledge and aptitude, and how
far the contrivances specially intended to impart
knowledge and aptitude are adapted for their pur
poses, remain to be inquired into. The growth of
knowledge, or the continual addition of new to
old knowledge, is a subject which there will be
more hope of our approaching successfully if we
reserve it till we have inquired somewhat carefully
into the opportunities which have been hitherto
afforded to each generation to acquire the know
ledge and aptitude of the preceding.
Go where we will, in every 'department of
industry, we see proofs of the increased know
ledge and aptitude of which we have spoken, and
also proofs of the ignorance and ill-conduct more
or less disturbing the operations, and diminishing
and damaging the products, of industry. The
young continually received into existing establish
ments, such as they are, while open to profit by
the knowledge and aptitude, are exposed to suffer
by the ignorance and ill-conduct with which they
are brought into contact. Thus we have simul
taneously before our eyes the increased knowledge
and aptitude which have helped to make us what
we are, and the ignorance and inaptitude lingering
among us to prevent our becoming what we might
be. These may be accepted as indications of the
direction in which efforts ought to be made, still
further to improve the improved state of existence
which has been prepared for us by our predecessors.
�6
MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.
The action of government must not be left un
noticed. It stands conspicuous among the proxi
mate causes of well-being. The perfection with
which it accomplishes its purposes may safely be
attributed to the knowledge and aptitude pre
vailing among a people, but is a sufficiently
peculiar manifestation of those qualities to deserve
to be separately investigated.
Our government and institutions, improved as
they have been, and more particularly of late
years, are generally acknowledged to be intended
to make us happier and better—to defend the
well-being which we enjoy, and to encourage us
in our efforts to increase it. They are not sup
posed to be perfect or unimprovable ; but the
parts susceptible of improvement by any process
within the reach of our present capabilities, bear a
small proportion to those which are well adapted
for their purposes. As regards our internal rela
tions, our intercourse with one another, they are
contrived and directed with a view to restrain all
individuals who will not, or can not, regulate their
conduct in conformity with what society in general
considers indispensable for its well-being. As
regards our external relations, our intercourse
with other nations, they are intended to promote
freedom of communication and interchange of
benefits.
A very slight acquaintance with modern history
suffices to make known that a great change has
come over us in our views of what ought to be
the action of government in its bearing upon
both our internal and our external relations.
Restrictions upon freedom and compulsory service
used to be the connection between the government
and the governed. Now the prevailing feeling
is, that the governed should be left unrestricted,
except where interference is clearly called for by
regard for the general well-being, and that the
services of individuals are to be voluntary, not
compulsory. A spirit of rapacity and extortion
used to be the characteristic of our dealings with
other nations ; and ignorance directed this spirit,
so as to lead it away from the very wealth which
it sought to grasp. For we then thought to enrich
ourselves by ruling the inhabitants of other lands,
and monopolising their trade, unable to perceive
that if they were allowed to rule themselves, and
to conduct their industrial and commercial opera
tions as was best for themselves, we should escape
the expense and responsibility of governing them,
and profit more in our trade with them.
Amplification upon these topics is unnecessary
here. It does not admit of a doubt that if the
changes which have taken place of late years in
the spirit and character of our government and
institutions have not been caused, they have been
rendered possible, by the increased knowledge of
the people. And we can scarcely fail to be led to
inquire whether every improvement of which our
government and institutions are susceptible, may
not be obtained through a wider diffusion of know
ledge.
During the growth of our nation there have
been noteworthy events which may have given
the direction to our progress, such as it has been.
The invasion and conquest of this island by the
Romans, the triumph, of William the Conqueror
at Hastings, the expulsion of the Stuarts, the
union of England and Scotland, and the subse
quent union of them with Ireland, are such
events. It is difficult to surmise what the state
of society might be at this moment had events
occurred of an opposite character to these. Again,
stress is sometimes laid upon the influence of our
insular position, of our climate, and of the varied
mineral stores with which we are favoured. We
notice these antecedents and concomitants of our
present state of well-being rather than leave them
unmentioned, lest it should be thought that we
had overlooked them as agents which have acted
and are acting in our favour. It is almost super
fluous, however, to point out that these latter
agents could only have been made to work in our
favour through our own knowledge and our capa
city in applying them. The sea affords facilities
for invasion as well as for defence, and obstructs
as well as promotes comHiercial intercourse.
Extend our inquiries as widely as we will, and
resolve as we may to exclude from our thoughts
nothing that can be supposed to bear upon our
present and future states of well-being, two causes
or agents stand out prominently from among all
the rest: the state of our knowledge, and our apti
tude in applying the knowledge which we have.
And indissolubly united with these chief agents
of well-being is the uninterrupted departure from
among us of the instructed and the capable, and
the arrival in their place of the ignorant and in
capable, to be or not to be made, according as they
are dealt with, instructed and capable.
If we could feel that our present state of well
being was all that we desire and expect, it would
be unreasonable to attempt more than to conserve
and perpetuate the machinery at work among us
for the conversion of ignorant and incapable in
fants into instructed and capable adults. But our
feelings are very different. We are everywhere
in immediate contact with an amount of destitu
tion and misery, which is most distressing to all,
with the exception of that frivolous and unthink
ing crew who would be able, like Nero, to fiddle
�MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.
1
while contemplating Rome in flames. Neither be made, not merely for the future, but to com
have we far to seek for causes of much of this pensate for the omissions of the past. The con
destitution. Examples of dishonesty, drunken- sideration of infant, day, evening, Sunday, and
nese, extravagance, dissipation, incapacity, sus adult schools for all classes is embraced in this
pension of work occasioned by disagreements general description, and it is implied that the
between employers and employed, and misuse of later the age at which the work is begun, the
credit, both in giving and taking it, meet our more difficult will it be found. There is no rivalry
eyes in the columns of the daily papers devoted between infant, juvenile, and adult schools, ex
to reports of our police, bankruptcy, and other tended even to universities, the latter being con
courts of law. The culprits and their victims tinuations of, not substitutes, for the education in
thus exposed to view bear but a small proportion the former. The best of university educations is
to those who are partially excused and screened possible only after the best of infant and juvenile
by their friends, but who, nevertheless, surely, teaching and training.
We cannot afford, on this occasion, to enter
though silently, slip out of the ranks of industry,
and sink into dens of filth and corruption, or into the details of school arrangements, whether
directed to the teaching or to the training of the
seek shelter from them in the poorhouse.
The more thoughtful members of society may young. We simply implore the Commissioners
not be all of one mind as to the best means of to direct the inquiry upon which they are about
removing these causes of misery, but they are to enter, with a view to ascertain and to point out
beginning to suspect that, whatever room there the means by which schools may assist in forming
may be for difference of opinion in some respects, boys and girls into capable and well-conducted
the means adopted must comprise contrivances men and women, persuaded that those means are
for removing the ignorance more or less observable to be found if searched for in earnest.
Two opportunities have been lost; there is now
in those who bring suffering upon themselves.
Here we are brought back to the consideration a third. It will be sad, indeed, if, with the signs
of the means by which ignorance and prejudice, of progress in everything else, education is to
or ignorance disguised as knowledge, may be stand apart untouched and unimproved by the
diminished in the future. To contend that many increased powers which observation and experi
of the causes of misery above indicated do not ence have helped us to. There is little to encou
originate in ignorance, but in evil passions and rage us in this tripartite division of education into
depraved dispositions, is to start an objection upper, middle, and lower. But the middle plank
more plausible than valid. Eor all must admit is alone left to us, and we cling to it with the
that, to have right conduct and the disposition to tenacity and hopefulness of a shipwrecked sailor.
act upon the right and avoid the wrong, the dis An inquiry into middle-class schools by men who
tinctions between right and wrong must be under know what to aim at, may do a service which
stood. But to understand these distinctions, and their predecessors who inquired into the upper
to be able to follow them in all their ramifications, and lower left undone. All depends upon the
and in their various directions and minutest forms, end which the inquirers propose to themselves.
and to desire to seek for them, is what we mean We are anxious to learn, not merely whether
by knowledge and fondness for learning. A com middle-class education is efficient, or in what par
munity endowed with these qualifications will be ticulars it is deficient, but how far, whether effec
preserved from destitution in its more aggravated tive or ineffective, it is directed to the improvement
form, and also from the temptations to misconduct of society. If not so directed, its very inefficiency
which are inseparable from destitution; and the might be a merit.
children growing up in it, will be trained as well
Some years ago I happened to be among a
as taught in circumstances most favourable, both numerous party dining together, previous to a
for their dispositions and for their intelligence.
visit of inspection to an evening school attached
It seems idle to ask, looking at education from to a large industrial establishment in this metro
this point of view, when it should begin, or at what polis. The conversation naturally turned upon
age it may be expected to prove most effective. subjects connected with education, and, as will
As soon as external influences begin to operate in happen, fortunately in these days, doubts were
forming the disposition and in awakening the in expressed whether the character of the education
telligence, so soon should efforts be made to direct generally provided was as good as it might be.
those influences aright. At whatever age it may One of the guests grew warm and excited at some
be found that those efforts have not been made, at of the criticisms made upon what he evidently
that age, without a moment’s delay, should efforts held to be above criticism. He was a thriving
�8
MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATION.
merchant. He had three sons—one in his own
business, one at a university, and the third in the
army. He was the sublime of soaring middleclassism. The climax of his justification of edu
cation as it is, and for leaving it undisturbed, was
that the classics were the best basis for the edu
cation of the upper classes, and the Bible for that
of the lower. Another of the company, who had
been a silent listener to the conversation, here
asked diagonally across the table whether it was
meant, in thus reserving the classics for the rich,
and surrendering the Bible to the poor, to convey
an impression of the respective merits of profane
and sacred literature. This question, as may be
supposed, caused no little confusion to a man who
evidently spoke as if in authority. Of course, he
meant nothing of the kind. In fact, he made us
believe that he meant nothing at all.
Towards the close of the inspection which fol
lowed, our silent companion was requested to say
a few words to the lads assembled; and in less
than a quarter of an hour his. simple unpretend
ing talk, interspersed with questions, drew out
from them an expression of their ways of think
ing and feeling upon the duties which they had
to perform ; how they might injure or benefit
their employers, and what effect would be pro
duced upon themselves, according ps they did the
one or the other ; what wa^es they received, and
why they received neither more nor less, and how
they hoped, to receive more in future ; what the
use to them was of the school work in which they
had been engaged, and why their employers had
assisted them to it; whether it was easy for them
to save out of their small wages, and if not, why
they should make the attempt; how the large
capital, by means of which they were employed,
had been accumulated; and when people ought to
begin to form a habit of making provision out of
present earnings for future wants; whether the
trust reposed in them ever offered temptations to
do wrong; what effect the yielding to or resisting
such temptations would have upon the comfort
and prosperity of their employers, and what upon
their own and upon the building up of the dispo
sitions and character upon which their future
happiness depended.
It was gratifying to hear the warm expression
of thanks which, on the impulse of the moment,
our admirer of classical and biblical education
proffered to his troublesome interrogator. He
seemed to feel for the time that something more
might be done towards forming the intelligence
and dispositions of the young than to cram them
with words and phrases, whether extracted from
the classics or from the Bible. It was sad to think
how transient the favourable impression made
upon him was likely to be.
It might be said that an inquiry into schools
would not be complete if, after an examination
into the public schools and schools for the poor,
those for the middle classes had been passed over.
Let us hope that the future report upon middle
class schools will not leave the inquiry as incom
plete as before. Our impression is that, if the
inquiries already made had been conducted with
a view to test the efficiency of schools as auxili
aries in qualifying the young to distinguish right
from wrong, and in inspiring them with the feel
ing that their conduct, as well as their words,
ought to be an expression of their convictions,
the middle-class inquiry would be unnecessary.
Up to a certain age, the teaching and training
best for the children of the poor, is also best for
the children of the rich. Beyond that age, the
wealth of the parents determines the length of
time for which the children can be detained from
work to carry on further schooling. If, however,
our own judgment in this matter were overruled,
and we were driven to decide upon the merits of
schools for the children of the poor and the chil
dren of the rich, by different standards, we should
be disposed to judge somewhat in this way :—
Those schools for the children of the poorer
classes are the best which are most successful in
fitting them, and in preparing them to become fit
to preserve themselves from destitution.
Those schools for the children of the richer
classes are the best which are most successful in
fitting them, and in preparing them to become fit
to preserve themselves, in the expenditure of the
wealth which they will have no occasion to earn,
from frivolity, profligacy, and indifference to the
sufferings and helplessness of others.
We will not express the opinion which we have
formed of the merits of these two classes of schools,
estimated by these two tests which, it must be
admitted, are the very opposite of severe. The
Commissioners who have inquired into them,
have not favoured us with theirs. W e trust that
the Commissioners now about to inquire into
middle-class schools, will not be equally reticent.
These schools contain some children who will not
be called upon to earn the means of subsistence
among the many who will have partly, if not
wholly, to do so. We hope the Commissioners
will, at least, tell us how these schools stand the
two very humble tests which we suggest should be
applied to them, and if they come somewhat
ignominiously out of the trial, what changes will
enable them to stand similar tests more creditably
in future.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Middle class education: what to aim at, as well as how to aim
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Ellis, William [1832-1907.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: 6 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: Tentative date of publication from KVK. Printed in double columns. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[187-?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5183
G5686
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Middle class education: what to aim at, as well as how to aim), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Education
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/75e3b6258aa063016e67c00d5a898908.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=CnhVMMyjMoErzKG9VTv90o6nEmrKNRw6B-G0QsMKX9g2S-J8MKLV0YTgCdQK4pY3TyQBfKbqkLWswKgl7RGks4sfewQLUB2Njz-ko9eRZ2NBBGUNaBgurATTGw3-QR1Bd6VLV9q1FjPuNlpFWWh1tOOGdst7o0MNvhnnirYLvcjoeoDgtc1gyIWOUZtGKVrn-OthHrA4gHmM7tKpxktCBC7VVOXvcOKXVRW202iwiF3kI%7EdzH1lO34PE1fnj6XNju5M22gwbFvRDOQ8onSP5ESY%7EFmGoN3fclu2dpn1UEFB-0ybjJyqXbZAzJ7-ljh9zhLR2r5r%7ELIZf8vVNw%7ElVTQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
a39b5aa4e1b7aafecefcb4e0505e4610
PDF Text
Text
iftogal institution of <£reat Britain.
WEEKLY EVENING MEETING,
Friday, January 30, 1857.
u
William Pole, Esq. M.A. F.R.S. Treasurer and VicePresident, in the Chair.
Rev. F. D. Maurice, M.A. M.R.I.
Milton considered as a Schoolmaster.
Milton was an actual schoolmaster : his letter to Mr. Hartlib,
explains his idea of education. In the year 1639, after his return
from Italy, he took a house in St. Bride’s Churchyard; after
wards one in Aldersgate Street, for the instruction, first, of his two
nephews, and then of the children of some of his friends. Accord
ing to Dr. Johnson, several of Milton’s biographers have shown a
desire to shrink from this passage of his life altogether, and have
wished to represent his teaching as gratuitous. Johnson himself,
while he ridicules this folly, sneers at Milton for returning to Eng
land, because his countrymen were engaged (as he thought) in a
struggle for liberty, and then vapouring away his patriotism in a
private boarding-school.
4
The earliest biographer of Milton, Edward Phillips, his nephew
and pupil, is not open to the charge of regarding this occupation of
Milton as a disgrace, or of hinting that he undertook it without
remuneration. The others had probably had a notion that Alders
gate Street was not the place for a poet to dwell in, aud that his
work ought to be of a specially etherial kind. But Chaucer was
Comptroller of Petty Customs, in the port of London; Spenser
was born in East Smithfield, and died, it is to be feared, “for lack
of bread,” in King Street, Westminster; Shakespeare was busy at
the Globe Theatre during the most important years of his life;
and Milton himself was not only born at the Spread Eagle, in
Bread Street, not only received his education at St. Paul’s School,
but had evidently a lingering love for London, whenever for a short
time he was separated from it. There is clear evidence that he
preferred the Thames to the Cam. Even in the genial years that
�2
Rev. F. D. Maurice,
[Jan. 30,
he passed at his father’s house m Horton, when he was writing
“ L’Allegro,” “ Il Penseroso,” “ Comus,” “ Lycidas,” he was still
paying frequent visits to London, that he might perfect himself in
his father’s favourite study of music, and in the mathematics. And
finally, he left Italy, where he had passed so many months of
exquisite delight, and where he had received homage so unusual for
any dweller on this side of the Alps, as soon as he heard of the
probable meeting of the new (the Long) Parliament.
Johnson’s complaint is refuted by his own sensible opinion that
Milton taught for money, and not for amusement. Since he had
determined that he ought to oppose the measures of the Court, was
it not the duty of an honourable and prudent man to secure himself
against the bribes of the Court ? The patronage of Charles I. was
bestowed with liberality and discernment. The report that a young
man had come to London, who had received panegyrics from the
academies and from the most eminent men of letters in Italy, was
likely enough to reach the queen or the archbishop. There was
nothing in Milton’s previous career to render it improbable that he
might be induced to use his pen in their favour. Instead of de
nouncing court entertainments, he had written a mask; he could
be favourably spoken of by the family at Ludlow Castle. Money
was important to him, for he had tastes that were expensive. No
one would have felt more the charms of cultivated and refined
society. Might not his scheme of the private boarding-school then
be a very reasonable means of preventing him from vapouring
away his patriotism, first by making him independent of his pen ;
secondly, by making him a less creditable associate for those who
would have been glad to amuse themselves with his learning and
eloquence ?
We learn from Howell’s “ Londinopolis,” printed in 1657, that
Aldersgate Street “ resembled an Italian street more than any other
in London.” Phillips speaks of it as “ freer from noise than any
other.” Mr. Cunningham shows, in his Handbook, that it was the
residence of distinguished noblemen. Milton must have strained a
point to hire a house in such a situation. That he did so, is one
sign of the earnestness with which he entered upon his task. We
know, from his letter to Mr. Hartlib, that he regarded the building
in which the education was conducted as a part of the education
itself.
It is useless to speculate whether any of the friends to whom
his letters or his sonnets are addressed committed their sons or
kinsmen to bis care. The names of John and Edward Phillips are
all that have come down to us. Of these men, through the labours
of Mr. Godwin, we have more information than it is generally
possible to obtain respecting persons of their calibre. They were
the younger brethren of that “ fair infant whose death by a cough ”
is immortalised in one of Milton’s early poems. When his sister
married a second time, he took the boys into his house. Both
�1857.]
Milton considered as a Schoolmaster.
3
became industrious literateurs. Both, even before the Restoration,
became Royalists. Both for a time fell into the licentiousness
which so commonly accompanied that reaction. John Phillips
began with answering an anonymous reply to his uncle’s defence;
then wrote a vulgar satire upon Presbyterians ; became a travestier
of Virgil ; a dishonest translator of Don Quixote ; a hack of the
booksellers ; in one discreditable passage, a reviler of Milton.
No doubt the elevation of his uncle’s character may have ex
asperated the grovelling tendencies in him. If he had been under
the direction of a high-minded Royalist, he would probably
have become a self-willed Puritan. The flogging of Busby would
have been the most useful discipline for him. But he nowhere
attributes his disgust at Puritanism to Milton’s austerity. Edward
Phillips, who shared that disgust, proves such a notion to be impos
sible. Nearly the last of his long series of books was the biography
of his uncle. In it he recurs with affectionate reverence to the
education he had received in Aldersgate Street, gives an account
of that education, which shows that it embraced, as we might expect
it would, every kind of study; that the tone of the teaching
was noble, and that Milton knew when to unbend the bow as well as
to nerve it. Edward Phillips speaks with warmth, and something
of remorse, of the blessings which his school years might have been
to him if he had passed them aright.
Johnson, who knew nothing concerning the Phillipses, except
that one of them had written the “ Theatrum Poetarum,” speaks of
the small fruit which proceeded from the “wonder-working
academy ” in Aldersgate Street. The fruits may have been unripe
and unsatisfactory. Milton may have been disappointed in this as
in his other hopes ; other noble men have been so before and since.
No one ever doubted that his own Samson was the image of him
self ; that the strong warrior became the blind and despised
sufferer. But Samson was victorious in his death. There was a
<£ Paradise Regained ” as well as a “ Paradise Lost ” in Milton’s
history. His book on Education tells us what he learnt, and what
we may learn by his school experiments. He never pretended that
these worked any wonders ; he does not even allude to them in his
writings. His scheme of education certainly resembles in its prin
ciples that which Edward Phillips speaks of. It was not, there
fore, a mere paper scheme ; it referred to actual living boys, whom
he had seen and tried to form. But the scale of it is one which he
could never have attempted; and for aught that appears in the
letter, he may have been led to it as much by a sense of his
failures as by pride in his success.
In England we have grammar schools, and what are called
commercial schools. In Germany there are gymnasia and real
schools. The idea of the letter to Mr. Hartlib is, that this division
is unnecessary and artificial, that the knowledge of words is best
obtained in union with the knowledge of things ; that each is helpful
�4
Rev. R. D. Maurice,
[Jan. 30,
and necessary to the other. His maxim that “ language is but the
instrument conveying to us things useful to be known,” might lead
us to think that he did not regard language as a direct means of
culture. This would be a hasty inference. He looked upon the
reading of good books as the best and only means of obtaining a
knowledge of language. He protests, therefore, against “ the pre
posterous exaction of forcing the empty wits of children to compose
themes, verses, and orations,” as a way to obtain a knowledge of
the language. But the author of a host of Latin elegiacs, the Latin
correspondent of foreign courts, is not so inconsistent with himself
as to despise such exercises. He regards them as “ the acts of ripest
judgment, and the final work of a head filled by long reading and
observing, with elegant maxims, and copious invention.” This is
not the language of a rebel against scholarship, but of a severe and
fastidious scholar. His compassion for boys is combined With horror
for their solecisms.
Milton’s idea of education is strictly Baconian : not in this
sense, that he had Bacon’s preference for physical studies to humane
or moral studies ; but in this, that he protests against that method
which starts from abstractions and conclusions of the intellect, and
maintains that all true method must begin from the objects of sense.
He may not have been well read in the “ Novum Organum; ”
but he could not have applied its maxims more strictly in a new
direction than he has done. Possibly his protests against making
logic and metaphysics the introduction to knowledge in the Univer
sities, when they ought to be the climax of knowledge, were more
suitable to his own day, when boys went to Cambridge or Oxford
at fifteen or twelve, than to ours. But if it be so, we ought to be
very careful that our youths do acquire the early experimental
training that he recommends, before they venture upon the higher
and more abstract lore : otherwise we may have to complain, as he
had, that “ they grow into a hatred and contempt of learning,” and
that when “ poverty or youthful years call them importunately their
several ways, they hasten to an ambitious and mercenary, or igno
rantly zealous divinity,” or to the mere “ trade of law,” or to “ state
affairs, with souls so unprincipled in virtue and generous breeding,
that court shifts and tyrannous aphorisms appear to them the highest
points of wisdom,” while “ some of a more airy spirit live out their
days in feasts and jollity.”
Passing from his principles to his application of them, we may
find abundant excuses for criticism, and, if we covet the reputation
of wits, for ridicule. He wished his college to be both school and
university; the studies therefore proceed in an ascending scale,
from the elements of grammar to the highest science, as well as to
the most practical pursuits. The younger boys are to be especially
trained to a clear and distinct pronunciation, “ as like as may be to
the Italian.” Books are to be given them like Cebes or Plutarch,
which will “ win them early to the love of virtue and true labour.”
�1857.]
Milton considered as a Schoolmaster.
5
In some hour of the day they are to be taught the rules of arith
metic and the elements of geometry. The evenings are to be taken
up “ with the easy grounds of religion, and the story of scripture.”
In the next stage they begin to study books on agriculture, Cato,
Varro, and Columella. These books will make them in time
masters of any ordinary Latin prose, and will be at the same time
“ occasions of inciting and enabling them hereafter to improve the
tillage of their country.” The use of maps and globes is to be
learnt from modern authors; but Greek is to be studied, as soon
as the grammar is learnt, in the “ historical physiology of Aristotle
and Theophrastus.” Latin and Greek authors together are to teach
the principles of arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and geography.
Instruction in architecture, fortification, and engineering, follows.
In natural philosophy we ascend through the history of meteors,
minerals, plants, and living creatures to anatomy. Anatomy leads
on to the study of medicine.
The objections to some of these plans are too obvious to need
any notice. No one will suppose that natural philosophy is to be
learnt from Seneca, or agriculture from Columella. Every one
will admit readily that his own amazing powers of acquisition led
Milton to overrate the powers of ordinary boys. But it would
seem a poor reason for not availing ourselves of the hints that he
gives us, that we have means of following them out which he had
not: a poorer reason still for not profiting by the warnings which
he gives us against filling our pupils’ heads with a mere multitude
of words, that he perhaps asked them to take in more both of words
and things than they would be able comfortably to carry. If he is
an idealist, he is certainly also a stern realist. He would have us
always conversant with facts rather than with names. He aims at
the useful as directly as the most professed utilitarian. The pupils
are to have “ the helpful experiences of hunters, fowlers, fishermen,
shepherds, gardeners, and apothecaries,” to assist them in their
natural studies. These studies are to increase their interest in
Hesiod, in Lucretius, and in the Georgies of Virgil. The incentive
for studying medicine is, that they may perhaps “ save armies by
frugal and expenseless means, and not let the healthy and stout
bodies of young men under them rot away for want of this (medi
cal) discipline.”
Two other objections have been raised by Dr. Johnson against
this scheme of education. The first will, probably, not have great
weight with the members of the Royal Institution, for it turns upon
the comparative worthlessness of the physical sciences. The other
is expressed in some very elegant sentences, maintaining that the
formation of a noble and useful character is the true end of educa
tion. One cannot help deploring that maxims so good and welldelivered, should be so utterly thrown away. They are absurdly
inapplicable to Milton’s letter. It is throughout a complaint that
the existing education was not sufficiently directed to the purpose of
�6
Milton considered as a Schoolmaster.
[Jan. 30, 1857/
forming brave men and good citizens. It is throughout an assertion
that that is the only purpose which any education ought to aim at.
The classics are not resorted to for the purpose of forming a style,
but of instilling manly thoughts, which a higher wisdom may purify
and make divine. Because the Englishman is a poor creature when
he is busy with abstractions, and the strongest of all when he is
dealing jvith realities, Milton would have him trained in these.
All exercises and all recreations are to contribute to the same end.
The pupils are to learn “the exact use of their weapon,” both
as “ a good means of making them healthy, nimble, and well in
breath, and of inspiring them with a gallant and fearless courage,
which being tempered with seasonable precepts of true fortitude
and patience, shall turn into a native and heroic valour, and make
them hate the cowardice of doing wrong.” In their very sports
they are to learn the rudiments of soldiership.
Music is not recommended as a graceful recreation to a few,
but as an instrument of making all the pupils “ gentle from rustic
passions and distempered passions.”
Certainly whatever the errors of Milton’s system may have
been, its ends were as noble and as practical as those of any that
was ever conceived. An institution trained, as this is, to profit by
the experiments of honest seekers in natural science, even if those
experiments prove failures, will not despise the experiments of a
moralist and a patriot who may have committed mistakes which the
most ignorant may detect, who had a righteousness of purpose
which the wisest will be most ready to admire and most eager to
possess.
[F. D. M.]
��ft
. .<
flBSk
<
�I
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Milton considered as a schoolmaster
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Maurice, F.D.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 6 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: Lecture delivered at the weekly evening meeting of the Royal Institution of Great Britain on Friday, January 30th, 1857. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Royal Institution of Great Britain
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1857
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5560
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<p class="western"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" name="graphics1" width="88" height="31" border="0" alt="88x31.png" /><br />This work (Milton considered as a schoolmaster), identified by <span style="color:#0000ff;"><span lang="zxx"><u>Humanist Library and Archives</u></span></span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</p>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Conway Tracts
Education
John Milton
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/47de5e0df331a120e9e67fff863cd239.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ATUuCGHE%7ECgZkyWSOx92NtcQRtse0bxkuW1-pAyyPW9fsjLzGZObUaR9pntsiigbx7vr%7EEN5z3gBm21DhAQ47cPzQAvASCWAmpGN0Q31tXaOiCThm9ND4D9sVgKi-qbMSYruQQyR%7ES93D0AzrYydH0iXix07eLu5mACKbgisvJOaklVSFE5-QuUZ-mf7ChRuR1ai4WwtykvW4v45W7DQEyJxiwSbbT2LpVQS4uUJJQ386dIIJnvBRt0rp7ncOIJQHHPDCRzHQc-2kcNZMulwKUayVJDDUsEnHPEIjPhDlrwYexpnoE6vjCdniY23nVnrD57TnAwEv90DFUcPSb8IZg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
2d2beec380895e34e1c2ace67b1ff0d1
PDF Text
Text
’ I M.AG
National Secular Society Tract
No. 6.
Mr. RAMSAY MACDONALD on
SECULAR
EDUCATION.
Report of a Speech delivered in support of
Secular Education at a meeting held under the
auspices of the Secular Education League, in
the St. James1 Hall, London, December io, 1908.
z | AHE case for the secular solution is a logical
I
case, it is a just case. This is a question
which concerns more particularly the
children of the working classes. I am bound to say
that nothing made me'feel so1 disgusted as when I
listened in the House of Commons, the other day, to
gentlemen whose feet had never crossed the threshold
of a Board School, who told us about the tre
mendous amount of concern they had for the quality
of the moral and religious teaching given to other
people’s children. All I can say is, I wish they would
look after their own children. If they had only
shown the same anxiety for their own children and
seen that they were well educated in morality and re
ligion, well bred, trained in the knowledge of what
was right and wrong, and had left us to do the same
with our children, modern society would have been a
much holier affair than it is to-day.
I am not
one of those who believe in peace at any price. I am
in favour of a just and lasting peace, a peace that has
been secured after the State and Church make up
their minds to look after their own business. There
is nothing more preposterous than that the State
should attempt to do the work of the Church unless
it is that the Church should actually expect the State
to do its work. Let us suppose that we are all pro
foundly religious and that we are simply burning
with anxiety to get the minds of our children, using
the word in its very best sense, converted. The
children have religious instruction for three quarters
of an hour each day, and we are going to say : ‘ What
�a blessed religious exercise they have had. How en
lightening it has been to their souls.’ Three quarters
of an hour’s instruction in Jewish history—very
ancient—and the child might say : ‘ Thank God, if I
did not know that David was the King of Judah, I
might have been a thief.’ We have a right to test
education by results.
We hear a great deal about
science nowadays. I would like to hear Mr. Hal
dane, who is a leader in science, give his genuine
opinion as a scientist, from the point of view of a
man who believes in the scientific method, as to the
effect of Bible reading in the schools from the re
ligious point of view. Let us begin on a secular
basis. Let us secularize our schools. Let us bring
in, not Bills to allow sectarian strife, but Bills to> in
crease the efficiency of education.
Let us make a
real beginning in the State care of children. Let us
try to devise some means by which the wisdom,
knowledge and power and the financial strength of
the State, can build up a physical, intellectual and
moral character in our children so that when they are
no longer children they shall be powerful men and
women, prepared to face life in all its aspects. Bring
in Bills to do that and peace will naturally follow.
If we could get our education ministers to tear out
from the official volumes, all records of those round
table conferences and barterings, and forget them,
and simply go, day after day, to our schools, see the
children, see the teachers and the buildings, and go
from those schools to' the factories and workshops and
see the conditions under which the youth of the
country has to work, and with that experience go
back to the conference room, and construct an Edu
cation Bill which would enable them to meet those
conditions, then you would have an education of the
right kind. You would have peace, you would have
a settlement which was not a surrender, and the
whole country would benefit enormously as the re
sult of those efforts.”
/
Printed and Published by The National Secular Society,
62 Farringdon Street, E.C.4.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Mr Ramsay Macdonald on secular education : report of a speech delivered in support of secular education at a meeting held under the auspices of the Secular Education League, in the St. James' Hall, London, December 10, 1908
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Macdonald, Ramsay
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: [2] p. ; 19 cm.
Series: National Secular Society tract 6
Notes: Printed by The National Secular Society.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
National Secular Society
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1908
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5481
Subject
The topic of the resource
Secularism
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<p class="western"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br />This work (Mr Ramsay Macdonald on secular education : report of a speech delivered in support of secular education at a meeting held under the auspices of the Secular Education League, in the St. James' Hall, London, December 10, 1908), identified by <span style="color:#0000ff;"><span lang="zxx"><u>Humanist Library and Archives</u></span></span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</p>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Education
Secularism
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1eb300809101f85e15731cf61aee4122.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=JjvQOZJbdNtMZ8UcMb7rh%7EcvXMOG6D-7JgtUQmx0a5jFhwYIBv9RPsOtwDGvzJ9nDYCq6foPDDk7ZFP6oK8iQGSkgqI-2zxxCCKgFEur4PtjuDQHsBV1Nf92C4BlKLjcmFf1TY1gwVHHO0GzjTxEPzCI-YNOn5f2SOgR0miKSWIZRDW8tRgqWwtxrddjHAgh8EepREp-bhv9qWO1IqklXt33JWz3ApWWag3Jiqipi7poQrzHmvVSPD4axtM-KO96EaA5fI5cix9NY2rCxyCDGToo81Lcf2d-NpJOVyPJRLszV3aGUuPl50629%7EQrjrmA2Cqul4nWAySkb3nohq6zPw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
e8b3ed319e01ece73942cf575769712a
PDF Text
Text
REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS
APPOINTED TO
INQUIRE
INTO
THE
CONDITION
OF
*
THE
PRINCIPAL
PUBLIC SCHOOLS:
fir
A PAPER READ AT THE MQNTHLY EVENING MEETING OF THE
COLLEGE OF PRECEPTORS, MAY 11th, 1864.
BY
W. B. HODGSON, Esq., LL.D., F.C.P.
“ Falsa est querela paueissimis hominibus vim percipiendi quae tradantur esse concessam; plerosque
vero laborem et tempora tarditate ingenii perdere. Nam contra plures reperias et faciles in excogitando,
et ad discendum promptos. Quippe id est homini naturale: ac sicut aves ad volatum, equi ad cursum, ad
saevitiam ferae gignuntur. ita nobis propria est mentis agitatio atque solertia; unde origo animi coelestis
creditur. Hebetes vero et indociles non magis secundum naturam hominis eduntur, quam prodigiosa cor
pora et monstris insignia : sed hi pauci admodum. Fuerit argumentum, quod in pueris elucet spes plurimorum: quae cum emoritur aetate, manifestum est non naturam defecisse, sed curam."—M. F. Quinctilian.
Inst. Orat. lib. 1. c. 1.
“ Those who, in their own minds, their health, or their fortunes, feel the cursed effects of a wrong
education, wonld do well to consider they cannot better make amends for what was amiss in themselves
than by preventing the same in their posterity.”—Bishop Berkeley, The Minute Philosopher, Dial. vii.§34.
“ An enormous sacrifice of time is made to the study of dead languages, and we ought to reap from them
a great and proportionate advantage.”—Rev. W. Sewell, M.A., “ Essay on the Cultivation of the Intellect
by the Study of Dead Languages.” Lond. 1820. p. 297.
“ I think that, from some cause or other, the success of the work has not been in proportion to the
pains bestowed upon it.”—Rev. E. Balston, Head-Master of Eton School, “ Report of Commissioners,”
vol. iii, p. 117.
SECOND EDITION.
LONDON:
W. AYLOTT & SON, 8, PATERNOSTER ROW.
1864.
Price Sixpence.
�" In this progressive country, we neglect all that knowledge in which there is progress, to devote
ourselves to those branches in which we are scarcely, if at all, superior to our ancestors. In this
practical country, the knowledge of all that gives power over nature, is left to be picked up by chance on
a man’s way through life. In this religious country, the knowledge of God’s works forms no part of
the education of the people,—no part even of the accomplishments of a gentleman.”—Lord Ashburton,
Speech at a Meeting of Schoolmasters at Winchester, 16th Dec., 1853.
"It is a most important truth, and one which requires, at this day, to be most earnestly enforced,
that it is by the study of facts, whether relating to nature or to man, and not by any pretended cultiva
tion of the mind by poetry, oratory, and moral or critical dissertations, that the understandings of
mankind in general will be most improved, and their views of things rendered most accurate.”—Dr.
Arnold, in Thompson's “Hist, of Rom. Lit.” 1852. p. 379. (Encycl. Metrop)
" It . would indeed be wonderful if a study of the poet’s lines were of more value than the study of
those things that inspired them: and if the words of men had in them more spiritual nourishment than
the works of the Creator.”—Prof. Jas. Nicol, “ On the Study of Nat. Hist.” 1853. p. 30.
..." 0 necessario confessare che piil presto sia degno il subbietto che la lingua; perchO il subbietto
0 fine, e la lingua 0 mezzo.”—Lorenzo de’ Medici.
" For one man who is fitted for the study of words, fifty are fitted for the study of things, and were
intended to have a perpetual, simple, and religious delight in watching the processes, or admiring the
creatures, of the natural universe. Deprived of this source of pleasure, nothing is left to them but
ambition or dissipation; and the vices of the upper classes of Europe are, I believe, chiefly to be attributed
to this single cause.”—John Ruskin.
“ Our present system, on account of the preposterous manner in which it attempts, to exalt the old
learning, is a direct cause of its being unjustly neglected, decried, and undervalued.”—Rev. F. B. Zincke,
“ School of the Future.” 1852. p. 78.
“ When I considered the former days of my youth, and the years of affliction, which had been many;
when I was driven on circularly in Latin bondage, as a horse in a mill, continually moving, but making
no progress; or, as a Jonas in tne whale’s belly, making long voyages, but seeing nothing about me, ana
often threatened by hard task-masters, who made me serve with rigour; I did, in compliance with
the dictates of reason, and with my own inclinations, resolve that this boy should, from those mis
fortunes, reap some advantage, and gain some knowledge, by (what I apprehended to be) the mistakes
and blunders of other men.”—J. T. Phillips, Preceptor to his R. H. Prince William, Duke of Cumber
land, “ A Compendious Way of Teaching Ancient and Modern Languages'' &c. 3rd Ed. 1728. p. 57.
“ Je croyais avoir d6ja donnd assez de temps aux langues, et m6me aussi it la lecture des livres
anciens, et i leurs histoires, et h leurs fables; car c’est quasi le m6me de converser avec ceux des aut.res
siOcles que de voyager. Il est bon de savoir quelque chose des moeurs des divers peuples, afin de juger
des ndtres plus sainiement.......... Mais lorsqu’on emploie trop de temps h voyager, on devient enfin
stranger en son pays; et lorsqu’on est trop curieux des choses qui se pratiquaient aux siCcles passes, on
demeure fort ignorant de celles qui se pratiquent en celui-ci.”—Descartes, “ Discours de la Methode.”
1637. (Alas! more than 200 years ago!)
“ Il semble que nous devons accommoder nos dtudes fi l’dtat present de nos moeurs, et dtudier les
choses qui sont a’usage dans le monde, puisqu’on ne peut changer cet usage pour l’accommoder h l’ordre
de nos etudes.”—L’Abbe Fleury, “ Traite du Choix des Etudes.” 1685.
" Is it not more probable that the proper and legitimate means of training the intellect co-existed
with the intellect itself, not since the period of the rise and fall of the Greek and Roman empires, but
since the beginning of the world ?”—Angus Macpherson, “ English Education.” Glasgow. 1854.
"Am I wrong in believing that the tendencies of the age are in favour of decreasing, rather than in
creasing, the amount of time bestowed upon classical scholarship P”—Dr. R. G. Latham, “ On the Study
of Language.” 1855. p. 112.
“ The father of Montaigne has observed that the tedious time which we moderns employ in acquiring
the language of the ancient Greeks and Romans, which cost them nothing, is the principal reason why
we cannot arrive at that grandeur of soul and perfection of knowledge that was in them.... The ac
quirements of science may be termed the armour of the mind; but that armour would be worse than
useless, that cost us all we had, and left us nothing to defend.”—Rev. C. Colton, “ Latonf &c.
�ON THE
REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS ON
PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
The sight of this Report, in four bulky
volumes, which weigh above ten pounds
avoirdupois, may well serve instead of
preface. Its contents are far too ample
and too various to allow me to do more
than call attention to one of its many
aspects; and even so, all our time will be
too short. The Commission included in
its scope the nine following schools:—
Eton, Winchester, Westminster, the
Charterhouse, St. Paul’s, Merchant Tay
lors’, Harrow, Rugby, and Shrewsbury.
The inquiry was divided into three
parts :—“ The first relating to the pro
perty and income of the several schools;
the second, to the administration and
management of them; the third, to the
system and course of study pursued in
them, to the religious and moral training
of the boys, their discipline, and general
education.” (p. 1.) Of these three heads,
it is exclusively the third, and even that
by no means thoroughly, that I wish this
evening to treat; looking less to the reli
gious and moral training of the boys,
than to “ the system and course of study,”
and its ascertained results, especially in
that department of study which claims
the lion’s share of time and effort. My
comments may be best arranged under
three heads: 1st, The Report of the Com
missioners regarding results; 2nd, The
evidence on which it rests; 3rd, The re
commendations of the Commissioners.
It ought to be further explained, that,
besides the general Report and general
recommendations of the Commissioners,
there is given a full and elaborate Report
on each of the nine schools, with further
recommendations specially applicable to
each. I propose, however, to confine
myself entirely to the general Report and
general recommendations. It is impor
tant to bear this restriction in mind, be
cause it is difficult, perhaps impossible,
to avoid injustice in speaking collectively
of nine schools which differ from each
other in not a few respects. It may be
not unnatural, as it is certainly not un
common, to take, as the typical repre
sentative of all these schools, Eton, the
most richly endowed, the most nume
rously attended, the most aristocratic
(though also the most backward and in
efficient) of them all. But much that is
true of the plethoric Eton may be very
far from true, say, of the more sparedieted Shrewsbury, the eminence of
which, in spite of difficulties, is an in
structive fact. At the same time, any
B
�4
such unintentional and inevitable injus
tice belongs rather to the Commissioners
than to me. It is on them and their
authorities that I almost exclusively rely.
I. The Times (of 28th March, 1864) thus
condenses the Commissioners’ Report on
the actual working of the present system,
so far as relates to our present purpose;
and this resume will probably be accepted
as less prejudiced, and so more trust
worthy, than any that I could make.
“ In one word, we may say that they find
it to be a failure—a failure even if tested
by those better specimens, not exceeding one
third of the whole, who go up to the Univer
sities. Though a very large number of these
have literally nothing to show for the results
of their school-hours from childhood to man
hood, but a knowledge of Latin and Greek,
with a little English and arithmetic, we have
here the strongest testimony that their know
ledge of the former is most inaccurate, and
their knowledge of the latter contemptible.
A great deal is taught under these two heads,
but very little is learned under either. A
small proportion become brilliant composers
and finished scholars, if they do not manage
to pick up a good deal of information for
themselves; but the great multitude cannot
construe an easy author at sight, or write
Latin prose without glaring mistakes, or
answer simple questions in grammar, or get
through a problem in the first two books of
Euclid, or apply the higher rules of arith
metic. A great many, amounting to about a
third at Christ Church, and a fifth at Exeter
College, fail to pass the common Matricula
tion Examination. Not less than a fourth
are plucked for their Little-go, a most ele
mentary examination in the very subjects
which we have just mentioned; and of the
rest many are only enabled to pass by the
desperate exertions of College Tutors and
‘ coaches.’ We need not follow this class of
public school men through the remainder of
their University career, since the duty of
teaching has then devolved upon others; but
for their shortcomings at entrance the schools
are mainly responsible. Most of them, says
an Oxford tutor of great experience and
*
judgment, ‘are persons who were allowed
as boys to carry their idleness with them
from form to form, to work below their
powers, and merely to move with the crowd;
they are men of whom something might have
been made, but now it is too late ; they are
grossly ignorant, and have contracted slovenly
habits of mind.’”*
A few citations from the Report itself
will serve to test the general accuracy of
the resume just given. The Commis
sioners say (vol. i. p. 26):—
“From the evidence the following con
clusions appear to follow:—That boys who
ha/ve capacity and industry enough to work for
distinction, are, on the whole, well taught in
the article o£ classical scholarship, at the
public schools; but that they occasionally
show a want of accuracy in elementary
knowledge, either from not having been well
grounded, or from having been suffered to
forget what they have learned; that the
average of classical knowledge among young
men leaving school for college is low; that in
arithmetic and mathematics, in general in
formation, and in English,f the average is
lower still, but is improving; that of the time
spent at school by the generality of boys,
much is absolutely thrown away as regards
intellectual progress, either from ineffective
teaching, from the continued teaching of
subjects in which they cannot advance, or
from idleness, or from a combination of these
causes ; that in arithmetic and mathematics
the public schools are specially defective, and
that this observation is not confined to any
particular class of boys. It is impossible to
misapprehend the effect which this state of
things produces, and must produce, on the
studies of the Universities. In the case of
those who do not read for honours, at all
events, the work of the first two years is
simply school-work—work proper for the
upper forms of a large school. The usual
age of matriculation at Oxford (no record is
kept at Cambridge) is between 18 and 19.
* “ The system (of public schools) has pro
duced men most remarkable for their great public
utility and eminence; but on the other hand it
appears that after spending a great many years in
these educational institutions, the large mass come
out with a great knowledge of cricket, and a very
good knowledge of rowing, with only that sort of
Latin and Greek which is perfectly useless in after
life, and entirely destitute of mathematical, scien
tific elementary truth, a knowledge of history and
their own country, which it must be admitted are
desirable, if possible, to attain.’’—Earl Gran
ville, Chancellor of the University of London.
{Times, 12th May, 1864.)
t It must never be forgotten that one main ob
ject for which boys learn the dead languages is to
teach them to use their own. (Report, vol. i. p. 15.)
“The composition of Greek prose and Greek
verse is a poor substitute for the faculty of trans
lating such authors as Pindar and Thucydides flu
ently into elegant English.”—Rev. C. W. Sand
ford, M.A., Senior Censor of Christ Church,
* The Rev. James Riddell, Fellow and Tutor Master of Rugby from 1841 to 1847 ; in Report,
vol. ii. p. 11. 1864.
of Balliol College.
�5
Of 430 who matriculated in 1862, only 22, or
5 per cent., were below 18 years of age; while
209, or 49 per cent., had attained the age of
19. It follows that, with a great mass of
men, school education—and that education
one which barely enables them at last to con
strue a Latin and Greek book, poet and
orator, chosen by themselves, to master three
books of Euclid, and solve a problem in
quadratic equations—is prolonged to the age
of 20 or 21.”* (p. 24.)
“ Natural science, with such slight excep
tions as have been noticed, is practically ex
cluded from the education of the higher
classes in England. Education is, in this
respect, narrower than it was three centuries
ago; whilst science has prodigiously ex
tended her empire, has explored immense
tracts, divided them into provinces, intro
duced into them order and method, and made
them accessible to all. This exclusion is, in
our view, a plain defect and a great practical
evil. It narrows unduly and injuriously the
mental training of the young, and the know
ledge, interests, and pursuits of men in maturer life. Of the large number of men who
have little aptitude or taste for literature,
there are many who have an aptitude for
science, especially for science which deals,
not with abstractions, but with external and
sensible objects; how many such there are
can never be known, as long as the only edu
cation given at schools is purely literary ; but
that such cases are not rare or exceptional,
can hardly be doubted by any one who has
observed either boys or men. Nor would it
answer, were it true, to say that such persons
are sure to find their vocation, sooner or later.
But this is not true. We believe that many
pass through life without useful employment,
and without the wholesome interest of a
favourite study, for want of an early intro
duction to. one for which they are really fit.
It is not, however, for such cases only, that
an early introduction to natural science is
desirable. It is desirable surely, though not
necessary, for all educated men. Its value as
a means of opening the mind and disciplining
the faculties, is recognised by all who have
taken the trouble to acquire it, whether men
of business or of leisure. It quickens and
cultivates directly the faculty of observation,
which in very many persons lies almost
dormant through life, the power of accurate
and rapid generalisation, and the mental
habit of method and arrangement; it accus
toms young persons to trace the sequence of
* It is “beyond doubt that not one of these
nine schools sends as many as half of its boys to
the Universities, and that in the case of most of
them the proportion is much less than one-third.
These proportions should be borne in mind in
considering the fitness of the system of instruction
at these schools for the end in view.” (p. 27.)
cause and effect; it familiarises them with a
kind of reasoning which interests them, and
which they can promptly comprehend; and
it is, perhaps, the best corrective for that in
dolence which is the vice of half-awakened
minds, and which shrinks from any exertion
that is not, like an effort of memory, merely
mechanical. With sincere respect for the
opinions of the eminent schoolmasters who
differ from us in this matter, we are con
vinced that the introduction of the elements
of natural science into the regular course of
study is desirable, and we see no sufficient
reason to doubt that it is practicable.” (p. 32.)
The length of this citation will, I trust,
be justified by its almost inestimable im
portance. It exposes one of the most
striking omissions in ordinary school
teaching, especially of the richer classes—
an omission which not only is greatly to
be deplored on its own account, but
which goes far to frustrate the attempt
to teach even what is included. Vainly
can it be affirmed that natural science is
already taught in many of these schools.
It may figure in programmes; it may be
made the subject of an occasional lecture
during, probably, the intervals of time
assigned to play; but that it is systemati
cally taught, as other subjects are, and as
it must be if any good is to be effected, is
quite unproved. Better that it should
*
not be taught at all, than that it should
be so taught as to furnish an argument
against its admission into schools on a
reasonable footing.
“ It is clear that there are many boys
whose education can hardly be said to have
* Viscount Boringdon, when examined regard
ing Eton, thus replies:—“Lord Clarendon:—
‘ Natural science is, I believe, wholly unattended
to ?’—‘ Entirely.’ ‘ Occasionally there are lec
tures given ; a lecturer comes down from London,
and lectures on natural science ?’—‘ Yes.’ ‘ Are
they much attended to ?’—‘ Yes ; they are a good
deal attended to; it is with boys who have nothing
to do in the evening; once a week, boys, who have
nothing to do in the evenings, go there, but I do
not think they attend much to them; a certain
number do, but I think that most come a great
deal for making a row.’ ‘ Are the lectures gene
rally of a popular kind? are they good lectures ?’
—‘ Yes.’ ‘ Lecturers entitled to command atten
tion, which they do not get?’—‘ Certainly.’ ” (Vol.
iii. p. 257.) After this, can anything be more evi
dent than that physical science cannot be taught in
schools 1
B2
�6
begun till they enter, at the age of twelve or
thirteen, or even later, a school containing
several hundreds, where there can be com
paratively little of that individual teaching
which a very backward boy requires.” (p. 40.)
At first sight, this evil may seem to be
chargeable, not on the public schools, but
on the preparatory schools, or on the
parents, with whom the Commissioners
“ do not hesitate to say that the fault
chiefly rests.” But a strict entrance
examination, such as the Commissioners
themselves recommend, and such as it is
the duty, as well as the right and the
interest (rightly viewed) of the public
schools to institute, would very speedily
abate this grievance, which now aggra
vates, much more than it excuses, their
inefficiency.
.
It is the office of education,” say
the Commissioners, (p. 30,) “ not only to dis
cipline some of the faculties, but to awaken,
call out, and exercise them all, so far as this
can be usefully done, in boyhood ; to awaken
tastes that may be developed in after life; to
impart early habits of reading, thought, and
observation; and to furnish the mind with
such knowledge as is wanted at the outset of
life. A young man is not well educated—
and, indeed, not educated at all—who cannot
reason, or observe, or express himself easily
and correctly, and who is unable to bear his
part in cultivated society, from ignorance of
things which all who mix in it are assumed
to be acquainted with. He is not well edu
cated if all his information is shut up within
one narrow circle, and he has not been
taught, at least, that beyond what he has been
able to acquire lie great and varied fields of
knowledge, some of which he may afterwards
explore, if he has inclination and opportunity
to do so. The kind of knowledge which is
necessary or useful, and the best way of
exercising and disciplining the faculties (?),
must vary, of course, with the habits and re
quirements of the age and society in which his
life is to be spent.............. Hence, no system of
instruction can be framed which will not re
quire modification from time to time. The
highest and most useful office of education is
certainly to train and discipline; but it is
not the only office. And we cannot but re
mark that, whilst in the busy world too great
a value perhaps is sometimes set upon the
actual acquisition of knowledge, and too little
upon that mental discipline which enables
men to acquire and turn it to the best ac
count, there is also a tendency, which is the
very reverse of this, and which is among the
besetting temptations of the ablest school
masters ; and that if very superficial men may
be prodmeed by one of these infi/uences, very
ignorant men are sometimes produced by the
other.” (p. 30.)
“ If a youth, after four or five years spent
at school, quits it at 19, unable to construe an
easy bit of Latin or Greek without the help
of a Dictionary, or to write Latin grammati
cally, almost ignorant of geography and of
the history of his own country, unacquainted
with any modern language but his own, and
hardly competent to write English correctly,
to do a simple sum, or stumble through an
easy proposition of Euclid, a total stranger to
the laws which govern the physical world,
and to its structure, with an eye and hand
unpractised in drawing, and without knowing
a note of music, with an uncultivated mind,
and no taste for reading or observation, his
intellectual education must certainly be ac
counted a failure, though there may be no
fault to find with his principles, character, or
manners. We by no means intend to repre
sent this as a type of the ordinary product of
English public-school education; but speak
ing both from the evidence we have received
and from opportunities of observation open
to all, we must say that it is a type much
more common than it ought to be, making
ample allowance for the difficulties before re
ferred to, and that the proportion of failures
is, therefore, unduly large.......... The school
has absolute possession of the boy during four
or five years, the most valuable years of pupil
age, the time when the powers of apprehension
and memory are brightest, when the faculty
of observation is quick and lively, and he is
forming his acquaintance with the various
objects of knowledge. Something, surely,
may be done during that time in the way, not
of training alone, but of positive acquisition,
and the school is responsible for turning it to
the best account.” (p. 31.)
These passages may, and indeed must,
suffice to indicate the point of view from
which the Commissioners regard these
schools, the standard by which they try
their results, and the degree in which
their expectations have been fulfilled or
disappointed.
Before we proceed to cite a small part
of the evidence in support of these very
grave strictures, let me remind you, first,
that the Commissioners are not the ene
mies, but the friends, of the public-school
system—most of them, if not all, having
been themselves brought up under one or
other of its forms,—and that their purpose
is to amend, not to destroy; 2ndly, that
�these institutions are, for the most part,
richly endowed, venerable from their
antiquity and the associations with indi
vidual greatness which cling to their
very stones, and amply represented in
both houses of the Legislature, as in all
the upper walks of social life I 3rdly, that
their intimate connexion with the Church
renders them in reality a branch of the
great ecclesiastical organization of the
country; 4thly, that they are superin
tended, in the main, by the ablest and
most accomplished men whom, within
the limits of the Church, it is possible to
find; that the masters are, in general,
handsomely paid, and not unfrequently
exchange the ferule for the crozier, and
still more frequently retire from the tur
moil of the schoolroom to some not un
dignified church-living. The concur
rence of all these circumstances ought
surely to favour the development and
diffusion of the highest and widest cul
ture, if only the wit and the will existed,—
the wit to know in what true education
consists, and the will to carry this know
ledge into practical effect. Terribly deepseated must the evil be which goes so far
to, neutralize all these seemingly great
advantages, and to make the results of all
this vast mechanism so miserably meagre,'
on the admission of even its best friends!
II. The evidence on which the Com
missioners base their conclusions is too
extensive to permit, and too uniform to
require, many extracts here. The Rev.
C. W. Sandford, M.A., Senior Censor of
Christ Church, Oxford, thus writes:—
“ The head boys come well prepared from
school. The standard in our class examina
tions in classics is consequently high. This
is not affected by the state in which the
average boys come to the University. The
other studies may suffer in some degree...........
Some fifty or sixty young men matriculate at
Christ Church in the course of each year.
Of these perhaps ten will read for honours in
classics. Such men would be able to construe
with tolerable correctness a new passage from
any Latin or Greek author, translate a piece
of easy English prose into tolerable Latin,
and answer correctly simple grammatical
and etymological questions in Latin and
Greek. The other forty or fifty would not.
In fact, very few of those who are merely
candidates for matriculation can construe
with accuracy a piece from an author whom
they profess to have read. We never try
them in an unseen passage. It would be
useless to do so. They are usually examined
in Virg. JLn. I—V, and Homer, II. I—V.
But if they have not read Homer orVirgil, we
examine them in whatever authors they have
read last.... We do not test their knowledge
of ancient or modern history, or of geography,
at matriculation. We examine them in arith
metic, but not in Euclid or Algebra. Their
answers to the questions in arithmetic do not
encourage us to examine them in Euclid or
Algebra. We do not examine the candidates
in religious knowledge. But at the end of
every term the junior members of the house
are examined in some portion of the New
Testament. The answers written by the
mass of the men are not better than what we
might expect from the upper classes of our
parochial schools. Very few have that know
ledge of the Bible that a Christian gentleman
should have. Nor do many show a desire to
increase their knowledge. Of the 150 who
attend the divinity lectures, 20 will show that
they they have been well taught before en
tering the University.” (Vol. ii. pp. 10,11.)
The Rev. G. W. Sitchin, M.A., Junior
Censor of Christ Church, thus writes:—
“ The average men bring up but small re
sults of the training to which they have been
subjected for years. There is a general want
of accuracy in their work; even the rudi
mentary knowledge of grammar and Latin
prose writing is far less than it ought to be.
I fear that the elementary schools send the
little boys up to the public schools in a very
unprepared state, and that the public schools,
to a great extent, assume that the boys are
fairly grounded; which is not the case. The
only subjects which are professed at school,
and do not form part of our system of work,
are such rudimentary matters as English
composition, spelling, arithmetic, &c. In
these there seems to be considerable defi
ciency. The University course of teaching
is much hampered by the crude state of the
men subjected to it, and by the necessity of
supplementing the shortcomings of school
education. Our system becomes, for average
men, both narrow and vague. We feel that
the most we can do for men who come up de
ficient in knowledge of grammar, history,
language, &c., is to provide something for
them to do; the time for real progress seems,
in many cases, to be absolutely past. Men
whose abilities lead them towards other than
classical studies are much hindered from
their proper pursuits, and sometimes stopped
altogether, by that want of early accurate
�8
training, which shows itself at every step we
take in educating our men. Consequently,
it appears to me that the University is obliged
to spend much of her energies on matters
which do not belong to her. If one is of
opinion that eight to ten years spent chiefly
on the elements of Latin and Greek ought to
have been enough to secure a fair knowledge
of grammar, then one cannot help regretting
the weight which presses on us. But I am
aware that many think otherwise, consider
such a repetition of rudiments a good, and
call it a general education. As a matter of
fact, a couple of plays of Euripides, a little
Virgil, two books of Euclid, or the like, form
the occupation of a large part of our men
during their first university year; and I can
not consider this a satisfactory state of things,
especially as not a few fail in passing their
examination in these subjects. It should be
remembered that the best men, who go in for
scholarships, are taken without the ordinary
matriculation examination.... Of the ordinary
men, a quarter might possibly steer their way
through an unseen passage in Greek with
fair success. Bather a larger number might
manage an ordinary piece of Latin. Tolerable
Latin prose is very rare. Perhaps one piece
in four is free from bad blunders. A good
style is scarcely ever seen. The answers we
get to simple grammatical questions are very
inaccurate. In arithmetic they have im
proved, as it is now understood that they
cannot pass responsions without it. With a
matriculation examination, whose standard is
very low, and solely intended to prove that
men have a fair chance of afterwards passing
responsions, and with every wish to admit
men, we have still been obliged this year to
reject about one-third of the whole number
who have presented themselves. As to
average men, their exact knowledge of gram
mar, &c., is now tested by us ; whereas,
a few years ago, it was almost taken for
granted. This makes me diffident in express
ing an opinion about its improvement or
decay. On the whole, I am inclined to think
it has gone backwards, for I can easily ima
gine it better; it would be hard to conceive
it much worse.... We have a vast number of
young men from the upper forms of the
public schools, especially from Eton. On the
whole, their conduct is very satisfactory, and
I can imagine no men more pleasant to deal
with, had they had fair-play in respect of
their learning. As it is, they come to us
with very unawakened minds, and habits of
mental indolence and inaccuracy.” (Vol. ii.
pp. 11—13.)
“ I think that the education given at the
schools does not sufficiently prepare boys for
the University course. The boys are not
well grounded in the subjects to which most
of their time has been given, and on other
points less strictly academical their ignorance
is sometimes surprising. In fact, I am sorry
to say that many boys come to the University
from school knowing next to nothing. These
general remarks, of course, admit of very
many exceptions, as regards both schools and
individuals. The University course is much
affected by the ill-prepared state in which
the majority of the students come; and
instead of making progress, a few years ago
the University had to make its course com
mence with more elementary teaching, and
to insist on the rudiments of arithmetic, and
a more precise acquaintance with the ele
ments of grammar. Tutors felt that it was
degrading to both themselves and the Uni
versity to descend to such preliminary in
struction; but the necessity of the case
compelled them. Had reading and spelling
been included in the reforms of that day, it
would have been not without benefit to many
members of the University. I have some
times had to remind my brother examiners
and myself in the final examination for B.A.,
that we were not at liberty to pluck for bad
spelling, bad English, or worse writing. If
more of such elementary teaching were done
at school, the University course might be
both deepened and widened. Hitherto it has
seemed useless for the University to enlarge
her course to suit the tastes of men whose
minds have never been formed at all by any
methodical teaching, and who really cannot
be said to have any tastes.... It is difficult to
say what proportion of candidates for ma
triculation can translate a new passage of a
Latin or Greek author. At my own college
we consider such a test much too severe, the
college would be left half empty if it were
insisted on. The usual plan is to select a
passage from some book which they have
recently read. Perhaps eight out of twenty
candidates could translate a passage from an
easy author. (Of course I am speaking of
the ordinary students, not of candidates for
scholarships.) Rather more than this pro
portion, perhaps twelve out of twenty, would
write a piece of tolerable Latin prose, and do
a fair grammar paper. Of arithmetic and
mathematics few of them know anything
more than the amount insisted on by the
University, and many of them barely that;
the extent of their knowledge does not reach
beyond vulgar fractions and decimals. And
here I think that the schools are greatly to
be blamed.” (Vol. ii. pp. 16, 17.)
The Rev. W. Hedley, M.A., lately
The Rev. D. P. Chase, M.A., Principal
Fellow and Tutor of University College,
Oxford, and Public Examiner, thus of St. Mary Hall, and Tutor of Oriel
Collesze. thus writes:—
�9
“In my opinion, the previous education
given to those who enter the University does
not fulfil satisfactorily the purpose of ground
ing in the classical studies which they are
required to pursue. The result is, that the
minimum of attainment necessary for the
B.A. degree is far below what it might and
ought to be; while the difficulty which the
majority of passmen have in producing even
that minimum necessarily restricts and
narrows the course. Much of the teaching
given at the University is such as ought to
have been given at school. This, while it
tends to weary and disgust those who have
been better taught, precludes any higher
teaching of those who must be kept to school
boy work. ... I think that public-school boys,
when they are good, are better than any
others. They have a readiness in producing
what they know, and a polish in their pro
ductions, which are rarely found in others.
When they are bad, they are very bad. This
seems to me to prove that the public schools
have the power of giving the very best in
struction, while their circumstances are in
themselves an education; that all boys have
there an opportunity of being well taught,
but that on no boy is imposed the necessity
of learning.” (Vol. ii. pp. 17,18.)
preparation for the University course shown
by candidates for an ordinary matriculation,
that I am convinced either that the system of
teaching at the schools is radically faulty, or
(what is more probable) that little more can
be done in the matter of Latin and Greek
than is done, and that therefore some new
direction should be given to the studies
pursued in schools.” (Vol. ii. p. 20.)
The Rev. Arthur Faber, M.A., Fellow
and Tutor of New College, thinks that
“in scholarship and mathematics the
public school system has a marked supe
riority over that of other schools;” and
that while “ the standard is undoubtedly
a low one, and might be raised with
advantage to the University, public school
education tends to qualify for a University
residence the great majority of boys.”
(Vol. ii. p. 21.)
The Rev. Bartholomew Price, M.A.,
Fellow of Pembroke College, and Sadlerian Professor of Natural Philosophy,
speaking “of mathematical instruction
The Rev. Henry Furneaux, M.A., and attainments in Oxford, so far as
Fellow and Tutor of Corpus Christi Oxford and the public schools act on each
College, thus writes:—
other,” thus writes:—
“ It may be fairly maintained, that the
schools from which the University is fed
either have not sufficiently grounded in
classics and mathematics a large number of
those whom they send us, or, as is very
commonly the case, have allowed them to
forget in the higher forms the groundwork
which was taught in the lower.” (Vol. ii.
p. 19.)
“I do observe a very marked difference
between young men coming to this University
from the great public schools, and from other
schools or from private tutors, as to their
mathematical attainments. The young men
from public schools are far worse prepared.
Whatever time they may have given to the
subject, it does not appear to me that they
have given that study and attention to it
The Rev. J. R. T. Eaton, Fellow and which has generally been so profitably be
stowed elsewhere.
Tutor of Merton College, thus writes:— the young men to be Assuming the ability of
equal, not only do I find
“ It has long been held among college tutors the attainments of those from other schools
that the late age (18—19) up to which young to be greater, but I find them to be better
men are retained at our public schools, grounded and to have learned the elements
before quitting them for the Universities, is more thoroughly and more carefully. Seldom
counterbalanced by no corresponding increase do I meet with young men from the public
in the amount of knowledge gained. In this, schools who know more than the bare ele
as in other points, the many are sacrificed to ments of mathematics; whereas others have
the few. While a really persevering and gone through a sound course of geometry,
intelligent youth is gaining fresh stores of which I take to be a most excellent dis
information, improving his powers of taste ciplinary exercise, and have often well studied
and composition, and grounding himself in the principles of the modern analytical
his knowledge with a view to competing for methods. This is frequently the case with
scholarships at the University, the bulk of young men who come from the Universities
young men at a public school are going back, sflid schools of Scotland, and from schools in
not progressing. They have reached an age England of the class just below the large
when the stricter discipline fitted to boys is public schools. . . . The junior scholarship has
losing its hold; they have no adequate motive never been gained by a young man from the
to engage their diligence. . . . On the whole,! great public schools. ... I cannot say that
I am so little satisfied with the amount of the knowledge of the young men who come
�to this University as ordinary Btudents
appears to me such as it might and ought to
be. Frequently arithmetic, one or two books
of Euclid, and a little algebra, usually no
farther than simple equations, is all that they
profess to have learned, and this amount is
generally known very imperfectly. During
the last four years I have become acquainted,
through the Oxford local examinations, with
the standard of knowledge of those subjects
possessed by boys belonging to the middle
class schools; and I find it, for extent and
accuracy, far superior to that which is ex
hibited by the candidates for matriculation
from public schools who come under my
notice. These latter can in many cases
scarcely apply the rules of arithmetic, and
generally egregiously fail in questions which
require a little independent thought and
common sense.”
The evidence from Cambridge, while less
extensive, is on the whole less strongly
conclusive than that from Oxford against
the public school system.
The Rev. J. B. Mayor, M.A., Fellow
and Tutor of St. John’s College, thus
writes:—
for a ' pass’ is lowered, in consequence of the
numbers who fail to answer a fair proportion
of the questions proposed to them. For 18
years I have found employment in Cambridge
in supplementing, as a private tutor, the de
ficiencies of school education, and in teaching
the simplest rudiments of arithmetic, algebra,
and elementary mathematics, and in pre
paring in Latin and Greek candidates for the
previous examination and ordinary degree...
The greater part of my pupils are from
public schools, and I cannot but think that I
have to teach them nothing but what they
ought to have been thoroughly taught at
school. ... There is at Cambridge no matricu
lation examination except at Trinity College,
and there the Greek and Latin subjects are
fixed, and Latin prose composition is not re
quired ; yet I may call attention to the fact
that, for the last two years, rather more than
one-third of those who entered at Trinity
failed at the first entrance examination. With
regard to arithmetic, I can testify, from my
own experience, to the almost universal
ignorance of the simplest first principles of
the subject, and may state that at the pre
vious examination in October, 1862, there
were 86 decided failures in arithmetic and
algebra out of 260 candidates; while in the
examination for the ordinary degree in June,
1862, one examiner found in the translations
from the Greek author mistakes in spelling
in the papers of 91 candidates out of 161.
I think in Greek and Latin I find public
school boys generally more fluent, and as su
perficial as boys educated elsewhere, but
worse prepared in arithmetic and elementary
mathematics.” (Vol. ii. p. 30.)
“I think that the standard of University
teaching and of the University degree is
much lower than it should be, partly in con
sequence of the ignorance and backwardness
of the men who come to us from the schools.
.... My impression, after some years’ ex
perience as a lecturer and tutor at one of the
largest colleges of the University, is that not
more than two-thirds of those who come up
The last witness whom I shall cite is
for matriculation could construe an easy
passage from a Latin author, and not more the Very Rev. H. G. Liddell, who was
than one-third an easy passage from a Greek for nine years Head Master of West
author, which they had not seen before.
Probably about -the same proportion might be minster School, and who has been for
able to translate into Latin, and answer easy seven years (since 1855) Dean of Christ
philological questions. . . . My impression is Church, Oxford. Being examined by the
that more is known of ancient than of modern
history; but the majority are very ignorant Commissioners, he says:—
“ I think those boys are generally better
of both, as well as of geography.” (Vol. ii.
prepared who come from less fashionable
p.26.)
The large majority
The Rev. W. H. Girdleston, M.A., schools.... get from the great of the average
of boys I
public schools
Christ’s College, thus writes :—
are from Eton. I think the temptations to
“ I consider that the education generally idleness that exist there are greater than in
given at schools does not give a satisfactory other schools, and I suppose that is the
grounding in those subjects which form the reason of their being less well prepared.”
especial studies of this University, and that
Being asked, “ in regard to the average
the large majority of young men who enter number of public schools, what would be
into college show a very superficial knowledge
of Latin and Greek; while of English litera the qualifications of the boys; for in
ture, English history, and English composition, stance, can they write Latin, not ele
they are deplorably ignorant. ... It is a con gantly, but correctly, without gram
stant complaint of our University examiners,
that the mass of men are very badly ground matical mistakes P” he answers, “ No,
ed ; and often the standard of marks required generally not.”
The examiner, Mr.
�11
Vaughan, having said, “I need hardly
ask you whether they can write Greek
correctly ? ” Mr. Liddell answers, “ I
never tried them in Greek at the ma
triculation examination.” Being asked,
“ Can they, if a Greek author is put into
their hands, and they are allowed to read
it once over, construe a passage which,
does not contain words of very rare occur
rence, and no sentence of a very intricate
character P” he says:—
“‘I can best answer that question by
stating that in practice we are obliged to1
restrict ourselves to books that have been
prepared. I do not think we should get even
a tolerable translation of a book which they
had not read before.’... ‘ Not of any pas
sage ?’—‘ If you pointed out an easy passage
from Xenophon, in which there was not the
slightest difficulty, perhaps you might; but
you would have to select your passage with
great care; you could not open the book at
random and ask them to read a Greek pas
sage. We do not get it well done even in the
books that are prepared in a great many
cases. I am speaking of those who come up
merely to be matriculated — the average
boys.’... ‘ Now, I have asked you generally
with regard to the public schools. With
respect to Eton, can you tell what is the state
of classical attainments there ?’ .... ‘ With
these average boys it is very much what I
have stated. Their Latin prose is certainly
not elegant or scholarlike. It is exceedingly
bad. Even those boys who can construe
pretty fluently, when you come to probe
them in grammar, often fail to give satis
factory answers. They often fail even when
the question is put upon paper, and they have
plenty of time to think. Many of them bring
up the words misspelt in the grossest man
ner.’ ” (Vol. iii., p. 400.)
*
The evidence now quoted suggests
several reflections, of which I venture to
present a few in brief.
1st. Seeing that, in the main, “ clas* The case is not better in France. “ Il n’est
presque pas de jour qui n’apporte son temoignage
de la decadence des humanites scolaires chez vous.
L’autre semaine, je fus a la Sorbonne recommander
un candidat qui se presentait pour la deuxieme
fois aux epreuves du baccalaureat. Disant qu’aux
premieres epreuves sa version avait ete ‘ bonne,’
je fus vivement interrompu par le venerable examinateur: ‘ Dites passable,’ s’ecria-t-il; ‘jamais
nous n’en voyons une bonne 1 Et cependant cette
version est la deux-millieme environ que le candi
dat a mise sur le papier depuis le commencement
de ses etudes!’—Fred. Diibner, Reforme, life.
1862. p. 3.
sics” and mathematics, and especially
classics, are taught in these schools to the
grievous neglect, partial or total, of all
other subjects which are important either
from their practical utility or from their
educational influence, it might have been
some consolation, if not some compen
sation, to find that classics at least were
well taught and commonly learned. But
no! For the sake of classics, all other
subjects are more or less neglected; yet
even these do not seem to profit by the
monopoly so largely assigned, and so vigi
lantly guarded. This discovery is most
lamentable, yet most instructive. Just
as, in economics, a “ protected” manu
facture is always sickly,—so in education,
monopoly is fatal to the subject it would
encourage. It is only just to add, that it
is not to the public schools only, though
mainly, that this stricture applies.
2nd. In the light of such disclosures as
these, we can better understand the as
sault lately made on the education of the
poor, so far as it depends on state agency,
and the too successful attempt to restrict
it virtually within limits not long ago
believed to be too narrow for even the
poorest of the poor. Very revolutionary
indeed must have been the continuance
of a scheme of primary instruction which
should make the children of the humbler
classes superior in real intelligence and
available acquirements to those of the
richer and higher classes. “ Payment
according to results” — a cry so mis
chievously potent to curtail the instruc
tion of the former—may, with far greater
reason, be commended to the attention
of those who conduct the instruction of
the latter.
*
* According to .the last Report of the National
Society, “ The effect of the Revised Code has
been to increase the demand for reading-books,
copy-books, and slates, while that for books on
history, geography, and all higher branches, has
considerably diminished.” At the last Annual
Meeting of the Society, the Archbishop of Canter
bury said:—“In order to meet the diminished
contributions, it has been found necessary to give
up the employment of many skilled teachers. The
result has been, that mental teaching has not been
�12
3rd. It is sadly striking that too com
monly the school instruction of the rich
seems to be expected to begin at the very
age at which that of the poor is expected
to end, or at even a later age. Com
plaints have long been rife of the diffi
culty of retaining poor children at school
beyond the age of 10,11, or, at furthest,
12. Yet it seems that 12, and even 13, is
the age virtually often assigned for the
commencement of the actual teaching of
the children of the rich. The very years
in which for the former all must be done,
are by the latter passed with nothing
done. Universities, condemned to mere
school work, throw the blame on the
schools, especially the public schools.
These schools pass on the charge to the
preparatory schools; and by these again
it is shifted to the parents, who, having
been themselves brought up in the old
school and college course, tread blindly
in the routine of custom. The vicious
circle is thus complete, and each party, if
even it desires a change, waits for the
so efficient as before. As to reading, writing, and
arithmetic, that has been in no way affected ; but
in regard to history, geography, and general infor
mation, the demand for that description of know
ledge has been diminished. He was, therefore,
afraid that less general information would be given
in the schools than before the new Code was esta
blished.” (limes, 8th June, 1864.) “Mr. M.
Arnold observed that the new method of examina
tion did not afford Inspectors the same means of
drawing out the children, and of ascertaining
really what they could do, that was afforded under
the old system; and when he (Mr. Walter) lately
had an opportunity of seeing a school inspection,
it struck him forcibly that that was the case. If
it were not a breach of confidence, he might add
that the Inspector was very much of the same
opinion, and observed to him, that under the new
system of examination it was impossible to get at
the intelligence of the children, to ask them ques
tions which would draw out their minds and prove
what they really understood, so well as under the
old system of inspection. The children were re
quired to read a certain number of lines, to do a
sum, and write a copy; but as to putting any
question which would test their general knowledge
and understanding, nothing of the kind was at
tempted ; and when he (Mr. Walter) suggested
that such a course of examination might as well
be attempted, the answer was that there was no
time for it, and that it would be impossible to get
through the work if that system were pursued.”—
Mr. Walter, M.P. for Berkshire. (Times, 1st
July, 1864.)
others to set it on foot. The institution,
by the great public schools, of a standard
of preliminary qualification, and a rigo
rous adherence to it, may abate this cry
ing evil; but its removal can be effected
only by a thorough remodelling of the
course of private instruction. So long as
children are left in ignorance of those
studies most congenial to their age, and
forced to acquire what is unsuitable to
their mental condition, so long must the
work of early teaching be irksome in its
operation and barren in its result.
4th. These disclosures of the real re
sults of public school teaching lead me to
view with some surprise a recent jeremiad
by a gentleman of high educational name,
on the incompetency and untrustworthi
ness of private schools, with slight, if any,
exception. Ifthere are any private schools
the results of whose teaching are as de
plorably unsatisfactory as those now pro
ved to attend public school teaching, it is
indeed time that they should be “im
proved off the face of the earth;” and
probably this consummation would long
ago have been attained, had the public
schools, the great educational exemplars
of the nation, not neglected their duty,
and wasted their mighty power. The
better and, I believe, the larger class of
private school teachers will assuredly
welcome as an auxiliary, not dread as an
opposing force, any improvements in the
great public schools. Their hands would
thus be strengthened, and their aspira
tions raised. Though their labours may
be more obscure than those of public
school masters, they are not less zealous;
to them also are the names of Arnold,
Kennedy, and Temple treasured watch
words, rich in encouragement and guid
ance. But even if names like these were
less exceptional than they are, they would
but strengthen the case against a system
which, in spite of these, has been so sig
nally found wanting.
5th. It must not be forgotten, that the
results, whether for good or for evil, of
�13
6th. The Commissioners, in their gene
which we have seen in part the evidence,
concern almost exclusively those of the ral conclusion, after saying of the course
pupils who go up to the Universities. of study,
Of even these, say the Commissioners,
“ which appears to us sound and valuable
“ those from the highest forms of these in its main elements, but wanting in breadth
and flexibility,—defects which, in our judg
schools, who are on the whole well taught ment, destroy in many cases, and impair in
classical scholars, notoriously form a all, its value as an education of the mind;
small proportion of the boys who receive and which are made more prominent at the
present time by the extension of knowledge
a public school education. The great in various directions, and by the multiplied
mass of such boys expose themselves to requirements of modern life,”—and of the
no tests which they can possibly avoid.” organization and teaching, regarded not as to
its range, but as to its force and efficacy,—
(Vol. i. p. 23.) But, as we have already I “ we have been unable to resist the conclu
seen, the Commissioners declare that sion, that these schools, in very different
only about one third of the pupils of the degrees, are too indulgent to idleness, or
struggle ineffectually with it; and that they
public schools, “taking them altogether,” consequently send out a large proportion of
go into the Universities. “Not one of men of idle habits and empty and unculti
these nine schools sends as many as half vated minds,”— go on to say,—“ Of their disci
moral training we have been
of its boys to the Universities; and in pline andterms of high praise.” (Vol. i. able to
speak in
p. 55.)
the case of most of them the proportion
This estimate, which it would be pre
is much less than one half.” (Vol. i.
sumptuous in me formally to contradict,
p. 27.) If such is the mental condition
*
I think it would be not less credulous to
of the one-third who have had before
accept. When I remember the applause
them what ought to be the stimulus of
which almost everywhere greeted, some
farther training at the University, what
years ago, the melancholy revelations of
is likely to be the mental condition of the
“ Tom Brown,” I am very distrustful of
remaining two-thirds, who, on their leav
the general notion of the morality, whe
ing school, enter at once on the business
ther possible or desirable, among school
of life, or oxi some course of professional
boys. In the absence of more direct
training, for which the teaching at the
means of judging, I note the indications,
public schools is still less likely to have
casually given in the Commissioners’
formed a fitting preparation ? The Com
Report, of the moral state of Eton, less
missioners regret that the test, which
casually of that of Westminster. I fix
they proposed to apply, of “ a direct and
my eye on the idleness and mental va
simple examination of a certain propor
cuity admitted to be too common, and I
tion of the boys,” was “ declined by the
rest in the conviction, that idleness is the
schools.” In the absence of such or any
fruitful parent of vice, and that the devil
equivalent test, we are left to an inference
dances not more surely in the empty
of probability. Few perhaps will main
pocket than in the empty head. It is not
tain that, leaving out of view the prize
wonderful that in a country where suc
winners at Oxford and Cambridge, it is
cessive generations of the leaders of opi
only the stupid and ignorant who con
nion have been subject to the public school
tinue their training at the Universities;
regime, such as it used to be, the general
or even that they are inferior to the ma
standard of morals by which youth are
jority who do not enter at the Univer
tried should be as low as is undoubtedly
sities. If the selected sample fail, what the general estimate of what is possible
shall we say of the sack ?
to be learned in school, still more of the
* At Christmas, 1861, the nine schools con
tained 2696 boys between 8 and 19 years of age,
the average being about 15. (Vol. i. p. 11.)
influence of judicious school-training on
character and conduct in after life. The
“ Tom Brown” code of school ethics often
�14
reminds me of the Irish father who said
that of all his sons he liked his youngest
best, “ because,” said he, “ he never kicks
me when I’m down.” It is scarcely more
exacting, or more difficult to please.
III. Time permits only a very brief
notice of the general recommendations of
the Commissioners. They are given un
der thirty-two heads, but many of them
are beyond our present scope.
“ (7) In the selection of the masters, the
field of choice should in no case be confined
to persons educated at the school. (8) The
classical languages and literature should con
tinue to hold the principal place in the course
of study. (9) In addition to the study of
classics and to religious teaching, every boy
should be taught arithmetic and mathe
matics ; one modern language at least, which
should be either French or German; some
one branch at least of natural science, and
either drawing or music. Care should be
taken to ensure that the boys acquire a good
general knowledge of geography and of an
cient history, some acquaintance with modern
*
history, **
and a command of pure gram
matical English. . . . (11) The teaching of
natural science should, wherever practicable,
include two main branches—1, chemistry
and physics; 2, comparative physiology and
natural history, both animal and vegetable.
. • . . (13) Arrangements should be made
for allowing boys, after arriving at a certain
place in the school, and upon the request of
their parents or guardians, to drop some
portion of their classical work (for example,
Latin verse and Greek composition), in order
to devote more time to mathematics, modern
languages, or natural science; or, on the
other hand, to discontinue wholly or in part
natural science, modern languages, or mathe
matics, in order to give more time to classics
or some other study. . . . (16) The promo
tion of the boys from one classical form to
another, and the places assigned to them in
such promotion, should depend upon their
* The difference between the phrases, “ a good
general knowledge of ancient history,” and “ some
acquaintance with modern history,” is equally
significant and strange.—W. B. H.
** Young people should learn the contemporary
history in which they live, and of which they are a
'part. Vicksburg is as important as Saguntum ;
to follow Forey from the coast to Puebla (and
learn why if'e lent) is as exciting as accompany
ing Cortez ; and to know something of the history
and the sayings and the doings of those who would
like to govern us, is at lenst as important for
our youth of either sex, as to learn the consti
tution of the Roman legislature.”—Athenceum,
20th June, 1863.
progress, not only in classics and divinity,
but also in arithmetic and mathematics; and
likewise, in the case of those boys who are
studying modern languages or natural sci
ence, on their progress in those subjects re
spectively. (17) The scale of marks should
be so framed as to give substantial weight
and encouragement to the non-classical stu
*
dies. ....
“ (23) Every boy should be required, be
fore admission to the school, to pass an en
trance examination, and to show himself well
grounded for his age in classics and arith
metic, and in the elements of French and
German. (24) No boy should be promoted
from one form to another, on ground of seni
ority, unless he has passed a satisfactory
examination in the work of the form into
which he is to be promoted. (25) No boy
should be suffered to remain in the school
who fails to make reasonable progress in it.
.... (32) The Head Master should be re
quired to make an annual report to the Go
vernors on the state of the school, and this
report should be printed.” (Vol. i. pp. 53
—55.)
Without attempting to criticise these
recommendations in detail, I may say
that, in their general spirit and tendency,
they are a worthy sequel of a Report
which, admirably written, bears traces
everywhere of anxious yet calm and
patient deliberation, clear and impartial
judgment, and earnest desire to conci
liate the claims of the present, if not the
future, with respect for the past; to re
pair, enlarge, and adapt the existing sys
tem, not to destroy it and build afresh
upon its ruins. No one interested in
education can fail to find in its almost
every page ample material for reflection.
* The following scheme for the distribution of
the school or class lessons in a week is suggested
as furnishing a comparative scale (p. 34) ;—
1. Classics, with History and Divinity . 11
2. Arithmetic and Mathematics ... 3
3. French or German
.............................. 2
4. Natural Science................................... 2
5. Music or Drawing................................... 2
School Lessons, taking about an hour each, 20
“ It is here assumed that the school lessons take
about an hour each, and that they will be such as
to demand for preparation in the case of classics
10 additional hours, and in those of modern lan
guages and natural science respectively, at least
two additional hours, in the course of the week;
and that composition will demand about five
hours.” (In all 37 hours per week, out of 144, not
reckoning Sunday; 107 remaining for sleep, meals,
and exercise—say 18, or three-fourths, per day.)
�15
Nevertheless, while I cheerfully admit
that these suggestions go as far in the
right direction as could fairly be expected,
with due regard to either the inevitable
prepossessions of the Commissioners, or
the great practical difficulties with which
inveterate custom and neglect have per
plexed the question, I am very far from
thinking that they go to the root of the
evil, or do more than facilitate future
changes far more extensive than any now
possible, or perhaps safe. Progress, to
be sure, must be gradual; and sudden
and sweeping revolution is only less to be
dreaded than total immobility or torpor.
It was not to be expected that the Com
missioners should raise the question,
which, in spite of many well meant at
tempts to extend to the middle and lower
classes what are called the benefits of
public school training, is gradually for
cing itself on the public mind—whether
the system of separating boys from their
homes, and herding them in large num
bers in barrack-monasteries, away from
the blessed influences of the family, be
indeed the true ideal of education; and
whether the evil which exists to a smaller
extent in private boarding schools be not
magnified and intensified in the great
public schools. A judicious provision for
an exceptional and unfortunate necessity
is widely different from the advocacy of a
system as in itself the best that can be
even desired. This is a grave question,
which I must here only indicate, without
stopping to discuss.
But there is another question, only
less important, which the Commissioners
have tried to settle, and which I cannot
pass over. I belong to a large and everincreasing class of persons who, by ob
servation, reflection, and experience, are
led to believe the present system of clas
sical teaching to be a superstition, a
blunder, and a failure. Historically ex
plicable as a necessity of a bygone age,
its continuance in our day seems to me a
mischievous anachronism. Animated by
a deep sense of the value of Roman and
Greek literature, and of the good which
its study might effect under a wiser and
more natural method of instruction, and
truly grateful for the benefit I have my
self derived from it—dearly purchased as
it has been—I am not to be deterred
or dissuaded from uttering convictions
which I have long and carefully matured.
It is in the interest of classical instruc
tion itself that I would speak. Hitherto
neither the languages nor the literatures
of Greece or Rome have been in any
worthy sense learned by any but a very
minute fraction of the great mass of boys
who have spent eight, ten, and more of
the most precious years of their lives in
the wearisome drudgery which ancestral
wisdom has decided to be the inseparable
accompaniment, and even the indispen
sable instrument, of this kind of learn
ing. Hitherto even the few, with rare
exceptions, know little, while the many
know nothing, of what they are seeming
to learn; the training, thus practically
null in respect of knowledge, has done,
and is doing, much to foster habits of
idleness, distate, and incapacity for men
tal exertion, obtuseness, and confusion of
mind; and lastly, while these subjects
are not learned, other subjects, more con
genial to youthful faculty and taste, as
well as more practically useful in after
life, and at the same time better fitted as
educational agents, are, for the sake of
these, not taught. “ If,” says the Times
(28th April, 1864), “ we had any reason
to believe that Latin and Greek had been
displaced by French, or geography, or
music, or the elements of natural science,
we might, at any rate, feel that we had
gained something in place of what we
had lost.” But no! Just as a great Ger
man philosopher is reported to have said
that only one man living understood his
system, and he didn’t; so boys learn only
Latin and Greek, and these they do not
learn. Yet singular, almost incredible
is the indifferent levity with which this
�16
admitted result is tolerated, even by those
who profess to regret it, and to wish it
changed. Only the other day, this same
Times said (7th May, 1864):—
“ If you despise an accomplishment, you
may live to want it. Indeed, there are few
men who do not confess, some time or other,
that they would give a good deal to be able
to learn what they could have learnt easily in
their youth. It is very common to see gentle
men long past the freshness of youth making
violent efforts to learn music, chymistry, geo
logy, botany, and a good many other things.
At a much earlier date, a young gentleman,
having by great interest got his name on the
Foreign-office, finds himself condemned to a
French master for a twelvemonth before he
can get an appointment; or he travels, and
finds an impassable gulf between himself and
every human being who cannot speak Eng
lish. He may even become painfully con
scious of a much more serious defect, in a
total ignorance of English literature, down to
the composition of a sentence, the wording of
a note, or the spelling of words in common
use. He may expose himself to those with
whom he has every reason to stand well. He
may hear conversations about the incidents
of war or history, in which he will find it wise
to avoid taking a part, lest his geography
should be found wanting. On these occasions
the strongest conviction that he can write
Latin hexameters better than any of the com
pany will hardly sustain self-respect under
the detection of profound geographical or his
torical ignorance. These, however, a/re only
inconveniences; and, to the sound English
reason, are trifles compared with the disci
pline of the mind. But even in that point of
view, all these accomplishments—and we must
add to them mathematics—have their value
in giving breadth and elasticity to the intel
lect, besides that opportunity of change which
is necessary to many learners.”
All this admitted ignorance and inca
pacity are, it seems, “only inconveniences
—trifles compared with the discipline of
the mind.” But it occurs to ask, How
far are this ignorance and incapacity com
patible with the much-lauded discipline of
the mind; and would not the removal of
this very ignorance and incapacity, as the
Times itself admits in the very next sen
tence, do much to promote the discipline
of the mind ? Everywhere, and for ever,
do we find this unhappy and groundless
contrast between what is called, almost
with a sneer, “ useful knowledge,” and
mental discipline,— as if it were only
through useless knowledge, or stuff too
useless to be called knowledge, that men
tal discipline can be attained. Similarly
pernicious and baseless is the current pre
ference of what is acquired with toil and
pain to what is acquired with ease and
pleasure. * Of the body it is true that only
what food is taken with healthy appetite
can be healthfully digested, and converted
into blood and tissue; and so is it. with
the mind. Is it reasonable to believe that
utility and pleasure are inevitably di
vorced from educational influence, and
that the true value of learning lies in its
inutility and repulsiveness P f To classical
teaching I utterly refuse, in any case, the
monopoly of mental (discipline; and in the
case of those who never get beyond the
grammatical and verbal ’husks, I contend
that the mental influence is, to the young,
for evil, not for good. But the advocate
of the prevailing system, if driven from
the defence of mental discipline, shelters
himself behind other screens, such as
physical training, geni/us loci, influence of
numbers, esprit de corps, advantage of as
sociation with youths of rank and breed
ing. Of none of these things do I need
or wish to speak disparagingly; though,
as regards the last, it does strike me as
strange that those who spurn utility in
the matter of young men’s learning should
lay stress upon utility of a much lower
kind in the associations that they form.
But all these things are quite irrelevant,
unless it can be shown that a change of
subjects and mode of teaching would be
fatal to their existence. Would boys be
less addicted to football, cricket, and boat
ing, if they ceased to be ignoramuses P
Would the influence of numbers, and of
the rivalry which “ develops the manly
*
fllaiov ovSev ep.p.eves /J.d9np.a.—P:LA.TO.
t “ How stupidly wrong are they who speak' of
the dryness of study. And how marvellously sa
gacious were the fathers of the Latin language who
gave to the word studium the double meaning,
study and desire."—W. P. Scargill, Essays,
&c., p. 373. 1857.
�17
English character,” so much admired, we
are told, and envied by continental na
tions, perish if boys were taught what
interests, not disgusts, them, and what it
is of the utmost importance for their own
and for others’ sakes that they should
know ? If not, then away with such
flimsy pretexts, which do but thinly veil
an obstinate resistance to educational im
provement ! If I complain of scarcity and
badness of food, is it any answer to tell
me that the air is very pure, and the
prospect exquisitely fine. I rejoin, “ Give
me better food, and more of .it, and I will
better appreciate the purity of the air and
the loveliness of the prospect.” I remem
ber an advertisement of a vacant curacy
in one of the Southern counties, which is
scarcely a burlesque on this mode of rea
soning. It ended thus,—“ The salary is
small, but the sea-bathing is excellent.”
The learning is small (for, as Mr. Glad
stone says—
“ Boys learn but little here below,
And learn that little ill,”)—
things which need not be its substitutes
at all, but which ought to be its firm
allies and faithful friends. Even Mr.
Gladstone (who, in spite of his brilliant
and versatile talents, his rich and various
acquirements, is still a striking instance
of the defect which Mr. Faraday, in his
evidence, points out in men classically
*
trained) speaks, in his letter to the Com
missioners, of “ the low utilitarian argu
ment in matter of education, for giving it
what is termed a practical direction;” and
declares it to be “ so plausible, that we
may on the whole be thankful that the
instincts of the country have resisted what
in argument it has been ill able to con
fute.” In some amazement I turn up the
word imstinct in Johnson’s Dictionary; it
is there defined: “ Desire or aversion act
ing in the mind without the intervention
of reason or deliberation; the power de
termining the will of brutes.” I will not
ask whether instincts may be acquired, or
are necessarily innate. But never before,
probably, was so singular a duty assigned
to instinct as that of judging of the com
parative value of rival methods of school
training. Falstaff indeed says,—“ Beware
instinct. The lion will not touch the true
prince. Instinct is a great matter; I was
a coward on instinct.” To be an educa
tionist on instinct, and by instinct to
recognize the true system of education,
is a feat so remarkable, that I can hardly
believe it to be within the capacity of any
one man, much less of a whole nation. Is
it not, besides, the very business of reason
to lessen the exclusive domain of instinct,
and to guide instinct, where it does not
take its place? Mr. Gladstone’s recent
speech in the House of Commons presents
many subjects for remark; but time per
mits me to say here only that when he
charges the ineffectiveness of school
teaching on the “ luxury and self-indul
gence ” in which we live, and “ the laxity
which is essentially connected with the
but the cricket is excellent. If physical
exercise and amusement (for which, by the
way, I have long and earnestly pleaded)
are indeed the leading purpose of our
great schools,—and it would seem that at
Eton they absorb a very large proportion
of the school-life,—then let the fact be
avowed and acted on: cedat armis toga;
let the gown give place to bat, ball, and
wickets ; let cricket be promoted, vice
classics superseded, and let the HeadMastership be transferred to that vir
ca/ndidatus, Mr. Lillywhite, or the clas
sically denominated Mr. Julius Caesar.
Possibly, however, if cricket were made
compulsory and primary, and classics op
tional and secondary, we should have less
of the former and more of the latter, and
the change might be fatal to the very
supremacy of the physical training which
it was intended to promote. But, seri
ously, it is deplorable to see how parents
suffer themselves to be hoodwinked by the * See Frazer’s Magazine for February, 1864,
substitution for sound mental culture of p. 156.
�18
signal prosperity and wealth of the coun
try,” he virtually, though unconsciously,
passes the severest censure on those great
capitals of education, in which generation
after generation of our richer upper classes
have been allowed to grow up without any
guidance whatever as to the true duties,
any more than as to the true sources, of
wealth. But here is involved a conception
of youthful training which as yet has
dawned on only a very few minds, and of
which the Commissioners, unlike those
who reported not long ago on the state of
English primary schools, seem never to
have even heard. For aught they appear
to know, the successful attempts made,
for some years past, in and near this city,
to convey to poorer children knowledge
and training in this most vital subject,
embracing as it does all our economic and
other social relations, and full of interest
and instruction for both rich and poor,
might as well have been made in Nova
Zembla. The rising sun of education, un
like the physical sun, would seem to touch
first with his beams the lowly valley, and
then, through mist and cloud, slowly to
climb to the hill-tops.
This omission in the Commissioners’
Report detracts largely, in my opinion,
from its value. But I trust I am duly
grateful for what I find. The two great
wedges—Natural Science and Modern
*
Languages —which are destined, sooner
or later, to rend asunder the present sys
tem, have, at all events, received a vigorous
impulse which will not be lost. No vis
inertias can for ever prevail against testi
mony so clear and so emphatic as that
of Dr. Carpenter, Dr. Hooker, Professor
Owen, Sir Charles Lyell, Sir John Her
schel, Professor Faraday, and others,f to
the value of Natural Science, not for pur* “ The interchange of ideas with the contem
poraneous world is of as much importance as the
preservation of the ideas of the past; and the
tongues which men now speak are those which
men should learn to understand.’’—Sir Robert
Kane, 1849.
f I regret that Professor Tyndal and Drs. Lankester and Lyon Playfair were not examined.
poses of “ low practical utility,” but as an
instrument of mental discipline.
Meantime, it is cheering to have a
statement like the following from so emi
nent an authority as the Rev. Dr. Morti
mer, Head Master of the City of London
School:—
“It is my opinion, founded on very con
siderable experience, that the limited time
given to classics, in comparison with other
public schools, is fully made up by the in
creased mental power obtained by an ac
quaintance with many other subjects. At all
events, it is a fact, that the university career
of pupils of the City of London School is emi
nently successful; and the reason seems to
be, that from being early trained to take up
several different subjects of study, they ac
quire the faculty of readily adapting them
selves to the work set before them, and bring
to it a large amount of collateral information.”
(Vol. ii. p. 580.) *
Other evidence to alike effect might be
quoted. (See Vol. ii. p. 17.)
Still more encouraging is the declara
tion of Charles Neate, Esq., M.A., Fellow
of Oriel College, Oxford:—
“We cannot go on for-ever learning all that
our ancestors learned 300 years ago, and all
* “ It is generally agreed that the greater at
tention now given at most schools to mathematics,
history, and modern languages, whilst it has ad
vanced those subjects, and proved beneficial by
enlarging and stimulating the mind, has not in
jured scholarship.”—Report, vol. i. p. 25.
“We collect from the evidence that, speaking
generally (there are not a few exceptions), boys
who succeed in classics succeed also in mathematics
and in modern languages. This shows that, ordi
narily, any boy of good capacity may with advan
tage study each of these subjects, and may study
them all together.”—Report, vol. i. p. 16.
“As an almost invariable rule, the men who do
best in outlying subjects also do best in scholar
ship. Men of great intelligence will naturally be
greedy of all learning; and there is something,
too, in the awakening of a boy’s mind, even if he
is not of high ability, which far more than pays for
the outlay of time and energy.”—Rev. G. W.
Kitchin, M.A., Junior Censor of Christ Church,
Oxford.Report, vol. ii. p. 12.
“ During the years that I was at Rugby, from
1841 to 1847, the knowledge of mathematics and
modern languages advanced. Special masters
were appointed to teach those subjects. Sctiolarship during the same time advanced. Mathema
tics, history and geography, and modern languages
should certainly be taught at school. Nor need
scholarship suffer. The study of modern languages
would tend to improve, not to injure, scholarship.”
—Rev. C. W. Sandford, M.A., Senior Censor
of Christ-Church. Report, vol. ii. p. 11.
�19
that has grown up as new knowledge since
Of three plans which have been devised,
then. The time must come when we must and two of which are actually in operation
make a selection and a sacrifice. I think it
in various places in this and other coun
has come now.” (Vol. ii. p. 49.)
tries, for evading the ever-increasing dif
The great practical remedy suggested ficulties of the present system, this is, I
by Mr. Neate almost exactly coincides am convinced, by far the simplest, the
with what I have advocated for many most effective, and the one destined ulti
years. He proposes “that the learning mately to prevail. Against the other two
of either Latin or Greek should be post plans, whether that of having side by side,
poned till the age of 12 years [I would say in the same institution, a collegiate and a
14]; boys being up to that time taught non-collegiate department, or that called
their own language and one foreign lan in France “ bifurcation,” by which boys
guage, together with something of the who have been taught together up to 14
literature of either; also arithmetic, some
and 15 diverge, some to the modern or
portion of natural history, and, of course,
non-collegiate, others to the ancient or
the facts of their own history; in all which
collegiate side of the school,—there are
those boys more especially that come from
very grave objections. On both the Com
public schools are almost incredibly igno
missioners report with caution rather than
rant.” (Vol. ii. p. 49.) If the age of 14
approval. The third plan, according to
were adopted, the course of instruction
which all boys up to the age of 14 should
up to that age would be, and ought to be,
be taught together all the subjects really
considerably enlarged. Mr. Neate goes
most important for them all to know,
on:—“ I believe a boy so prepared would
whatever their lot in life,—classics being
learn more Latin and Greek between the
reserved for those who should remain long
ages of 12 and 16, than he does now be
enough at school to profit by the study,
tween the ages of 10 and 18.” “ But in
order to ensure this, great improvements to learn, in his sense, to lose a little more time,
are needed in our methods of teaching.” to delay a little longer before we begin teaching
Latin and Greek.”
(Ibid.) This proposal, heretical as it may Reform," 1836, p. —Sir Thos. Wyse, “ Educa.
166.
appear, is supported by high and ample “ We are of opinion that the study of the
learned languages ought not to be commenced till
authority; but, not to stray too far from the higher functions of fancy and feeling begin to
the Report before us, I will quote only a stir, and a taste for literature and reading begins
short passage from a pamphlet, “ Oxford to bud in the soul."—Professor Blackie, 1842.
“ I must say that in fixing upon ten as the
Reform and Oxford Professors,” published earliest age [at which the study of Latin or Greek
in 1854, by H. Halford Vaughan, Esq., ought to begin], I am by no means convinced that
it is best to begin so young. Judging from several
M.A., one of the Commissioners, and then instances which have come under my own obser
Regius Professor of History in the Uni vation, I am strongly inclined to believe that
twelve, or even fourteen, would be a better period
versity of Oxford:—“I believe it might for commencing Latin.”—Dr. J. H. Jerrard,
possibly be found that we have hitherto formerly Classical Examiner in the London Uni
learned the classical languages painfully, versity. the idea ever been suggested, that the
“ Has
imperfectly, and unseasonably,—slowly public schools should take nearly all of classical
study on themselves [i. e., relieving the prepara
imbibing rules by rote and by the ear, be tory schools from it]; that they should at least
cause we learn them at an age too unripe give up an entrance examination in Greek, but
standard in
spelling,
for a rational appreciation of such abstract I require a higher French, whichreading,thus form
history, &c., and
might
propositions, and losing thereby great part one of the principal previous studies, and then
.............
of the discipline so much boasted in the would not be so much required afterwardsto public
In this case, our sons would not go on
course of acquisition.” (p. 30, note.)
*
schools with so much Latin and Greek; but I beL
| lieve they would have a far greater capacity for
* “ We begin too soon, and we begin the wrong classical studies, and pleasure in studying, than
way. Rousseau says that one of the great arts of they ever now have.”—Letter signed “ G.,’’ in
education is to know how to lose time. We ought Times, 12th May, 1864.
�20
whether they go on to a University or not, proved to be bad be thrown aside, and let
•—would render classical instruction at advantage be taken of the private school
once easier and more effective in three teacher’s greater freedom, of the greater
ways : 1st, By the reduced number of flexibility of his system, unhampered by
those who take part in it; 2nd, By their charters, and traditions, and long prestige,
greater age; 3rd, By the greater develop to adopt whatever changes may seem most'
ment of their intelligence, due to their accordant, not with the whim of the mo
previous training in subjects more level ment, but with the growing tendencies
Jo their juvenile capacities, and more con and necessities of modern life. The tu
genial to their tastes. This innovation quoque argument is very well as a retort
was, doubtless, too formidable to be con to one-sided.satirists; it is a poor excuse
sidered by the Commissioners; but their for inaction and-indifference to improveReport, valuable as it is, is not finally | ment. If, as is possible, a Commission be
conclusive, and their suggestions, in so appointed by Parliament for inquiry into
far as they may be adopted, will render the state of middle-class school-teaching,
the introduction of it easier hereafter. Any I trust that you will aid, not obstruct, its
one who has had the twofold experience investigations; that you will not close
of teaching to young pupils what they your doors against examination. You
learn willingly, and what they learn invita have, or ought to have, nothing to con
\ut aiunt) Minerva, and who is competent ceal. A good school, like a good house
to more than “gerund-grinding,” will wife, can never be caught en deshabille.
hail with gladness a change which will I for one do not fear the result. There
render his labour at once more pleasing cannot surely be many private school
masters who, under examination the most
and more efficient.
There are yet many things of which I rigorous, would rival the evasiveness, the
inconsistency, the narrowness, and the
should wish to speak,
“ Sed jam tempos equum fumantia solvere petulance displayed by the Rev. Head
colla.”
Master of Eton, or the humiliating want
In conclusion, let me hope that this of acquaintance with the moral evil per
Report will be of service to the large body vading his own school, and of power to
of private-school teachers who chiefly con put it down, revealed by the Rev. Head
stitute this College of Preceptors. Dis Master of Westminster. But a much
paraged and maligned as they too often higher level than all this would still be
are, they will not, I trust, rest satisfied in too low. To the progress now going on
the belief that, bad as private schools may in private middle-class schools, in schools
sometimes be, the large public schools for primary instruction of both sexes, and
have now been shown to be, most pro not least, in schools for girls of the middle
bably, much worse. Rather let warning and upper classes, much more than even
be taken from the signal and melancholy to the direct effect of such a revelation as
failure here set forth, all the more strik this, startling as it is, do I look for the
ingly because by friendly hands ; let the steady rise and swell of public opinion
causes of that failure be' anxiously consi which shall sweep away the accumulated
dered ; let all slavish copying of models abuses in our public schools.
London: Printed by C. F. Hodgson & Son, Gough Square, Fleet Street, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
On the report of the Commissioners appointed to enquire into the condition of the principal public schools: a paper read at the monthly evening meeting of the College of Preceptors, May 11th, 1864
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: 2nd
Place of publication: London
Collation: 20 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed in double columns. Minor annotation correcting typo p. 14.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Hodgson, W. B. (William Ballantyne)
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
W. Aylott & Son
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1864
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5193
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (On the report of the Commissioners appointed to enquire into the condition of the principal public schools: a paper read at the monthly evening meeting of the College of Preceptors, May 11th, 1864), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Education
Public Schools
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/b964c0e77b4489a324f44b2d6969b62a.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=nRl%7EjFx915GfEMQTT6d7zDDVnw7ANIG4ICOi9Ggp0MCVdZg2sNCaHEuZSkvp4S9SZmzZvOnEGktvBnM2zO0gzZ1XMMXkYQt9IKnp1MPSNNMGZ%7EW7LQr6iAkYiLzEICWF9FXtgSyW8saWl6GWwySz-6UbUWoFAmKzETn3KJ84YvP14Q3kIo2t0orSAHiZ0Cnx9DRp4ImukPSiTN5ZrqHZSTpvrL7Urhk9AIzQXGpDOfxLpaMYNqZ0-Ud-SCND7cI5CF34ev8SDHqBzmygT6NcXImVnQQKQbM1bVSKcMbzBwL1V48ArejjnjBqmxddgWy7wKaS43a9Zan5OrOOre2Fhw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4ce1534d4af2d690b3b4c5d885ed9b86
PDF Text
Text
RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION
IN
SECONDARY FOUNDATION
SCHOOLS.
HOW TO DEAL WITH IT.
HE writer of the following brief remarks has been
impelled to commit them to print by the reflection
that whilst the propriety of allowing the Masters of
Primary Schools to give instruction in religion has for
the last two years formed a prominent subject of
national discussion, the objections which lie against
allowing or requiring the Head Masters of Secondary
Endowed Schools “to make provision, in conjunction
with the Governing Body,” for similar instruction, have
not, as far as he is aware, received adequate attention.
Under the system which at present obtains in the
Secondary Endowed Schools of England, a Head Master
of honesty and intelligence is evidently liable to find
himself in a dilemma of the following kind; either he
must teach the scholars (and whether he does so by
explicit inculcation or by the implication of reticence,
makes but little difference to the resiflt), at a peculiarly
impassionable age, that every detail of the Biblical nar
rative is truth unquestioned and unquestionable on pain
of offending God, and. the maxims of conduct therein
commended, of perfect morality; or he must acquaint
them with some at least of the conclusions to the con
trary established or advanced by modern criticism.
The first alternative, it will be admitted, is not only
very unfavourable to the teacher’s growth in accuracy
of thought on religious topics, and sensitiveness to the
responsibilities of his position, but involves the risk of
drawing the children of parents of broad and en
lightened religious opinions back into the terrifying
misapprehensions, to use no stronger word, which it cost
themselves possibly years of mental agony and painful
study to outgrow. The second alternative would most
assuredly involve him in contentions with the Governors
of the School and with parents of a narrow, unculti
vated, and, by consequence, intolerant type of ortho
doxy, whereby would be caused very probably the im
mediate decadence of the School, and, finally, the ruin
of the Head Master by dismissal where possible.
T
�2
Two courses are open by which the evils indicated
may be avoided. Either the curriculum of instruction
in these schools may be restricted to secular knowledge,
as is the case in the nascent Public Schools and Col
leges in New Zealand, among our colonies ; or the treat
ment of the text of the Bible may be conformed in
practice to that of the histories of Livy and Herodotus,
and the ethical treatises of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero,
the established conclusions and critical methods of
modern science and historical proof being no more
ignored, discredited, or suppressed in the case of the
one department of study than in that of the other.
It is to be feared that some time must yet elapse
before either of these two courses is introduced by legis
lative enactment into Secondary Endowed Schools. He
desires, therefore, to advocate the immediate establish
ment of a College of Secondary Education, on the Pro
prietary system, after the model of Cheltenham College,
in which the second of the courses defined above, which
is also the one which appears to him abstractedly the
best, may form the distinguishing feature.
He entertains the conviction that the number of
persons has enormously increased of late years, and is
daily increasing still more rapidly, who, so far from
desiring to see promoted in their children, by the in
struction given them in school, a retrogression in reli
gious conceptions from the standard of enlightenment
they have themselves attained, desire to see them aided
and encouraged in achieving and maintaining a like
moral enfranchisement. He is also of opinion that in
the foundation of a school of this kind is to be found
the remedy for the fact that whereas many of the most
able and the most ardent friends of religious enlighten
ment only achieve late in life the mental development
necessary to qualify them for a position in the ranks of
its adherents (perhaps but a few years before they are
removed from active service by death or the infirmities
of advancing years), the champions of obscurantism,
obstruction, and intolerance are recruited, owing to the
present system of Public School education, by the enlist
ment of each successive generation in its childhood.
PRINTED BY C. W. REYNELL, LITTLE PULTENEY STREET, HAYMARKET.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Religious instruction in secondary foundation schools: how to deal with it
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London?]
Collation: 2 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by C.W. Reynell, Little Pulteney Street, London.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[Thomas Scott?]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[187-?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5536
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Religion
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Religious instruction in secondary foundation schools: how to deal with it), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Education
Religious Education
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/0d0fafdb1b97920193fd9bdf3fe5e581.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=wMjdUk-3c3rnw5PadYy1YaghV15TcefvCtI-H3lmFzaHOv9KCzNrAodtMlJJx0ngo6JfV71dY2N-4TlajYsdDhMsBl8nJhxBcVgkiAz9fBbRZufWJ02Y3pSTgceAziWR4BF6EMXJ%7ELSdkmUOWLMY4wo8wZ7sSAZ76nCgnGiSE0z-l6d760pRFLmuenz5vCeJ334bixP4kCf0efCaKwZyHm4%7EE0mGR1cW7OZWRCfaIY6cuWMziAPRGXPUVR7PMt1Ok9Wc8YCVgsAjOio95cNkbnsQLcUsdZyOpLCnyVsg1xSIYQByQ3XR3zIYkYJhCQ-2YBrXhCDb3Xf%7Ebh9ZLb3Mbw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
677999c7bc4db0cee188ab56e0094098
PDF Text
Text
REMARKS
UPON THE
EDUCATION OF DEAF MUTES:
DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINES
OF THE
SECOND ANNUAL REPORT OF THE MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF STATE CHARITIES,
AND IN
REPLY TO THE CHARGES OF THE REV. COLLINS STONE,
Principal of the American Asylum
at
Hartford.
BOSTON:
WALKER, FULLER & CO., PUBLISHERS.
1866.
�Wright & Potter, Prs., 4 Spring Lane, Boston.
�On reading the last Report of the Principal of the American
Asylum for Mutes, it seemed to me that I ought to criticize it
publicly, first, in the hope of promoting the true interest of deaf
mutes, by calling attention to the subject of their education; second,
in order to defend my colleagues of the Massachusetts Board of
State Charities from some discreditable imputations; third, to set
forth the real doctrines contained in their Second Report; and lastly,
to exculpate myself from certain charges of inconsistency, and
insinuations of selfish purposes.
I thought to do this in a newspaper article ; but my interest in the
subject, or my inability to condense the matter, made it impossible.
When the manuscript was finished, it was laid aside ; and the pur
pose of publishing it half abandoned.
A recent event has confirmed my first purpose; but leaves not
the time to recast the article. This must explain the tardiness of
its appearance, and its being written in the third person.
SAMUEL G. HOWE.
Boston, October 21st, 1866.
��REMARKS
UPON THE
*
EDUCATION OE DEAF MUTES.
The American Asylum, for the Education and
Instruction of Deaf Mutes, at Hartford, is the oldest
establishment of the kind in the United States, and
the only one in New England. It has been of
incalculable benefit to the deaf mutes of all the
country.
It enjoys, and it deserves public confi
dence and esteem. It enjoys moreover the monop
oly of educating the public beneficiaries of all the
New England States; a monopoly of which it
seems to be very tenacious.
Its Annual Reports are widely circulated; and
are considered as valuable and reliable. They are
read and regarded as entirely sound by most
persons interested in the education of deaf mutes.
The Institution is strictly conservative. Its
Directors are men of high character, pure motives,
and eminent gravity. Its system of instruction,
adopted fifty years ago, is still adhered to, with
few changes; and all proposals to modify it are
stoutly resisted.
�6
If pressed, they are repelled with sensitiveness,
and sometimes with asperity; as though they were
considered impertinent interference; and yet any
citizen of Massachusetts, at least, has a right to
press thbm, because about half the pupils of the
school are beneficiaries of this State.
The late lamented Horace Mann, Secretary of
the Massachusetts Board of Education, proposed a
great modification of the system of instruction;
and brought powerful arguments and stubborn
facts to the support of his views. But he failed
to effect any material change. The Asylum yielded
a little for a time, under his vigorous attacks, but
swung back to its old moorings; and, held fast
by the anchor of conservatism, breasts the tide of
progressive ideas which sweep by it.
In France, Dr. Blanchet, connected with the
Imperial Institution for Deaf Mutes, has long been
advocating still greater changes in the system of
educating these unfortunates. His views are inge
nious and plausible, and have found considerable
favor.
The Minister of Public Instruction, in a very
able Circular to the Prefects of all the Departments
in France, recommended Dr. Blanchet’s plan to
their favorable notice several years ago.
Some Departments and Municipalities have voted
money, and made arrangements for testing the
practicability of the proposed plan. It has been
�7
in operation in some parts of France and of Russia.
It is radical in its nature., and points to a partial
abandonment of central Institutions, and the
instruction of mutes in their several towns.
This plan seems to us impractical in its full
extent; but it certainly has very valuable features,
and deserves notice and trial. We shall watch the
experiment in France with great interest, and we
wish Dr. Blanchet all the success which his zeal
and enterprise merit.
Meantime, the Massachusetts Board of State
Charities, part of whose duty it is to visit the
Hartford school and look after the interests of the
beneficiaries placed there by the State, suggested,
in its Second Annual Report, some important
changes in the system of instructing and educating
our deaf mutes, which, if carried out, would result
in their being educated at home instead of being
sent to Connecticut.
This seems to alarm the Hartford school; and
the Principal devotes almost the whole of his last
Report to what purports to be an answer to the
suggestions of the Board.
He seems fairly roused; but not so much to the
importance of the principles in question, as of
defending the practices of the Hartford school, and
of preserving the patronage of Massachusetts. He
has at least two qualifications, which, as Byron
�8
says, always make a writer interesting, to wit,
"wrath and partiality.”
His zeal leads him, not only to overlook facts
and reasonings, but, unconsciously perhaps, to be
uncourteous to the Board, and disrespectful to the
Chairman, upon whom he makes a personal attack.
He seems to think that if he can convict him of
inconsistency, and show that he is ignorant of the
best manner of educating mutes, the matter will be
put to rest. He therefore avoids discussion of
principles, and his Beport is mainly an argumentum
ad liominem. As such, it would not call for a
public reply, because the public do not care whether
the Principal or the Chairman of the Board is right
in his theories. But our people do desire to have
our deaf mutes educated in the best manner;
though do not often have the means of knowing
much about it. The present, therefore, seems to be a
good opportunity of drawing their attention to it;
and, as most of them are rather attracted than
repelled by the smack of a controversy, we shall
yield to the temptation, and without following the
example of the Principal, in regard to personalities,
we shall assail his positions, and refute his state
ments, so far as propriety and respect for an opponent
will permit. Out of such a discussion, conducted
with the desire to elicit truth, ought to come, not
any scandal to the cause of public charity, but on
the contrary, an advance of its best interests.
�9
It will be necessary, however, first to consider
some general principles which are apt to be forgot
ten in the organization of Institutions, and of
methods for educating deaf mutes, and similar
classes of defectives. We can at the same time
show the grounds upon which the Massachusetts
Board of State Charities placed its suggestions
for a change in our present system, and which called
forth the displeasure of the Principal.
The multitude of unfortunates into whose condi
tion the Board was to inquire, and over which the
law gives it general supervision, was divided into
the Dependent class, the Destructive class, and the
Criminal class.
The first comprised destitute orphans; abandoned
children; vagrant and vicious children, and youth;
the blind, the deaf and dumb; the insane, the idiots,
the confirmed drunkards, State paupers, and the
like; making nearly twenty thousand persons in
Massachusetts alone.
The general principles to be followed in the care
and direction of these unfortunates were thus set
forth:—
1st. “ That it is better to separate and diffuse the
dependent classes than to congregate them.
2d. “ That we ought to avail ourselves as much as possi
ble of those remedial agencies which exist in society,—the
family, social influences, industrial occupations, and the
like.
�10
3d. “ That we should enlist not only the greatest possible
amount of popular sympathy, but the greatest number of
individuals and of families, in the care and treatment of
the dependent.
4th. “ That we should avail ourselves of responsible socie
ties and organizations which aim to reform, support, or help
any class of dependents, thus lessening the direct agency of
the State, and enlarging that of the people themselves.
5th. “ That we should build up public institutions only in
the last resort.
6th. “ That these should be kept as small as is consistent
with wise economy, and arranged so as to turn the strength
and faculties of the inmates to the best account.
7th. “That we should not retain the inmates any longer
than is manifestly for their good, irrespective of their
usefulness in the institution.”
The three last propositions seem sound, but they
are unwelcome to those who are wedded to public
institutions, and who believe in the doctrine of
teaching, improving, or supporting children and
adults in masses.
The Board says:—
“ Our people have rather a passion for institutions ; but
they have also a vague idea that great piles of brick and
mortar are essential to their existence and potency. They
want to see them at once, and in the concrete. Hence,
we sometimes have follies of the people as well as of indi
viduals—many stories high, too—and so strongly built, and
richly endowed, that they cannot be got rid of easily.”
In support of their principle the Board said:—
�11
“ The hideous evils growing out of the old system of
keeping men in prisons, shut up without separation, and
without occupation, are too well known to need mention
here ; but it is not enough considered that the chief evils
arose, not from the men being especially vicious or criminal,
but from the fact of their _being congregated so closely
together.
“ Let us see how it affects the pauper class.
“ Most of those belonging to the first division mentioned
above, to wit, those in whom dependence is inherent, and,
of course, permanent, are infirm mentally, morally, or
physically, perhaps in-all these respects. Neither can those
in the other class be in a normal and vigorous condition,
else they would not be dependent. There exists in them,
indeed, the innate disposition or capacity for recovering the
normal state, but as yet it is in abeyance. Now, out of
unsound and abnormal conditions there must, *of course,
grow certain mental and moral tendencies, which, to say the
least, are unwholesome. And it is a natural consequence,
(though disregarded in practice,) that if an individual with
these tendencies lives in close association with others like
himself, all his peculiarities and tendencies are intensified
by the intercourse. The greater the majority of unsound
persons in his community, the greater the intensification of
his abnormal tendencies. Each acts upon all; and the
characteristics of class, or caste, are rapidly developed.
Nothing is more contagious than evil.”
This principle is further illustrated by reference
to special classes as of the deaf mutes, and of the
blind.—
�12
“ The lack of an important sense not only prevents the
entire and harmonious development of mind and character,
but it tends to give morbid growth in certain directions, as
a plant checked in its direct upward growth grows askew.
It would be a waste of words to prove this, because a denial
of it would be a denial of the importance of the great senses.
“ The morbid tendencies, however, are not strong—cer
tainly not irresistible—at least with the blind. They are
educable, like all tendencies and dispositions, and by skilful
management may be turned to advantage. Certainly, how
ever, they ought to be lessened, not strengthened, by educa
tion. Now, they are lessened, and them morbid effects
corrected in each individual by intimate intercourse with
persons of sound and normal condition—that is, by general
society; while they are strengthened by associating closely
and persistently with others having the like infirmity.
“ Guidecbby this principle, we should, in providing for the
instruction and training of these persons, have the associa
tion among them as little as is possible, and counteract its
tendencies by encouraging association and intimacy with
common society. They should be kept together no more
closely and no longer than is necessary for their special
instruction; and there should be no attempts to build up
permanent asylums for them, or to favor the establishment
of communities composed wholly, or mainly, of persons
subject to a common infirmity.
“ Special educational influences, to counteract these special
morbid tendencies, should begin with the beginning of life
and continue to its end; and they should be more uniform
and persistent with mutes than with blind.
“ The constant object should be to fashion them into the
likeness of common men by subjecting them to common
�13
social influences, and to check the tendency to isolation and
to intensification of the peculiarities which grow out of
their infirmity.
“ A consideration of the principles imperfectly set forth
above, will show that when we gather mutes and blind into
institutions for the purpose of instruction, we are in danger
of sowing, with sound wheat, some tares that may bring
forth evil fruit. The mere instruction may be excellent,
but other parts of the education tend to isolate them from
common social influences, and to intensify their peculiarities,
and this is bad.”
These rather novel doctrines have attracted atten
tion among thoughtful persons. They have been
praised by high authorities; pronounced too radical
by others; and have been assailed by a few who
fear that the importance and usefulness of long
established institutions, to which they themselves
are honestly wedded for life, may be impaired if
such doctrines should be accepted.
The Board, after carefully setting forth the prin
ciples upon which all methods of treating special
classes should be based, went on to apply them to
the case of the deaf mutes of Massachusetts.
The present method is to send these unfortunates,
at the expense of the State, to Hartford, there to
reside with many others of the same class, in a
great asylum, and be kept closely together during
the most impressible years of their lives, deprived
almost entirely of family and social relations, except
�14
with each other. They have not even the advantage
of family relations with their teachers, who naturally
show their preference for domestic life over asylum
life, by dwelling in their own houses.
This arrangement, however saving of labor, and
sparing of money, violates the principle so strenu
ously urged by the Board of Charities, that defective
children should be associated together as little as is
possible; and with ordinary persons as much as is
possible.
The Board suggested that instead of this plan,
the deaf mutes of Massachusetts (who are quite
numerous enough to form one school as large as a
school ought to be,) should be educated at home,
that is, within the State. The plan did not contem
plate an asylum, but simply one or more schools, to
which mutes could go for instruction, as other chil
dren go to common schools; and during the rest of
the time be subjected to the ordinary family and
social influences,—not of a great deaf mute family,
but of common life.
The plan certainly had many important features.
The method proposed was in accordance with the
principles set forth by the Board, the soundness of
which has not been disproved. It avoided, as much
as is possible, the acknowledged evils of congregat
ing persons of common infirmity closely together.
It involved no great expense. It was in the nature
of an experiment; and could be abandoned with
�15
little loss, if it should fail. In fine, it seemed to
present a happy mean between the old system of the
Hartford school and the system urged by Blanchet,
which begins to find so much favor in France and
other European countries. It incorporated the
admitted advantages, and avoided the acknowledged
evils of each. But it also involved the loss to the
Hartford asylum of almost one-half its pupils, who
are maintained there by the State of Massachusetts.
It is conceivable, therefore, that it should be
opposed, both directly and indirectly.
Accordingly, the Principal of the American
Asylum at Hartford, opposes it in his way, which
is the indirect way. He devotes almost the whole
of. his last Report to this matter. First, he makes
a false issue with the Report of the Board of Chari
ties; second, he makes a personal attack upon the
Chairman.
He raises a false issue, by devoting a large part
of his Report to the subject of teaching mutes
articulation, as if that had been urged by the Board.
He sets forth forcibly and fully the advantages of
the French method of instruction used with some
modifications at Hartford, and the disadvantages of
the German method used in the German, and
many other European schools.
If there was room to go into the matter here, it
could be shown, that, with the exception of a single
sentence, which should be qualified, all that is urged
�16
in the Report of the Board of Charities in favor of
articulation, is sound, and cannot be gainsaid. "We
quote from pp. 51-55 of their Report:—
“ The inherent differences between children who are blind
or mute and ordinary children, are not so great as to form
characteristics of a class, or to remove them from the effect
of common educational influences. We are not, therefore,
to modify these influences to suit their condition, but rather
modify their condition to suit them. We must, however,
modify our method of instruction somewhat to suit the
blind, and a great deal to suit the deaf mutes.
“ It is not the purpose, now, to speak of special instruction,
further than to say that, other things being equal, the me'hod
is best which approaches most closely the approved methods
used with ordinary children.
“ But in speaking of education in a more general sense,
that is of the influences which are brought to bear upon the
development of character, -a few words may be appropriate
upon the subject under consideration, to wit,—
“ Intensification of Peculiarities Growing' out of an
Infirmity.
“ It is to be borne in mind always, that the infirmities
which characterize these classes of mutes and blind do, in
spite of certain compensations, entail certain undesirable
consequences,'which have unfavorable effects upon body and
mind both.
“ The lack of an important sense not only prevents the
entire and harmonious development of mind and character,
but it tends to give morbid growth in certain directions, as a
plant checked in its direct upward growth grows askew.
It would be a waste of words to prove this, because a
�17
!
:
>
denial of it would be a denial of the importance of the great
senses.
“ The morbid tendencies, however, are not strong—
•certainly not irresistible—at least with the blind. They are
educable, like all tendencies and dispositions, and by skilful
management may be turned to advantage. Certainly, how
ever, they ought to be lessened, not strengthened, by educa
tion. Now, they are lessened, and their morbid effects
corrected in each individual, by intimate intercourse with
persons of sound and normal condition—that is, by general
society; while they are strengthened by associating closely
and persistently with others having the like infirmity. They,
themselves, seem to have an instinctive perception of this,
and the most delicate of them feel the morbid tendency
which may segregate them from ordinary people, and put
them in a special class. Some of them struggle "against it
in a touching manner, as the fabled nymph resisted meta
morphosis into a lower form of life.
“ They seem to cling to ordinary persons, as if fearing
segregation, and strive to conform themselves to their habits,
manners, and even appearance. They wish to look, to
act, to be, as much like others as is possible, and to be con
sidered as belonging to ordinary society, and not to a special
class.
“ It is generally supposed that this feeling, especially in
the blind, arises only from the fact that blindness and
poverty are associated together, and that poverty calls forth
contempt, lightened, in their case, by pity. But the feeling
has a deeper source. It is very strong in those of delicate
and sensitive natures, and it ought always to be respected
and encouraged. Our principle in treating them should be
that of separation and diffusion, not congregation. We are
3
�to educate them, for society of those who hear and who see;
and the earlier we begin the better.
“We violate this principle when we gather them into
institutions; but we do so in view of certain advantages of'
instruction in common, which are not to be had in any other
feasible method; as we bear with an inferior common school
rather than have none. A man of wealth might, indeed—
and if he were wise, would—allow his mute or blind child
to spend a certain time in a well-regulated institution for
like children; but it would be only a short one.
“ Guided by this principle we should, in providing for the
instruction and training of these persons, have the associa
tion among them as little as is possible, and counteract its
tendencies by encouraging association and intimacy with
common society. They should be kept together no more
closely and no longer than is necessary for their special
instruction; and there should be no attempts to build up
permanent asylums for them, or to favor the establishment
of communities composed wholly or mainly of persons
subject to a common infirmity.
“ This is far more important with the mutes than with the
blind, because of their speechlessness. Language, in its
largest sense, is the most important instrument of thought,
feeling, and emotion; and especially of social intercourse.
Blindness, in so far as it prevents knowledge of and partici
pation in the rudimentary part of language, to wit, panto
mime, or signs, gestures, and expression of features and
face, tends to isolation : but the higher and far more impor
tant part of language, speech, is fully open to them. Then
their sense of dependence strengthens their social desires;
increases their knowledge and command of speech, and
makes that compensate very nearly, if not quite, for igno
�19
rance of other parts of language. The blind, if left to
ordinary social influences, are in no danger of isolation. It
is when we bring them together in considerable numbers
that the tendency to segregation manifests itself; and this
is rather from necessity than from choice, for the social
cravings become more intense with them than with us.
“ With mutes it is not so. Speech is essential for human
development. Without it full social communion is impossi
ble ; since there can be no effectual substitute for it. The
rudimentary and lower parts of language, or pantomime, is
open to mutes; but the higher and finer part, that is,
speech, is forever closed ; and any substitute for it is, at best,
imperfect. This begets a tendency to isolation; which not
being so effectually checked during youth, as it is with the
blind, by a sense of dependence, becomes more formidable.
To be mute, therefore, implies tendency to isolation. The
blind need little special instruction; the mutes a great
deal.
“ An attempt to consider different modes of instructing
mutes would lead into a wide field of discussion ; but it may
be remarked that in the plenitude of arguments and disputes
about the comparative merit of the various systems of sign
language, it has not been enough considered that, by teach
ing a mute to articulate, we bring him to closer association
with us by using our vernacular in our way, than by teach
ing him the finger language, which can never become our
vernacular. The special method tends more to segregate
him and his fellows from ordinary society. In the first case
one party adheres to the natural and ordinary method of
speech, and the other party strives to imitate it; in the
second, both use a purely arbitrary and conventional
method.
�20
. “ The favorite motto of the adherents of the method of
dactylology betrays this fault,—
4 Lingua vicaria manus ; ’
for the very vicariousness is objectionable, and ought to be
lessened as much as is possible.
“ Without pretending to metaphysical precision, it may be
said that by means of the senses we come into conscious
relations with external nature—with men and things. Sen
sation and perception are the roots of knowledge. The
wider the circle of sensuous relations, the more rapid the
acquirement of knowledge. By action and reaction between
our internal nature and external nature, character is devel
oped. But in order that there may be harmonious and
entire development of human character, there must be the
ordinary organs of human sense : no more and no less.
“ The result, then, of the lack of any one organ of sense
must be twofold; first, limitation of the circle of sensuous
relations ; second, inharmonious development of character.
“ In the education of the deaf mutes and of the blind we
are to counteract the limitation by special instruction given
through the remaining senses ; and we are to counteract the
tendency to inharmonious development by special influences,
both social and moral.
“ Special educational influences, to counteract these special
morbid tendencies, should begin with the beginning of life
and continue to its end ; and they should be more uniform
and persistent with mutes than with the blind.
“ The constant object should be to fashion them into the
likeness of common men by subjecting them to common
social influences, and to check the tendency to isolation and
to intensification of the peculiarities which grow out of their
infirmity.
,
�21
“A consideration of the principles imperfectly set forth
above, will show that when we gather mutes and blind into
institutions for the purpose of instruction, we are in danger
of sowing, with sound wheat, some tares that may bring
forth evil fruit. The mere instruction may be excellent,
but other parts of the education tend to isolate them from
common social influences, and to intensify their peculiarities,
and this is bad.”
It will be seen that the Board does not commit
itself to the system of articulation. Nay! the Report
says expressly, (p. lviii.,) ” that while some of the
members believe that articulation should be taught,
others, without pretending to decide upon the com
parative merits of different systems of instruction,
believe that many benefits would arise from having
the wards of the State taught within her borders.
They would, therefore, suggest a plan for change
in our system of educating deaf mutes.”
In this plan, the Board do not recommend that
articulation should be taught.
This is the false issue which the Principal makes.
Next, he tries to divert attention from the reason
ing of the Board, by attacking the Chairman, and
disparaging the value of his opinion.
He singles him out by name; rudely insinu
ates that he is given to riding hobby horses, and to
changing them frequently; and that moreover he
might have some personal end to gratify; and say
ing for himself, with much complacency,—■" We are
�22
not specially sensitive in this matter, we have no
hobbies to ride, and’ no personal end whatever to
gratify ! ” (p. 38.)
Considering that the Report of the Board of
Charities alluded to the Directors and officers of the
Hartford Asylum very courteously; and admitted
that the deaf mutes of Massachusetts ” have
received fair and kind treatment at their hands, and
been taught by a corps of able and accomplished
teachers; ”* such language by one of those officers,
sanctioned by those Directors, and printed in their
Annual Report, appears uncourteous and strange,
to say the least!
Again, considering that no one charged the Rev- *
erend Principal with being sensitive, or hobby
horsical, his language certainly shows neither lack
of sensitiveness nor abundance of Christian charity;
but it does suggest the French proverb,—" gui
s’ excuse s’ accuse ; ” — ” who needlessly excuses
himself, accuses himself.”
And yet again, considering that the Reverend
Principal is not sensitive, and declares (p. 29,) that
the objections urged against the Hartford system
have been repeatedly met, to the satisfaction of
committees of the Massachusetts Legislature, it is
strange he should say, ” It may be proper to give
them a passing notice: ” stranger still, that this " passing notice ” should occupy almost the whole
of his Report.
Report, p. 57.
�23
He then proceeds, not to consider the arguments
and considerations urged against the Hartford
system, but to demolish them by lessening whatever
weight they might derive from the character of the
members of the Massachusetts Board of State
Charities, in whose Report they are found.
That Board consists of seven members, six, at
least, of whom are gentlemen of character, and some
of them eminent scholars and teachers. They all
sign the Report ; and all endorse the principles
which it advocates, and the application of those
principles to the education of mutes; although
they admit< they are not all of them, competent to
decide whether mutes should be taught articulation
or not.
But the Principal regards them as mere men of
straw, who signed what they did not understand or
believe!
He says (p. 35,) with regard to the question of
teaching articulation, "On the side of educating
mutes by signs, we find every teacher in this coun
try, and in the British Isles, with the exceptions
above named, and several of these have spent
nearly forty years in the work of practical instruc
tion; on the side of teaching articulation, we find
Dr. S. GK Howe! ”
And so with all the arguments and considera
tions urged in the Report of the Board. It is,
"Dr. Howe objects;” "Dr. Howe urges;” "Dr.
�24
Howe complains;” "Dr. Howe suggests.” Dr.
Howe is everywhere, the Board nowhere!
Having deprived the principles advanced in the
Report of whatever moral support the names of the
doctor’s colleagues might give, he next tries to
demolish whatever they might get from the name
of the doctor alone.
He quotes some of his opinions, expressed many
years ago, and shows that they differ from those
put forth in the recent Report of the Board of
Charities, and then remarks,—
“ It is pleasant to notice, that as Dr. Howe’s views with
regard to the best arrangements for deaf mutes have not
been entirely settled in the past, there is reason to hope he
may come out right yet.”
Amen! but he will never come out right, if he is
afraid of inconsistency with former opinions; or
clings to doctrines because he once professed belief
in them. The doctor indeed says, in one of his
Reports, that the result of many years’ experience
and observation, both of blind and of mutes, con
vince him that he made mistakes in organizing the
Institution for the Blind, more than thirty years
ago. There was then no school for the blind in the
country, and he copied existing establishments,
among others the asylum at Hartford, merely
modifying it to meet the special condition of the
blind.
�25
He found, in a few years, that he had incorpora
ted some fundamental errors in the plan of organi
zation ; and in his Twentieth Report he states, that
having been called upon by a committee from
another State to recommend a plan for an institution
for the blind, he did recommend one differing in
important points from the Perkins’ Institution. He
would have no "commons,” no central boarding
house,—only a school-house. He would thus avoid
the error of making them board, and lodge, and
live so much together; because he finds that it
encourages a spirit of caste, and intensifies the
peculiarities growing out of their infirmity. He
would have them associate with each other less,
and with ordinary persons more, than is now done.
He would now follow out this idea in the pro
posed school for mutes in Massachusetts. He did,
indeed, follow it out in establishing the workshop
for the blind many years ago; and the most
satisfactory results have been obtained.
There are some thirty blind persons who come
together in the morning to learn trades, and to work
at them on wages, and go away to their several
boarding places in the neighborhood.
This establishment is under the general direction
of the Institution; but the inmates (some of them
young,) are not brought together except for
instruction, or for work, and not even for work in
large numbers; because the plan is to furnish work
4
�26
at their several homes whenever it is possible.
They are thus subjected to ordinary family and social
influences, and are trained to live in and take part
with ordinary society, and not trained to become
members of a special class or caste. The establish
ment is successful; and blind persons who have
been familiar with both modes of living,—asylum
life and common life,—prefer the latter.
It would doubtless be so with mutes if the exper
iment were fairly tried; for all the reasons and con
siderations in favor of such a system apply with
even more force to them than to the blind.
The first direct charge which the Principal
brings against Dr. Howe is, that he makes "an
offensive classification ” of deaf mutes.
"We object to Dr. Howe’s placing, as' he does,
the four hundred deaf mutes of Massachusetts
among the dependent classes.” (Pep. p. 29.) And
again, (p. 30,) " This offensive classification pervades
the whole Report,” &c.
He would be blameworthy indeed who should,
eve n by careless use of language, give just cause
of offence to a class of unfortunates who need all
our sympathy and kindness. But we shall show
that by no fair construction of the Report can such
a charge be sustained; and moreover, that if the
language of the Directors of the Hartford school,
and of the Principal himself, were construed as he
�27
construes the language of the Board, then they
and he are open to the charge of very " offensive
classification.”
So far from anything " offensive ” to the mutes
pervading the Report of the Board, they are spoken
of not only respectfully, but with tender interest.
Indeed, special care even is taken to combat the
common opinion, (which is really offensive to the
mutes,) that they form a special class, and must
always do so; an opinion, by the way, which the
Reports of asylums for deaf mutes, and even
those of the Principal himself, often tend, inadver
tently, to strengthen. The Board of Charities
says, (p. 50,)
“ It may be permitted, however, to draw a further illustra
tion of the principle under consideration from some persons,
(neither vicious nor criminal,) the similarity of whose
defect or infirmity causes them to be classed together, such as
the deaf mutes and the blind. It may not be improper, at
the same time, to make some remarks and suggestions upon
the mode of treating such of these classes as are at the
charge of the State.
“ It is common to regard deaf mutes and the blind as
forming special classes, though speaking strictly no such
classes exist in nature.
“ They spring up sporadically among the people, from the
existence of abnormal conditions of parentage, which produce
a pretty equal average number of cases in every generation,
among any given population.
�28
“ They abound more in some localities and some neighbor
hoods than in others; owing, probably, to ill-assorted
marriages.
“ The important points, however, are that these abnormal
conditions of parentage are not inherent and essential ones ;
that some of them are cognizable ; that with wider diffusion
of popular knowledge more of them may be known; and
that, by avoiding them, the consequences may cease, and the
classes themselves gradually diminish and finally disappear.
“We have no deaf or blind domestic animals; and the
generations of men need not be forever burdened with blind
and deaf offspring.”
The idea which pervades the Report is, that the
mutes and the blind, if left without special instruc
tion and training, tend to fall into the class of
dependents. If this gives just cause of offence,
then must the Report of all the institutions for deaf
mutes in the country be offensive; for they do
constantly express the idea that deaf mutes must be
a burden to their friends and to society, unless they
receive special instruction.
Out of the abundance of such expression we
select a few. The directors of the Hartford school
say: ” The translation indeed of one of the inferior
orders of creation to the human species, would be
only in a degree more wonderful than we have in
several instances witnessed in our scholars.” The
Principal quotes this language approvingly, in his
able paper, in the American Annals, (p. 3.)
«
�29
Nay! he himself is especially open to the charge
of what he calls " offensive classification.”
Without meaning to be "offensive,” he often
speaks of them in a way which might give pain to
sensitive persons. For instance, he says: "We do
not believe that another human being can be found,
in savage or civilized society, whose mind is so
thoroughly imbruted with ignorance and so difficult
to reach as that of many a deaf mute who has
grown up to maturity in the darkness and neglect
consequent upon his misfortune ! ” *
In many other places he speaks of them as
entirely dependent upon society for salvation from
a low and brutish life. He does not regard them
as dependent in the sense in which ordinary chil
dren and youth are, but specially and necessarily
dependent, owing to their natural infirmity; and
shows that they can be lifted out of their ignorance
and dependence only by special means and costly
training.
Nay, more! He not only considers them as a
dependent class, but he sometimes fairly puts them
down in the dangerous class. He says, eloquently:
“ It is the darkness and gloom of his mental condition that
makes him an object of commiseration, and renders him, if
uneducated, the most pitiable of all God's creatures. This
darkness is as nearly total as can well exist in the midst of
, * Thirty-Fifth Annual Report Ohio Institution for Deaf and Dumb,
p. 9. Report of Rev. Collins Stone, Superintendent.
�30
civilized and Christian society. His palsied ear shuts out
from his soul, not only the Q melody of sweet sounds,’ but also
the most familiar facts of common life and experience.
“ He knows nothing of the history of mankind, or of the
globe on which he lives, or of the immensely important truths
connected with his immortality.
“ He is also excluded by his infirmity from intercourse
with his fellow-men. He can neither make known to them
his own wants, nor understand and conform to their wishes.
But while in this uneducated state he is a very ignorant
being, he is by no means an innocuous one. His animal
nature is fully developed. His passions are fierce and
strong, and he knows no reason for their restraint. Revenge,
lust, jealousy, may have dominion over him, without the
presence of any moral considerations to lead him to repress
their promptings. He may thus easily become an uncom
fortable and dangerous member of society ! ”
Now, if the classification of these unfortunates
among the deserving but dependent members of
society is "offensive,” what must be that of the
Reverend Principal, who puts them among the
dangerous members?
But, in reality, neither meant any offence, and
none ought to be taken. The criticism is not
worthy of the Principal, whose actions speak louder
than his words; whose devotion of his life to the
education of mutes would prove him to be their
friend, let his language be what it might; and
though he has made more " offensive classifications ”
of them than the Board has done.
�31
The Principal next makes four several charges
against Dr. Howe, in one paragraph, as follows:
First, that ” a few years ago he advocated the
plan of educating deaf mutes and blind children in
one institution, on the ground that as the blind are
intellectually superior, such a union would be
especially for the advantage of deaf mutes.” The
Principal probably had been looking at the Twelfth
Report of the Trustees of the Perkins’ Institution
for the Blind, without remarking that it stated that
Dr. Howe had been in Europe most of the year,
and did not write his usual Report. But, no matter;
he stands by the Trustees’ report, and still maintains
that blind children are usually much superior to
mutes in capacity for intellectual attainment, by
reason of the gift of hearing, which is the mother
of speech; and that it would, on this and on other
accounts, be better for a mute child to be asso
ciated, while learning the English language, with
a blind child, than with another mute child.
His position is not understood by the Principal.
He has urged that certain advantages would accrue
to deaf mutes by being associated with blind chil
dren, because they would be forced to spell their
words upon their fingers, and to form distinct sen
tences, and thus to have constant practice in the
English language.
Thinking persons know well that one of the
greatest obstacles in the way of deaf mutes learning
�32
our language is the strong tendency they have to
use pantomime.
The attempt to make them use the English lan
guage in their intercourse with each other, is like
trying to make our children speak French together.
The little mutelings won’t take pains to spell out
the words when they can flash forth their meaning
with a look or a gesture.
They won’t make the letters t-a-i-l-o-r if they
can touch their forehead, and imitate the swing of
his arm; nor h-o-r-s-e if they can crook their fore
fingers by the side of their forehead to show his
ears; nor h-o-r-s-e-m-a-n if they can set two fingers
astride the other hand. They won’t restrict them
selves to the use of letters, and words, and sentences
in their intercourse with their playmates who can
see; but they would be forced to do so with
playmates who are blind.
There is hardly a mute graduate of the Hartford
school who can spell as well as Laura Bridgman
does; and nothing gave her such marvellous accu
racy, and such copious vocabulary, except the
necessity of constantly practising the use of words
which had been so painfully taught her.
It is almost a matter of certainty that she would
not have been able to spell so well as she does if she
had been merely deaf and mute. Like other mutes
she would have been tempted by the facility of
addressing signs to the eye to neglect that patient
�33
and persistent practice which is necessary to make
a good speller.
She could see no natural signs, and therefore,
persons conversing with her were forced to spell
their words; and her answers were necessarily
made not by signs, but by letters and words.
The case was a new and anomalous one, and if
the Doctor had regarded the ” consistency ” of his
record, and followed the practice of the ” schools,”
he would have declined to undertake the charge of a
child who did not come within the rules.
The passages on which, probably, the Principal
founds his first charge, merely set forth certain
advantages of the kind of instruction which the
blind mutes must have; and its applicability in a
certain extent to the instruction of ordinary mutes.
The second charge is, that " he has since been
understood to favor their education by a .new system
of dactylology of his own invention.”
The Principal has been imposed upon by a pure
invention of somebody. But should he allow himself to be imposed upon? Such a statement was
worth publishing, or it was not. If it was, then
the Principal should first have inquired if it were
true; and a letter of inquiry would have brought the
answer by return mail that it was untrue. If it was
not worth publishing, then such a statement is
unworthy a place in a Report professing to be a
5
�34
reply to the Report of the Massachusetts Board of
State Charities.
The third charge is, that " Dr. Howe once advo
cated removing mute children from home influences
and associations at a much earlier period in life than
most teachers think judicious.”
This is true; but if the Principal had gone on
and stated the whole truth, he would have made it
appear that Dr. Howe’s heretical views were finally
adopted by the Directors of the American Asylum.
As he has failed to go into the history of the
matter, which is interesting in the history of deaf
mute education in Massachusetts, we will do so.
In the Twelfth Annual Report of the Institution
for the Blind, for 1843, occurs the following:—
“ A few words must be said with regard to the two deaf
and dumb children who joined our school about a year
since, at the early age of seven years. Being too young to be
admitted into the Asylum for the deaf mutes at Hartford, .
they were placed by their parents under our direction, with
the hope that* they might, at least, gain a knowledge of
language at an earlier period than has been usually the case
with children in their condition.
“ The success which has attended the plan of instructing
Laura, by the finger language alone, has induced the
instructor of these two deaf mutes to teach them only by
the finger process, intentionally avoiding the use of the
gesture language, taught at Institutions for the deaf and
dumb. And, thus far, the plan, as in Laura’s case, has been
satisfactory.
�35
“ It is found these children not only learn to talk rapidly
with the fingers, but are able to form a precise idea of a
sentence expressed by the finger language, which cannot
always be the case in the use of their natural, or gesture
language; and in this important particular does the manual
or finger language seems to be of greater value to the deaf
mutes than the language of gesture.
“ They have made considerable progress, not only in the
acquisition of language, but also in writing, numerical cal
culations, and in a knowledge of objects which attract their
notice.
“During the last session of our State Legislature, the
Committee on Education, appointed by that body, consulted
our Board on the subject of admitting the deaf and dumb
to enjoy the privileges of our Institution. A consideration
of this proposition was urged, and encouraged, by parents of
deaf mute children, and also by educated deaf mutes, who
were anxious to have the education of their unfortunate
brethren commenced at an earlier age than was permitted
by the regulations of the American Asylum at Hartford, and
at a school nearer than that at Hartford.
“ The trustees, acting under Dr. Howe’s advice, expressed
a willingness to receive deaf mute pupils of tender years, on
the same footing with the blind, believing that it would prove
mutually beneficial to the two classes.”
The Report goes on to say,—
“ The question, we understand, was discussed at some
length by the committee, in the presence of a deputation
from the Asylum at Hartford, who protested against the pro
posed change, and it finally resulted in the arrangement that
the regulations of that Asylum should be so altered as to
�36
authorize the admission of our State deaf mute beneficiaries
at an earlier age than heretofore ! ”
It would appear from this record that most
teachers, and doubtless the deputation from Hart
ford, disagreed with Dr. Howe’s views. Neverthe
less, in order to prevent the loss of any Massa
chusetts beneficiaries, they consented to make an ’
" injudicious ” arrangement.
At any rate, they so far adopted the plan advo
cated by Dr. Howe, as to change their conditions
of admission, and admit pupils at what the Prin
cipal calls ” an earlier period of life than most
teachers think judicious.”
Dr. Howe had long before urged that deaf mute
children should begin to learn the English lan
guage as early as possible; and in 1812 he received
some young mutes into the Institution for the
Blind, partly in order to see if they could not be
taught advantageously at an earlier age than that
fixed for admission to the Hartford asylum.
From the early days of that asylum down to
1841, their Beports state that candidates for admis
sion must be not under ten years of age nor over
thirty. In 1842 they say, " State beneficiaries must
be not under twelve nor over twenty-five; other
applicants, between ten and thirty
This was not only putting the minimum age too
low, • but making besides an odious distinction
between State beneficiaries and private pupils. It
�37
was about this time that Dr. Howe was chairman
on the part of the Massachusetts House of Repre
sentatives, of the Committee on Public Charitable
Institutions, and agitated this matter.
It appears also that the Directors of the
asylum soon changed their views, and announced
that they would receive pupils between the ages of
eight and .twenty-five, thus admitting State benefi
ciaries four years earlier than they had before done,
and abolishing the odious distinction between them
and private pupils.
Nor have they stopped here; for in a later
Report, a committee of their Board says,—
•
z
“ The opinion is beginning to be quite prevalent, that a
longer time than six or eight years is requisite, thoroughly
to educate deaf mutes; and that the legislatures of the
States to which they belong should extend the term of their
instruction. Indeed, there is good reason for believing that
these legislatures will do this whenever the subject is fairly
laid before them. In that case, the objection to receiving
any pupils under ten which has hitherto been felt, would
be removed, and the number of pupils actually in the asylum
at any one time would be considerably increased, even if the
annual admissions should be the same as heretofore. As we
were the first to project and carry into effect the high class,
by means of which a portion of our pupils are enabled to
prosecute their studies much beyond the ordinary limit, we
ought also TO SECURE TO THE AMERICAN ASYLUM THE CREDIT
OF TAKING the first step in the opposite direction, and
thus offer the advantages of instruction to such young
�38
children as contemplate a thorough and extended course of
training.”
This report was approved and adopted by the
whole Board.
Dr. Howe urged the early instruction of mutes,
upon the ground that it was very important to
them; the Directors seem to have adopted it, first
to prevent the loss of the beneficiaries of Massa
chusetts; next, " to secure to the American Asylum
the credit of taking the first step,” &c.
Surely, we may fairly quote here the language of
the Principal respecting Dr. Howe, as more appli
cable to the Directors of his own institution, and
say, ” It is pleasant to notice that as the ” Directors’
" views with regard to the best arrangement for
deaf mutes have not been settled in the past, there
is reason to hope they may come out right yet.”
The Principal charges, fourthly, that Dr. Howe
" now takes the ground that deaf mutes should not
be gathered into institutions at all.”
We do not believe that the Principal would pur
posely misrepresent any one, and therefore do not
understand how, with the Report before him, he
could make such a statement!
That document [which the Principal treats as
Dr. Howe’s alone,] recommends a change in our sys
tem of educating the deaf mutes of Massachusetts,
�39
•
,
and gives the outline of a plan for an institution.
As this is an interesting matter to all humane peo
ple, and a very important one to deaf mutes, we
will sketch this outline.
The Governor and Council shall appoint three
commissioners for the education of deaf mutes,
who shall act without salary, [or they may be members of the Board of Education.] The commission1 ers are to select the children who are to be the
beneficiaries of the State.
This would certainly be an improvement on the
present system, for it is well known that the Gov
ernor and Council cannot attend to this work as
carefully as they would do, and as it ought to be
done. They have neither time nor means for doing
it thoroughly. Besides, it is a work for which per
sons should have some peculiar fitness. Some
applicants are unfit for State beneficiaries, and are
rejected after going to the asylum at the State’s
charge; some are not entirely deaf; some are
idiotic; some partially blind or deranged. How can
the Governor and Council examine a deaf mute
child and ascertain these things? But more often
the applicants are children of parents who have
some means, and who ought to pay part, at least,
of the cost, and so lessen the charge to the
Commonwealth.
These commissioners, after selecting candidates,
and deciding whether they should be taught wholly
�40
or only partly at the expense of the State, may
contract with any responsible society or organiza
tion of citizens of Massachusetts, who will under
take to instruct and train indigent deaf mutes
belonging to the State, upon a plan of which the
following is a vague outline. [It is understood
that responsible parties are ready to form an organ
ization, if the State should favor it.]
“ The society to provide a suitable building for school
house, and, if necessary, a workshop, and to employ com
petent teachers.
“ The commissioners to designate the beneficiaries, and to
allow the society for each one a sum not greater than that
now paid for beneficiaries at the Hartford school. Their
warrant should be, not for five years, as is now the case,
but from one year, and renewed, if, upon examination, the
pupil proved worthy.
“ The society to instruct and train these beneficiaries gra
tuitously in its school; to board the children of parents who
do not live in the neighborhood of the school in respectable
families, and pay--------- dollars and cents a week for at least
forty weeks in a year.
“ They shall, however, if possible, place but one mute in
any one family, and never more than three.
“ The commissioners should have power to require the
parents of beneficiaries to pay a certain part—say one third
or quarter—of the cost of the board of their children ; and
when they are manifestly unable to do so, then to require
the towns where they have a settlement to pay a sum not
exceeding one dollar in a week, for forty weeks in a year.
�41
•
“ The commissioners to have general supervision of the
school, and of the welfare of such wards of the Common
wealth as live more than two miles from the school.
“ The advantages of such a system would be many.
“ 1st. The care and oversight of these wards of the Com
monwealth would fall where they really belong—upon our
own citizens, a very large number of whom would come into
constant relations with them.
“ 2d. The children would be taught within the State, and
nearer to their homes ; and a large proportion of them might
live at home.
“ 3d. The relations of family and neighborhood would not
be interrupted so much, nor so long.
“ The importance of this is very great in all cases, but
especially so with those whose natural infirmity or peculiarity
tends to isolate them.
“ There are innumerable threads uniting us with society,
. and giving us the unspeakable advantages of home ,and of
familiar neighborhood, many of which are broken in the case
of thepe unfortunates; and we should strive to strengthen,
not to weaken, those that remain to them.
“ 4th. The disadvantages and evils arising out of congre
gation of great numbers of persons of like infirmity, would
be lessened and counteracted.
“ The Hartford school is already too large; and it is con
tinually growing. Living many years in such a congregation
strengthens that tendency to isolation which grows out of the
infirmity of mutism, and intensifies other morbid tendencies.
“ By the new plan all these would be lessened, and the
counteracting tendencies of common social life would be
greatly increased.
6
�42
“ The mutes would be together but five or six hours each
day. During the rest of the time, instead of being subjected
to the artificial restraint and influences of ‘ asylum life,’
which, at best, can be only a poor imitation of family life and
influences, they would be subjected to the average influences
of social life; which is the kind of life they are to live in
future, and for which, during all the tender years of youth,
they should be trained.
“ 5th. The whole establishment would be simplified.
There would be no need of a great building, with halls,
dormitories, kitchen, dining-room and the like; but only a
simple school-house, and perhaps a workshop. There would
be no need of superintendent, matron or steward, with their
corps of assistants ; no cooks, no domestics, and none of the
cumbrous machinery of a great institution.
“ 6th. Part of the burden of supporting the child would
fall where part of it (at least,) surely belongs, to wit: upon
the parents, and upon the neighborhood, and not all upon
the State. Moreover, besides lessening the cost and the
responsibility which now fall upon the State, it would divide
them among the people. The tendency of this would be to
cause our mutes to be educated more nearly as our other
children are. Every approach to this is very important to
the mutes, because it tends to prevent their social isolation,
and makes them to be regarded as members of society in full
communion.
“ A regular course of intellectual instruction would be
given in the school; but advantage might be taken of neigh
boring workshops for teaching some, if not all, the pupils
various handicrafts, as other youth are taught. This would
give a wider range of choice than can be given in the asylum,
where only a few trades are taught.
•
'
�43
'■
•
“ Arrangements might be made by which children of
farmers, who can be useful at home in summer, might come
to the school in winter.
“ Other advantages of such a change might be set forth,
besides the consideration that in a new school we might have
all the advantages of the long experience of the Hartford
school. We might avoid some of the errors which result
from its very organization which cannot be cured in one
generation ; and which, perhaps, stand in the way of intro
ducing new and improved systems of instruction.”
Now, if an establishment upon this plan is not
an institution for deaf mutes, then what constitutes
one? Is it eating in a common hall; sleeping in a
common dormitory; being subjected to daily chapel
devotions; taught a particular creed; and kept
cooped up in one building and yard? Are these
things essential to an institution? Then are not the
German universities institutions; nor our country
academies, nor our common schools, ” institutions.”
. Does not, then, this fourth sentence of the para
graph show, like the three preceding ones, that in
his excessive desire to put Dr. Howe in the wrong,
the Reverend Principal is led to misunderstand, and
then to misstate his views?
The conclusion that he does is strengthened by
the next paragraph, in which the Principal is led to
state what is utterly at variance with known facts,
and even with statements in his own Reports. He
says, (p. 35) :—
�44
“ Dr. Howe objects that our school is too large, and that
the cost is annually increasing. * * * The annual
charge is now $175. * * * The annual charge at the
Institution for the Blind is $200 per pupil, &c.”
This strange blending of truth and error gives
the reader an entirely false impression. The
annual charge at the Institution for the Blind
is more than the Principal states it to be; but no
matter—the animus of this sentence is clear; it
gives the impression that the cost at the Hartford
school is only $175 a year! Who, that is not
familiar with the financial condition of the Hartford
asylum, could fail to conclude, from reading this
statement,, that it cost much less to support pupils
there than at the Institution for the Blind, or at any
similar institution in the whole land? Whereas, the
actual cost is more than $175; probably nearer
$275 than $175 a year.
The Asylum has a fund given by the United
States government for the benefit of the mutes gen
erally, and the income of that, (and perhaps of
other funds,) probably amounted last year to over
$15,000. The Trustees, as in duty bound, appro
priate this, or part of it, to keeping down the
charges.
They do not tell us. how much; and the Report
of the Treasurer is marvellously condensed.
That document, however, show that the expenses
in 1865 were: for salaries $18,649.40; insurance
�45
and sundries, $1,314.21; total, $19,963.61. Other
expenses by the Steward, (p. 44,) $33,276.47; mak
ing in all $53,240.08 as the cost in 1865. This sum,
divided by 212, the average number of pupils,
gives over $250 a year for each. The printed
accounts are obscure, and there is apparent discre
pancy between the Steward and Treasurer,—so
that the actual cost may be a little less ; but
certainly it is far greater than an unsuspecting
reader would infer from the Report of the Principal;
and probably nearer $275 than $175.
There is another proof, that the eagerness of the
Principal to convict Dr. Howe of inconsistency,
leads him to contradict his own Report. He says,
(p. 38,) comparing the pupils of the Blind Asylum
with his own,—
“ It is comparatively difficult for blind children to travel in
public conveyances. They are exposed to constant danger,
and must always’ have. an attendant. Deaf mutes, however,
travel safely to all parts of the country
z
Here are several mistakes,—some excusable,
some not. It is excusable that the Principal should
not know that most of the pupils of the Institution
of the Blind travel to and from home on the rail
roads, without special attendants, and safely, and
that they are trained to do it. But it is not excusable
that he should publish a statement concerning them
without a little inquiry into its truth.
�46
Still less is it excusable that he should make state
ments, contradictory to others in the Report of his
own Institution. On page 72 of the very Report in
which he states that deaf mutes travel to all parts
of' the country safely, we find the following,
reprinted from former Reports:—
“ On the day of the commencement of the Vacation, an
officer of the Asylum will accompany such pupils as
are to travel upon the railroads between Hartford and Boston,
taking' care of them and their baggage, on condition that
their friends will make timely provision for their expenses on
the way, and engage to meet and receive them immediately
on the arrival of the early train at various points on the route
previously agreed on, and at the station of the Boston and
Worcester Railroad in Boston. A similar arrangement is
made on the Connecticut River Railroads, as far as to White
River Junction. No person will be sent from the Asylum to
accompany the pupils on their return; but if their fare is
paid and their trunks checked to Hartford, it will be safe to
send them in charge of the conductor.”
A critic writing in the spirit of the Principal’s
Report might be tempted to say that, when it is
desirable to make a point against Dr. Howe,
"the deaf mutes travel safely to all parts of the
country; ” but, when it is desirable to attract
pupils, the parents are assured " that an officer of
the Asylum will travel with them and take care of
them.”
�47
But the charitable conclusion is, that in his haste
and eagerness to make points against an opponent,
the Principal overlooked what careful thought
would have made him see, to wit: that blind people
are less exposed to danger in travelling than deaf
people. The former are made careful by their
infirmity, and their hearing is made acute by
practice; the latter are made careless, and they
have no hearing at all. Again, a little reflection
would have shown him, that one of the many
advantages of hearing, over sight, as a guardian
sense, arises from the fact that in the material
world warnings of danger come mainly through
the ear. This is, first, because, during half the
time, darkness prevails over the world, and then
the sentinel at the eye is off guard; but the
one at the ear listens during all the waking
hours; and, even when the body sleeps, is still half
awake; for the ear shuts no lid, as the eye does.
And second, because the eye receives no warning
unless the rays of light strike nearly from the front,
and therefore more than half the circle round us is
unguarded. But the ear gathers in sounds not
only from all around, but from above and below.
Unless the rattlesnake be in the direct path, the eye
sees him not, while the ear catches the first note of
warning, come it from where it may. The thinnest
substance stops light; but sound traverses thick
walls. Besides, sight is more voluntary,—hearing
�48
more involuntary; almost automatic indeed. Sights
are shut out easily; sounds with difficulty. You
can be blind at will; you cannot shut out all sound,
even by stopping the ears.
But be the philosophy of the matter what it
may, daily facts show that mutes and deaf per
sons are more exposed to the dangers of the
present mode of travel, and suffer more from them,
not only than blind persons, but than any class of
people whatever. We constantly hear of persons
being run over on the tracks; and in a large
proportion of cases they are deaf persons.
If the Principal will consult the records of rail
roads he will find many cases of mutes and deaf
persons being run over; but rarely one of a blind •
man being injured in that manner.
Nay! if he will look into the Reports of his own
Institution he will find evidence not only, of con
stant dread of danger from the rail cars, but acci
dents and deaths among the pupils, even, while
under the protecting and watchful care of the
Asylum.
The Thirty-Ninth Annual Report says,—
“ An accident occurred on the railroad to one of the .pupils
from Canada, in September last, which resulted in his death.
While walking carelessly along on the ends of the ties, out
side of the track, he was struck down by a passing train, and
so severely injured that he survived less than an hour. This
x
�49
is the first accident of the kind which has ever happened to
one of our pupils ; and we trust with the warning given to
them of the danger of a similar exposure, and the vigilance
which will in future be exercised on the part of those who
have the care of them, it will be the last. Several educated
deaf mutes have, within a few years, been killed while
walking on the track of railroads.
“ The practice of thus exposing themselves to almost
certain destruction cannot be too strongly reprobated, and
their friends should enjoin upon them, the importance of
discontinuing it under all circumstances.”
But the trust and the hope were vain; and vain
were the warnings and precautions, for we read in
the Fortieth Report, (p. 13,) as follows:—
“ A severe, but not fatal accident, happened to one of our
oldest pupils in July last, in consequence of incautiously
walking on the railroad track near the city. The warning
given in our last Report was unheeded, and • the result was
an injury, which will in a measure disable him for life.”
A still more shocking accident is related in the
Forty-Second Report, (p. 8) :—
“Two of the small boys, John Parker, from Massachu
setts, and Benjamin Dawson, from New Hampshire, were
killed by a train of cars as they were walking along the
railroad track. The caution given them but a few hours
before the accident was disregarded, and their intention of
being on the track but for a few moments, till they could
reach the crossing of a road, brought upon them this terrible
7
�50
calamity. While we sympathize with the afflicted friends of
these promising lads, and regret most sincerely their untimely
end, we cannot think there has been any want of care or
attention to the safety of the pupils in this particular, on
the part of the officers of the Asylum to whom their imme
diate oversight is entrusted. No rule of the establishment
has been more distinctly set. forth, more frequently or
more strictly enjoined, or more rigidly enforced, than
that which forbids the pupils going upon the track of a
railroad. Whenever an accident of the kind has happened
to a deaf mute in any part of the country, the fact has been
announced to them publicly, and they have been warned
never to indulge in a practice so unwise and so dangerous.
We trust that the lesson taught by this sad experience may
never be forgotten by the pupils, and that it may prompt
those who watch over them to still greater vigilance.”
The records of other Institutions show that dread
ful accidents have happened in consequence of the
infirmity of the pupils. As a matter of curiosity,
we have ascertained by the annual returns of all the
Railroad Companies of Massachusetts, that the
number of persons run over, and killed or injured
by the cars, during the last fifteen years, is 701.
This does not include passengers, nor persons con
nected with the trains, but only persons outside the
train, crossing the road, or walking or lying upon
the track. Of these, one is supposed to have been
injured in consequence of blindness, six of insanity,
and seventeen of deafness. Of course the supposed
cause is not always the real one; but, assuredly, if
�51
the real cause were ascertained, it would swell the
number of accidents to the deaf, much more than to
the blind; because the blindness is obvious, deaf
ness is not. Everybody in the neighborhood knows
who is blind, but not who is deaf. In the case of a
stranger, even, the corpse of a blind man would
reveal his infirmity; but deaf dead men tell no tales.
But even if they could, it might be useless for our
purpose, because if in the face of these reasons and
facts, the Principal persists in saying, even to make
a point against Dr. Howe, that "deaf mutes can
travel safely to all parts of the country,” he would
not believe otherwise even though one rose from
the dead.
Enough has been said to show that the charge of
ignorance and error which the Principal attempts
to fasten upon the Chairman of the Board of State
Charities, is laid at the wrong door.
If this were all, it would not be worth saying in
public. To aim at mere personal triumph would be
unworthy the cause and the parties. But there are
questions concerning the best modes of educating
and instructing deaf mutes which are very impor
tant to that class of unfortunates, and which would
deeply interest all intelligent and humane people if
they could be brought forward and fairly discussed.
It is the hope of causing them to be discussed
which decides us to print what has been written
above.
�52
While earnest and enthusiastic men like Blan
chet, in France, plead for the immediate modifica
tion of the old Central Institutions,- such as those
of Paris, London, and Hartford, and for teaching
mutes in common schools; and while eminent and
experienced, but conservative men, like the Abbe
Carton, in Belgium, admit that the modification of
the old system is only a question of time,—we of
of Massachusetts hold on to a system borrowed
from the old world, nearly fifty years ago, by a
legislative body not known to have been partic
ularly enlightened upon the subject of deaf mute
education.
This ought not to be; and our neglect of the
matter is not creditable to the Commonwealth. The
slightest examination would show that we have
not only failed to improve materially our method of
treating mutes, but have also failed to introduce
into it the system and order which characterize
other departments of the public service.
It would be a great mistake to say that the present
method of selecting the beneficiaries of the State is
a good one, for there is no real method about it;
and even the existing loose and imperfect practice
is left to officials who have not the time nor the
means to conduct it properly.
See how it works. A mother has a child who
cannot hear, and when he becomes eight or ten
years old she concludes, sadly, that he never will
�53
talk. She takes him to the common school, but the
teacher sends him home, saying he cannot do any
thing with him—cannot teach him. By and by she
learns that there is a school, somewhere, for such
children; and if she will go to the State House
she can find out all about it. There she is passed
civilly from one official to another, until she reaches
the gentlemanly clerk of the Secretary of State,
who concludes the child ought to be sent to Hart
ford, and he passes her over to the gentlemanly clerk
of the Governor, who kindly assists her in making
out the necessary papers, which are signed without
further examination. Neither of these gentlemen,
however, has any means of knowing whether the
applicant is a fit subject for the school, or not.
The child must then wait perhaps one month, per
haps eleven months, until the time of the annual
reception of pupils, and then be sent to Hartford;
provided that, in the meantime, the parents do not
change their purpose.
At Hartford, if the child is found to be a proper
subject, he is well cared for, and put under the
instruction of able and zealous teachers. But if,
as sometimes happens, the mutism is the result of
insanity, or of imbecility, or if the child is partially
blind, or otherwise defective, or is too feeble in
health, then he must be sent home again.
He has lost precious time; the poor parents have
been sadly taxed for the cost of the journey; the
7*
�54
State has perhaps been taxed for his clothing; and
all because it is nobody’s business to see that only
fit persons shall be selected as beneficiaries, and
sent out of the State at public charge.
Again, it is clear that parents who can afford to
pay part of the expenses of the child’s education
ought to do so. This would not only be just, but
really beneficial to them and to their child. It
would increase self-respect; attach more esteem to
the advantages of education; promote punctuality
of attendance; favor study at home, as preparatory
for school; and be in many ways advantageous,
besides being a saving of money to the State.
But it is now nobody’s business to attend to this
matter; consequently the pupils are, almost without
exception, at the entire charge of the State for their
board and instruction, and in some cases for their
clothing also.
Again, the Commonwealth sends about a hundred
pupils to the Connecticut school, but has adopted
no method for ascertaining whether her wards
are taught by a system well adapted to their
wants, nor even whether they have the full
benefit of the system, such as it is. There
is no examination, deserving the name, by any
official; and no means of knowing officially whether
the wards of the Commonwealth have been well
and properly treated, taught, and trained, during
their five or six years’ sojourn in another State.
�55
The whole thing is taken upon faith. Now, we our
selves do not lack faith in the honesty and ability
of those to whose care they are committed; but
officials should walk by light, and not by faith.
We say there is nothing deserving the name of
examination, for it would be a mistake to call the
present practice by such a name. The Governor
and Council, in their annual " progress ” among
State institutions, sometimes go out of our bor
ders, and visit the asylum at Hartford. The prac
tice is a good one, and certain good results follow;
but surely nobody will pretend that there is, or can
be, upon that occasion, anything like an examina
tion. It is merely an exhibition to a highly intel
ligent and sympathetic audience.
Then, once in a year, the Legislature appoints a
committee to look after public charitable institu
tions generally, and especially to see that they do
not spend too much money. This committee makes
a general inspection of all the charitable and penal
institutions in the State; and once a year they visit
the Connecticut asylum. They have reason to be
pleased by what they witness; and they generally
give the institution a complimentary notice in
their report. It is well known, however, that
members are not selected with a view to their
ability or fitness for judging the merits of a system
of instruction for mutes, and that their single flying
visit is only a general inspection. It is not, and
�56
cannot well be a thorough examination of the
merits of the system of instruction and of its
results. The reports of the Committee make no
such pretensions. They are complimentary, of
course, but very vague and general in their state
ments. Nevertheless, they are sometimes gravely
quoted by the Directors of the Hartford asylum, as
proofs that the friends of deaf mutes ought to be
satisfied with the excellence of their system, and of
its administration!
We assert with confidence that our Legislature
acts without sufficient light and knowledge upon this
subject. We assert, moreover, with sorrow, almost
with shame, that whenever an attempt is made to
bring about any change in the system of educat
ing our mutes, it is put down by considerations
not of wise economy but of mere money saving.
The whole matter is in the hands of the Legisla
ture, which are always full enough with other
business.
Whenever there is any likelihood of any action
looking to a removal of our beneficiaries from
Connecticut, a delegation of pupils is sent from
Hartford to exhibit their knowledge and acquire
ments. They make a strong appeal (not too
strong,) to the sympathy of the Legislature. Then
the Superintendent waits upon the Committee
of Public Charitable Institutions, and exhibits his
facts and figures. He makes a strong appeal (too
�57
strong, alas!) to the pocket-nerve of the State. He
shows that he can maintain our children, if we will
send them abroad, cheaper than we can do it at
home; and straightway the whole matter is left to
sleep for the year.
Perhaps there is no need of any change, and no
room for any improvement. Perhaps the great
march of improvement in all other branches of
instruction, affects not the method adopted at
Hartford nearly half a century ago, and followed
ever since, almost without change. Perhaps noth
ing can be borrowed for its improvement from the
opposite system adopted in the excellent schools
for mutes through the length and breadth of Ger
many,—the land of learned men and of able teach
ers. Perhaps Horace Mann was a dolt. Perhaps
the Board of State Charities is all wrong in
suggesting any changes in our present system of
educating our mutes. But there should be no
doubt about it. Either the Board of Education,
or of State Charities, or some competent persons,
should be specially charged to see,—
First, that all the unfortunate mutes in the
Commonwealth shall not only have the oppor
tunity of being educated, but be sought out and
encouraged to avail themselves of it.
Second, that the present method shall be prop
erly systematized and regulated, so that there shall
�58
be strict accountability, real examinations, and
positive knowledge about results.
Third, that any questions about change of the 1
present method shall be decided upon broad and
liberal grounds, and not by considerations of
dollars and cents.
Such a committee, if clothed with authority,
might procure such changes in the present method
as would satisfy all the friends of the deaf mutes;
or they might advise the adoption of a new one.
The Directors of the Connecticut asylum, which
has done so much for the mutes of New England,
ought not to object to any change which will pro
mote the interests of those unfortunates, even if it
should involve the loss of a monopoly which the
asylum has so long enjoyed.
If Massachusetts should deem it best to establish
a school of her own, she has mute children enough
to fill it as full as a good school need to be; or
perhaps ought to be. But even if there should be
competition for the beneficiaries of other States, it
would be animated only by generous emulation,
not as to who would take pupils cheapest, but who
would teach and train them best. Of such emula
tion, there surely would come good, and not evil.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Remarks upon the education of deaf mutes: in defence of the doctrines of the second annual report of the Massachusetts Board of State Charities and in reply to the charges of the Rev. Collins Stone, principal of the American Asylum at Hartford
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Howe, Samuel C.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Boston; Mass.
Collation: 58 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by Wright & Potter, Boston. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Please note that this pamphlet contains language and ideas that may be upsetting to readers. These reflect the time in which the pamphlet was written and the ideologies of the author.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Walker, Fuller & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1866
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5190
G5689
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Deafness
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Remarks upon the education of deaf mutes: in defence of the doctrines of the second annual report of the Massachusetts Board of State Charities and in reply to the charges of the Rev. Collins Stone, principal of the American Asylum at Hartford), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Deaf-mutes
Deafness
Education
Muteness
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/53bfa41313db56eccb63212164c15c29.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=L%7E9fNQwu1mtCXWHNx0Y1CbQG3Z1eqNP1GhpYHqrzRKvASuCwctkBjUYogihG-MoUaDs%7EXxqw3jV%7E5r9KkBliG9nKePBqPcnq2RZX0hsAZJtpZrFEwx5C2V2q3hcFNEgrVGCfrk%7E7bElIkHsZ3ZQR6-hY-SXd%7EDuKXW-l8KWMpkFqSKONFqsFdzisKdMeug6i7OHz0rWqonduDUF0o2S7w39HU0vKg9Azmw-%7EupOUtaAi%7EyZ%7EhKL1XSq%7EsTu5n7VImwCfEngqYA%7EuBwsrTC-HVVoA4K2WYqLSINjrPcW0A9shGBuxm2X4Bm1SotqNE0CRHy6tb2gEPeNEvYnCdAiG4Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
69c80e3607ec801e86ef41f04ce465fb
PDF Text
Text
�J
'ML
A
�In establishing a college on the ordinary basis, and with the
ordinary scope, there are few difficulties which earnest men and
moderate means will not readily surmount. The course required
is simple and single; the equipment is compact; instructors are
readily found for every department; precedents at every point are
abundant.
But the work committed to the Trustees of the Cornell Univer-.
sity is far larger, far more complicated. In most cases it has few
available precedents, in many it has none. The committee upon
organization, therefore, cannot hope to present a plan which shall
cover every point likely to arise in carrying on the institution
now to be commenced; but they hope to present a plan which
shall aid in setting the University in operation, and to suggest
ideas which will aid it in developing healthfully and largely.
Theory
of the
Plan
of
Organization.
The theory on which the committee have based their plan is
that throughout the national and State legislation preparatory to
the establishment of the institution, and also throughout the ideas
of the founder of the Cornell University, as explained to us by
himself, are two leading convictions as to the educational needs
of the country, and two corresponding ideas as to meeting these
needs.
Each of these convictions, and its corresponding idea, is sepa
rate and distinct, yet each is necessary to the other.
The first of these convictions is that there exists a necessity
never yet fully met, for thorough education in various special
departments, and, among them, the science and practice of Agri
culture, Industrial Mechanics, and kindred departments of thought
and action. The corresponding practical idea is that institutions
be founded where such instruction can be conducted with every
appliance necessary in discovering truth and in diffusing truth;
that such instruction be not subordinated to any other; that the
agricultural and industrial professions be regarded as the peers ’of
�every other; that access to these departments be opened as widely
as possible, and progress in them be pushed as far as possible.
The second of these convictions is that the system of collegiate
instruction now dominant leaves unsatisfied the wants of a very
large number, and perhaps the majority of those who desire an
advanced general education; that although there are great num
bers of noble men doing noble work in the existing system, it has
devoted its strength and machinery mainly to a single combination
of studies, into which comparatively few enter heartily; that where
more latitude in study has been provided for, all courses outside
the single traditional course have been considered to imply a
lower caste in those taking them; that the higher general educa
tion has therefore lost its hold upon the majority of the trusted
leaders of society, that it has therefore become under-estimated
and distrusted by a majority of the people at large, and that there
fore it is neglected by a majority of our young men of energy
and ability.
The corresponding practical idea is that colleges of wider scope
be founded; that no single course be insisted upon for all alike;
that various combinations of studies be provided to meet various
minds and different plans; thus presenting a general course to
meet that general want which existing colleges fail to satisfy.
Fundamental Plan of Instruction.
The labor imposed upon us then is two-fold.
First, we are to make provision for special courses—special
instruction in the departments of agriculture, mechanic arts, &c.
Secondly, we are to provide a general course—a general course
in which such instruction and culture be afforded as shall be de
manded by the young men who come to group themselves in the
different special courses.
Even if it should be claimed that the whole effort of the trus
tees ought to be devoted to agriculture and the mechanic arts
alone; even if we were to construe away the plain words of the
original act of Congress, which speaks of “other scientific and
classical branches ” as part of the object of the government grant
of lands, still the oft-repeated declaration of our founder that he
“ wishes to make such provision that every person can find oppor
tunity here to pursue any study he desires,” would be our suffi
cient warrant in using at least his munificent gift in supplementing
�5
the special instruction with general instruction, and rounding it
out into the proportions of an university.
•
Again, even were we to found merely technical schools, giving
instruction merely in special departments, the committee believe
that we should be very soon obliged to supplement these special
courses with a general course. Common sense, as well as general
experience teaches that there must be some variation in mental
labor. With rare exceptions, any man who pursues one science
or art alone, devoting his mind entirely to that, though he may at
first progress rapidly, soon shows that such progress is not normal.
It is very firmly believed that the great majority of men who
wish to attain a high place in any science or art, can rise higher,
even in that, by enlarging the mind by some parallel studies,
than by narrowing the mind constantly to their single pursuit.
Such contracted study gives facility and accuracy, but it is too
often fatal to the qualities which ensure eminence.
Your committee are therefore of the opinion that there should
be two great divisions of the university.
The first division should comprise the separate departments
devoted each to a special science and art. The second division
should comprise the department of Science, Literature and the
Arts in general.
In accordance with this division is presented the following plan:
Organization of Instruction.
I. Division of Special Sciences and Arts.
1. Department of Agriculture.
2. Department of Mechanic Arts.
3. Department of Civil Engineering.
4. Department of Commerce and Trade.
5. Department of Mining.
6. Department of Medicine and Surgery.
7. Department of Law.
8. Department of Jurisprudence, Political Science and History,
9. Department of Education.
II. Division of Science, Literature and the Arts in General.
1. 1st General Course.
2. 2d General Course.
3. 3d General Course.
4. Scientific Course.
5. Optional Course.
�6
The character of each of the departments named in the first
division is in the main, sufficiently explained by its title. Details
of courses of instruction in each cannot well be arranged until, the
trustees shall have consulted with the faculty, and it is recom
mended that at periods previous to the commencement of active
instruction, the Academic Senate be requested to convene for the
purpose of discussing.this subject and presenting plans.
But there is one department, regarding which, perhaps, some
explanation is needed here : the department of Jurisprudence—
Political and Social Science, and History.
We believe that although there will be some attention to these
subjects in the general course, there is need of a separate depart
ment devoted to a study of them, wider and deeper. We
believe too, that such a department should be established so soon
as we approximate a full corps of professors.
In various connections with institutions of learning, and in
various public employments, the committee have been convinced:
First—That great numbers of the most active young men long
for such a department, would work vigorously in it, and would
secure good discipline by it, and that these young men are many
of them not attracted to the existing colleges.
o
o
Secondly.—We believe that the State and nation are constantly
injured by their chosen servants, who lack the simplest rudiments
of knowledge which such a department could supply. No one
can stand in any legislative position and not be struck with the
frequent want in men otherwise strong and keen, of the simplest
knowledge of principles essential to public welfare. Of technical
knowledge of law, and of practical acquaintance with business,
the supply is always plentiful, but it is very common that in
leciding great public questions, exploded errors in political and
social science are revamped, fundamental principles of law disre
garded, and the plainest teachings of history ignored.
In any republic, and especially in this, the most frequent ambi
tion among young men will be to rise to positions in the public
service, and the committee think it well at least to attempt to
provide a department in view of the wants of these; a depart
ment where there should be something more than a mere glance
over one or two superseded text books,—where there should be
large and hearty study and comparison of the views and methods
of Guizot, and Mill, and Lieber, and Woolsey, and Bastiat, and
Carey, and Mayne, and others.
�There are among you, gentlemen of the board of trustees,
representatives of every walk in life, of every important profes
sion, of every party. There are among you, representatives of
the highest state and national employments, and we appeal to you
for corroboration of the statement, that whatever may be the
opinion of cloistered men, the opinion of men active in the world
at large, is decided, that there is a great branch of instruction
here, for which the existing colleges make no adequate provision.
It may be said that the function of colleges is to give discipline,
that knowledge is subordinate. We answer that they should give
both, and that as a rule, the attempt to give mental discipline by
studies which the mind does not desire, is as unwise as to attempt
to give physical nourishment by food which the body does not desire.
Discipline comes not by studies which are “droned over.”
Again, we believe that the knowledge given, is far more
important than many would have us think. The main stock in
political economy and history of most of our educated public men,
is what they learned before they studied for their professions.
Many an absurdity uncorrected at college has been wrought into
the constitutions and statutes of our great commonwealths, and
when we consider that constitution making for new states and old,
is to be the great work in this country, of this and succeeding
generations, surely, we do well to attempt more thorough instruc
tion of those on whom the work is likely to fall.
. One other department, needs, perhaps a few words of explan
ation—that of Commerce and Trade. Throughout the country
have sprung up schools known as “commercial colleges.” The
number of persons attending them is such as to show that they
meet a want widely felt, and the idea has suggested itself that at
some future day it might be well to try the experiment of a
department under the above name, in which a more thorough and
large instruction could be given, than in those at present so
numerous. Anything which will bring some university culture
to bear upon those preparing to lead in commerce and trade, will
be a benefit to the country. How far it can be done your com
mittee will not venture to say. At least one great European uni
versity has kept up a course of this sort for many years.
In the second division, it is necessary to give a more detailed
explanation of courses, and ideas upon which the courses are
based.
�8
The 11 First General Course ” comprises a combination of studies
mainly like the classical course at the existing colleges.
The “ Second General Course,” comprises a combination of
studies like the first, with the substitution of the German lano-uao’o
for the Greek. Giving, as such a course would, the two great
elements of our language, the Romanic and the Teutonic, it is
believed that it would be received with great favor by many of
the best minds dissatisfied with the existing college courses.
The “Third General Course,” comprises the same studies as the
previous courses, except that the two languages studied are French
and German.
The “ Scientific Course'' is combined in view of the wants of
those who intend devoting themselves wholly or mainly to the
natural sciences.
The “ Optional Course" is one in which the student is required
to choose three subjects of study from all those pursued in the
University, and to pass examination therein. This it is believed,
will add greatly to the efficiency of the institution. It is a course
permitted in some of the great universities of continental Europe,
and with excellent results. It has been tried thoroughly at the
State University of Michigan, and to nothing in its organization
is that institution more indebted for its acknowledged efficiency.
It is not recommended that all these departments be established
at once. The Cornell University must have a development—a
growth, though it is believed that its growth may be very rapid.
But your committee do not hesitate to declare their belief that
neither of these departments will attain full efficiency until all are
established. They believe that each additional department and
additional course will strengthen every other, by attracting more
and more earnest minds among teachers and taught; by stimula
ting emulation among professors and students: by throwing light
upon each science and art from every other; by presenting every
element of the best culture.
The committee, however, recommend the immediate establish
ment only of so much of the first division as is embraced in the
departments of Agriculture, the Mechanic Arts, Civil Engineer
ing and Mining.
o
o
They recommend the immediate establishment of so many
courses in the second division as shall be found necessary to meet
the wants of the students presenting themselves at the beginning
of the first term.
�9
In the second division it seems advisable to present some ideas
which have influenced them in determining the courses into which
the division is separated.
University Liberty
in
Choice
of
Studies.
The first question which arises in arranging general plans of
instruction is as to the amount of liberty to be allowed the student
in selecting his course.
On one hand are they who declare that students at the usual age
of entering college are unfit to select a course, and that it must be
chosen for them. Of those taking this view are some men held
in deserved honor throughout the country.
Ou the other hand are they who declare that the usual imposi
tion of a single, fixed course is fatal to any true university spirit in
this country; that it cramps colleges and men; that it has much
to do with that strange anomaly under the existing system—
scholars stepping out of the highest scholastic positions in college
classes into nonentity in active life; that it has been the main agent
in bringing about that relaxation of the hold which colleges once
had upon the nation, which all thoughtful men deplore.
The committee see much truth in the latter view. They think
that the first view contains a fallacy in the virtual assumption that
because a young student is not aperfect judge regarding his com
plete wants, therefore he is no judge at all, and shall have others
to choose for him; and but one course opened to their choice.
We hold, indeed, that most students need advice as to details
of study, and that probably none could construct the best possible
course of study; but we also hold that an overwhelming majority
of students are competent to choose between different courses of
study, carefully balanced and arranged by men who have brought
thought and experience to the work. By the aid of older friends,
and the faculty of the university, a young man ought to be able to
make a choice based upon his previous education and means of
future education—-upon his tastes, position and ambition. Cer
tainly the results could not be more wretched under such a sys
tem than under the existing system, even by the confession of its
most earnest advocates.
The committee have carried out these views by naming different
courses, so that while the student may have the benefit of the ex
perience of men older than himself, he may have some liberty of
choice; and they have added one course, giving to more mature
students complete freedom of choice.
�10
.
Leading Disciplinary Studies
in a
General Course.
The next question which arises regarding a general course, is as
to the classes of studies to be relied upon for mental discipline,
fundamental knowledge and general culture.
A large party unhesitatingly declare for the Greek and Latin
classics. They believe that nothing else gives so valuable a disci
pline or so perfect a culture.
The committee declare here their belief in the great value of
classical studies. They do not hesitate to advise those who have
time and taste for them to study them—the Greek for its wonder
ful perfection—the Latin for its great practical value as a key to
modern languages and to the nomenclature of modern sciences—
and both Greek and Latin for their value in the cultivation of
judgment. But while it is believed that these studies ought to
hold an honored place, the committee are strongly opposed to the
attempt to fetter all students to them, if for no other reason be
cause this would be to defeat the plain intentions of those who
framed the act of Congress to which the establishment of the uni
versity is due.
In the courses provided, the modern languages most in use, and
the sciences which in theory and practice have in latter years
attained such great importance, must be recognized at their full
value in imparting instruction, and in securing mental discipline.
The committee cannot forbear noticing here a fallacy regarding
mental discipline which they will endeavor to avoid in presenting
courses of study.
That fallacy consists in the idea that the only mental discipline
is that which promotes a certain keenness and precision of mind.
We believe that there is another kind of mental discipline quite
as valuable—discipline for breadth of mind. For the former, such
studies as mathematics and philology are urged; for the latter,
such studies as history and literature. To say that the latter are
not disciplinary is to ignore, perhaps, the most important part of
mental discipline. In American life there will always be enough
keenness and sharpness of mind. But the danger is that there will
be neglect of those noble studies which enlarge the mental horizon
and increase mental powers in reaching out toward it—studies
which give material for thought and suggestions for thought upon
the great field of the history of civilization.
Happily no studies are more enjoyed by the best American stu
dents than those which give this mental breadth—historical and
�11
political studies. This being the case, there need be no fears as
to their value in mental discipline, for discipline comes by studies
which are loved, not by studies which are loathed. There is no
discipline to be obtained in droning over studies. Vigorous,
energetic study, prompted by enthusiasm or a high sense of the
value of the subject, is the only kind of study not positively hurt
ful to mental power. Hence the great evil of insisting on the
same curriculum for all students, regardless of their tastes or plans.
Combination and Separation of Professorships.
In making provision for these different departments it will be
seen that they interpenetrate each other, one professorship
frequently extending through two or three departments.
So frequently is this the case, that it will be seen to be impos
sible to provide professors fully for any one department without
at the same time, making almost sufficient provision for the others.
Of the professorships to be filled at an early day, we would
present the following schedule :—
1st.
2d.
3d.
4th.
5th.
6th.
7th.
8th.
9tb.
I. Department of Agriculture.
Professor of the Theory and Practice of Agriculture.
Professor of Agricultural Chemistry.
Professor of General and Analytical Chemistry.
Professor of Geology and Mineralogy.
Professor of Zoology and comparative anatomy.
Professor of Botany.
Professor of Civil Engineering.
Professor of Veterinary Surgery and Breeding of Animals.
Physiology, Hygiene, and Physical Culture.
1st.
2d.
3d.
4th.
5th.
6th.
II. Department of Mechanics.
Professor of Physics and Industrial Mechanics.
Professor of Civil Engineering.
Professor of Architecture.
Professor of General and Analytical Chemistry.
Professor of Geology and Mineralogy.
Professor of Mathematics.
III. Department of Civil Engineering.
1st. Professor of Civil Engineering.
2d. Professor of Architecture.
�12
3d. Professor of Physics and Industrial Mechanics.
4th. Professor of Geology and Mineralogy.
5th. Professor of Mathematics.
1st.
2d.
3d.
4th.
Professor
Professor
Professor
Professor
IV. Department of Mining.
of Mining and Metallurgy.
of Civil Engineering.
of Geology and Mineralogy.
of General and Analytical Chemistry.
V. Department of Science, Literature, and the Arts.
1st. Professor of Moral and Mental Philosophy.
2d. Professor of History.
3d. Professor of Political Economy.
4th. Professor of Municipal Law.
5th. Professor of Constitutional Law.
6th. Professor of Ancient Languages.
7th. Professor of French and South European Languages.
8th. Professor of German and North European Languages.
9th. Professor of English Language and Literature.
10th. Professor of Rhetoric, Oratory and Vocal Culture.
11th. Professor of Mathematics.
12 th. Professor of Astronomy.
13th. Professor of Physics and Industrial Mechanics.
14th. Professor of Geology and Mineralogy.
15th. Professor of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy.
16th. Professor of Botany.
17th. Professor of Physiology, Hygiene and Physical Culture.
18th. Professor of Chemistry, General and Analytical.
19th. Professor of ^Esthetics, and the History of the Fine Arts.
20th. Professor of Architecture.
21st. Professor of Military Tactics.
22d. Professor of Physical Geography and Meteorology.
The entire university, therefore, would comprise the following
professorships:—
1. Theory and Practice of Agriculture.
2. Agricultural Chemistry.
3. Veterinary Surgery and the Breeding of Animals.
4. General and Analytical Chemistry.
5. Botany.
�13
6. Zoology and Comparative Anatomy.
7. Geology and Mineralogy.
8. Physics and Industrial Mechanics.
9. Mathematics.
10. Astronomy.
11. Civil Engineering.
12. Physiology, Hygiene and Physical Culture.
13. Moral and Physical Culture.
14. History.
15. Political Economy.
16. Municipal Law.
17. Constitutional Law.
18. Rhetoric, Oratory and Vocal Culture.
19. English Language and Literature.
20. French, and South European Languages.
21. German, and North European Languages.
22. Ancient Languages.*
23. ./Esthetics, and History of the Fine Arts.
24. Architecture.
25. Military Tactics and Engineering.
26. Physical Geography and Meteorology.
It will be seen, therefore, that there are twenty-six professor
ships needed at an early day. But it is not thought that it will
be necessary to have so many separate professorships at once, nor
to place all upon the same basis. Some professors must, to be
efficient, reside permanently at the seat of the university, giving
daily recitations or lectures, and conducting daily experiments.
Some will be perfectly efficient by a temporary residence,
during which recitations are heard, or lectures given. Hence
occurs at once, another division of a kind very different from any
we have previously made—the division into resident and non
resident professors.
Having in view this division, the committee present the follow
ing schedule:—
1.
2.
3.
4.
Resident Professors.
Theory and Practice of Agriculture
Agricultural Chemistry.
General and Analytical Chemistry.
Botany.
■To be separated into two or more professorships when circumstances shall demand it.
�14
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Zoology and Comparative Anatomy.
Geology and Mineralogy.
Physics and Industrial Mechanics.
Mathematics.
Astronomy.
Civil Engineering.
Moral and Mental Philosophy.
History.
Rhetoric, Oratory and Vocal Culture.
French, and South European Languages.
German, and North European Languages.
Ancient Languages.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Non-Resident Professors.
Veterinary Surgery and the Breeding of Animals.
Physiology, Hygiene and Physical Culture.
Political Economy.
Municipal Law.
Constitutional Law.
English Language and Literature.
^Esthetics and the History of the Fine Arts.
Architecture.
Military Tactics and Engineering.
Physical Geography and Meteorology.
Temporary Modifications of the Plan.
The question now arises, how much of this plan can be made
practical during the first year—how many of th3se professors
can we employ to advantage while the university is beginning its
operations?
Two plans suggest themselves. The first is to fill all these
chairs immediately, to make a beginning which shall give us a
reputation at once, to strike public attention on the first day of
the first term, by a large programme fully carried out.
The second plan is to hold during the first year, some professor
ships in abeyance, and of the remaining departments to combine
temporarily, several in one, thus commencing in a manner less
striking, feeling our way somewhat at first, finding gradually
what are the departments most needed.
The committee pronounce for the latter method. The policy
of the Cornell University has not been to make much proclamation
�15
of great purposes. Its founder has steadily gone on, always
performing more than his promises, and there are goodly signs
that the university authorities have caught his spirit. Two of
the noblest buildings for university purposes in the United States
have been reared; but there has been no pompous laying of corner
stones, no loud proclamations of new discoveries in the theory
and practice of education, no publication of programmes out of
all proportion to revenues, and it is to be hoped that we shall not
begin an ad captandum policy now. The only question worthy of
us is: What does the university practically need the first year?
It is believed that the duties may be so arranged that during the
first year eight or ten professors will be sufficient.
Possible Modifications of the Plan in Future.
Such is a general scheme offered as a point of departure in
arranging professorships. The committee know well that in
details it must often be departed from. The peculiar talents of a
valuable member of the faculty, have much to do with the final
shaping of the list of professorships. The demands made by stu
dents have also very much to do with it. A great demand upon
the professorship of Physiology, Hygiene and Physical Culture,
would make it necessary to change it from the non-resident to the
resident list, and so with others.
The number of students too, must have a very great influence
on this matter. As numbers increase, professorships must be sub
divided. Thus, until the numbers are large, the professor of
Physics can discharge the duties of professor of Industrial
Mechanics, but afterwards the latter department would probably
be detached.
As numbers increase, too, some departments will require
assistants. In some departments one system must be pursued and
the responsibility fixed on one man; it cannot therefore be divided.
But when numbers are greatly increased, it will probably be
necessary to appoint an assistant professor or instructor, who
should be subject as regards their plan of instruction, to the head
of the department. As any department developes also, it will be
necessary to subdivide it, and increase the number of professor
ships in it. Thus, for example, the department of Civil Engineer
ing, would be separated into three or four new departments, each
devoted to a special part of the work, and then must be added
instructors in geometrical and topographical drawing, &c.
�Non-resident Professors
for short
terms, or
University
Lecturers.
But there is a feature in the full organization which the
committee ask the trustees to consider especially. It is one which
several educators have in the recent years arrived at independ
ently of each other. It is one promising great results, but
demanding great care. This is the establishment of a system of
non-resident, short term professors, or university lecturers. The
plan is as follows : Have the full equipment of full term profes
sors above given, let the trustees elect each year a small number
of short-term professors or lecturers, from among the most distin
guished in their several departments, in this or other states;
let no general rule as to term of service, number of lecturers or
compensation be laid down, but let such special agreement be
made between each person thus called and the trustees, as shall
best secure the object desired.
Let the professors thus selected be either persons who are
accepted as authorities regarding matters upon which they
discourse, or persons whose talents, acquirements and reputations
are of the highest. Let them deliver, each, a certain number of
lectures, representing in a form and style as nearly suited to their
audiences as possible, what they themselves, consider the highest
results, or a summary of the main results of their labors. Let
their course of lectures be fully announced in the public prints to
the country at large. The advantage of such an addition to the
regular means of instruction, are believed to be very great.
First, great good would doubtless result to the Resident Faculty.
The great difficulty with bodies of professors remote from great
cities, and centres of thought and action is, that they lose connec
tion with the world at large, save through books; they become
provincial in spirit ; they lose that enthusiasm which contact
with other leading minds in the same pursuits would arouse;
they “ breed in and in;” their whole range of thought becomes
inevitably narrow. But, under this system now proposed, there
would be a constant influx of light and life from the great centres
of thought and action. The resident professors would be thrown
into close relations at once, with the special professors thus called.
Their views would be enlarged, their efforts stimulated, their
whole life quickened.
Secondly, great good would result to students in regular attend
ance. A great difficulty among students assembled in college is
�17
a regularity in routine, a dullness, a listlessness, a want of enthu
siasm. The general result of this, as regards study, is that it is
done mechanically; that most of the scholarly work is poor in
quality and small in quantity. The general result as regards conduct, is that too often, in a spirit of reaction against this listless
ness, the energies which would do great things if directed to study,
are directed to dissipation. It is believed by your committee that
if these special professors were men of the greatest ability and
eminence, an enthusiasm might be aroused among the students in
regard to various departments of knowledge, which would direct
their energies mainly into channels of study and thought.
The objection has indeed been made that these special courses
might cause confusion and dissipation in the minds of the students.
It is believed, however, that this will be the result with compara
tively few students, and even with these but temporarily. It is
believed that in the great majority of cases, the enthusiasm created
will far outweigh in good effects any evil effects arising from the
disturbance of the regular routine.
Thirdly, great good would result to large portions of the pub
lic in general, which under ordinary circumstances would not avail
itself of the ordinary privileges of the University. It is believed
that such special courses of lectures by distinguished men would
attract large numbers of citizens for brief terms, resulting in good
to them and to society at large, by an immediate extension of the
activity of the University among the matured minds and men
already in active life.
Fourthly, great good would result to the University itself. It
would enable the University to make a division of labor, selecting
members of the Resident Faculty, for their energy and working
ability, selecting men who have a name to make and ability to
make it, and not selecting men for the resident professors—for the
hard work of the University—who have attained eminence and so
outlived their willingness to do hard work.
Again, it would greatly strengthen the University as to reputa
tion. Let there be widely published each year, in leading jour
nals, in addition to a meritorious Resident Faculty, a number of
special professors or lecturers, whose ability in research, or in
presenting the results of research, is acknowledged, and the insti
tution would arrive in a very short time at a height of reputation
which other institutions have failed to achieve during long years
of ordinary administration.
2
�Again, the system thus proposed would strengthen the Univer* sity by attracting great numbers of students. The same simple
reasoning which we have used to show that this system would
give the University efficiency and power, also shows that it would
draw great numbers of students.
Nor would such a result be merely gratifying to pride. There
is an educating force of no mean value in the presence of a very
large body of students—a means of education through large
acquaintance, and through wide observation of character—a stimu
lus to effort through emulation, which in a small group can hardly
be attained.
Character
of
Scholarship in Professors.
The question next arises, what manner of men shall these pro
fessors be?
To maintain the efficiency and reputation of the University, its
faculty must constantly keep in view two great objects: first,-the
discovery of truth; secondly, the diffusion of truth.
By a certain class of men deservedly in high repute, there has
been fostered a spirit which tends not to the undue exaltation of
the discovery of new truth in science, for that cannot be unduly
exalted, but to the undue depreciation of the diffusion of scientific
truth.
Your committee believe that in the selection of a faculty, neither
of these two great functions of every professor should be exalted
at the expense of the other. It is not doubted that in the largest
minds devoted to science, the power of discovering truth and the
power of imparting it, are almost invariably found together. Men
should be sought for the faculty who can go on discovering truth
and imparting it. But it should not be forgotten that in an insti
tution of learning, facility and power in imparting truth are even
more necessary than in discovering it.
Where can these Professors be Found?
Many persons of high standing have answered this question
much as follows: “Your endowment is large: select the greatest
men in this country and other countries. Have perhaps fewer
professors, but range the country through and take from the lead
ing institutions their leading men, the men who give standing to
science, literature and art in America. Have the best.”
Other persons thoughtfully considering this problem have ans
�19
wered the question in a very different way: “ Your endowment is
indeed large, but it has to cover an immense field. The most effi
cient men for professorships are by no means necessarily those
most frequently paraded in newspapers. Often a hard working
man, who has never arrived at more than a local reputation, or a
young man who has not arrived at any reputation at all, is practi
cally better than men whose reputation is made, and who have out
lived the necessity of hard thought and work.”
There are important elements of truth in both these responses;
but your committee would answer this question as follows:
The division of the instructing body into the three great classes
of resident, non-resident and special professors or lecturers, already
recommended, suggests a solution of the problem.
To bring the University to the highest standard in science, lite
rature and the arts, at once,—to get such general advantages as
come from distinguished men and great names,—have a careful
eye to the selection of special lecturers; secure men for courses of
twelve or fifteen or twenty lectures, who, while they could not at
any sum be engaged permanently, can be secured for so short a
term by liberal compensation and the display of a promising field
of labor.
If it be said that such instruction will be fragmentary and super
ficial, we answer, that we believe such an assertion to be a great
mistake. The greatest course of lectures ever delivered before
an University,—the one which remodeled the science of history,
and which is felt to-day in every historical treatise of repute, con
sisted of but fifteen lectures. We refer to Guizot’s renowned
lectures on civilization ; and there are multitudes of similar exam
ples.
But for the steady hard work of the regular resident faculty, it
would be vain to seek such eminent men. It would cost immense
sums to take even a few of them out of the high places into which
they have climbed ; to tear them from the associations of a life
time ; to take them from the midst of their assistants, and to put
them again into a fresh field to begin their life-work anew.
To take Agassiz permanently from Cambridge, we must outbid
the Emperor of the French, who has already offered the most
tempting prizes in vain.
To take Dana permanently from Yale, or Dwight or Lieber from
Columbia, Guyot from Princeton, or Park from Andover, would
require our whole income ; and it is even then doubtful whether
�20
these men would do our work well as resident professors, building
up a new institution.
The opinion of the committee is, that the better course for filling
the resident body is to find out the names and characteristics of
of the most promising young men, who, under these distinguished
professors, have already commenced a career. Select those who
have a name to make, and who can make it. We can thus secure
enthusiasm, energy, ambition, willingness to work, and without
paying enormous salaries.
We do not, indeed, advise making up the faculty entirely of
such young men. It would be judicious to select from the most
successful instructors in the existing schools and colleges, men of
more experience to give the faculty steadiness ; but as a rule, the
committee believe that for a time, at least, the University must
rely upon young men for the hard work in building up this great
benefaction to the State and Naticn.
General Culture
of
Professors.
But while the first thing to be sought in professors is ability to
discover truth and to impart it, there is another requirement of
hardly less importance—general good culture and manliness.
If, to secure some great genius in any special department, we
have to bear with some lack of general culture, we ought perhaps
to sacrifice the lower qualifications for the higher ; but nothing
short of such extreme necessity should lead us to place men of a
low grade, as to general culture, among young men whose habits
of thinking and living are just receiving the form and impress
which they are to bear during life.
This University must not only make scholars : it has a higher
duty ; it must make men—men manly, earnest, and of good gen
eral culture. We must not make the mistake so common in older
colleges—in selecting to govern and guide bright, high-spirited
young men, tutors who do not and cannot know anything of the
world and of what the world is thinking,—instructors who lead
students to associate learning with boorishness or clownishness.
We must make no man an instructor simply because he is poor or
pious or a “squatter” on the college domain. We must have
men who are what we would have our sons be, and we must have
them at any cost.
And here the committee desire to say, that for instruction in
modern languages, as a rule, our best course is to secure Amcri-
�21
cans. The slight advantage in correct accent possessed by an
instructor from a foreign country is almost always too dearly pur
chased by sacrifice of the qualities which ensure success in lectures
or recitations. This suggestion is not made, of course, in any
narrow spirit of dislike for men of foreign birth, but under the
certainty that teaching American young men by foreigners has
almost universally proved a failure, both as to instruction and
discipline.
Methods
of bringing the General Culture of
BEAR UPON THE STUDENTS.
Professors
to
One of the saddest deficiencies in existing colleges is want of
free intercourse, and even of acquaintance, between professors and
students. In most of the larger colleges the great mass of stu
dents know really nothing of either President or Professors. They
are generally strangers, or worse than strangers. They have met
in lecture rooms or recitation rooms, but they have met as natural
enemies. Their only conversation outside the lecture room has
been when the student made excuses, or the professor gave re
proofs ’ and in these the student is normally a culprit, and the
professor a detective.
It seems all the more strange that such want of intercourse
should exist under a system which deifies classic culture, when the
Athenian ideal of that culture was obtained by frank, full, genial
conversation between teacher and taught.
It seems all the more sad, when every reflecting man knows
that hearty, manly sympathy in studies and pursuits established
between a young man and a man of thought, learning, character
and experience, is worth more than all educational programmes
and machinery.
In excuse for this it is asserted that the number of students in
college classes is generally so large that professors cannot know
them. It is believed by your committee, that this difficulty is
by no means insuperable. It has from time to time been over
come at various large colleges, and it is worth our trouble to try
some experiments at least in bringing students within range of
the general culture of professors, and keeping them within it.
- It is therefore recommended that the duty of acquaintance and
social intercourse with students be impressed upon the faculty,
and that additions be made to professors’ salaries expressly as an
indemnity or provision for such social privileges to students. The
�22
same principle which has led wise governments to make extra
allowances to ambassadors, for the express purpose of keeping up
genial social relations with the people among whom they are sent,
is the basis of the experiment now suggested. The experiment
can be tried, either by moderate additions to salary or deductions
from rents of University houses.
It is also suggested that some provision be made for weekly or
fortnightly reunions of faculty and students ; that at an early day
pleasant rooms be allotted for that purpose, and that some small
expenditure be made to render such gatherings attractive and pro
fitable. Even if some little time is taken from the ordinary rou
tine, the experiment is well worth trying.
Relations
of
Professors to Each Other.
The committee desire to impress here an idea which they con
ceive most essential to the success of the University ; simply this :
The University will tolerate no feuds in the faculty.
It may seem strange that this should be alluded to ; but in view
of the fact that more than one American college has been ruined
by such feuds, and that very many have been crippled ; in view
of the cognate fact that the odium theologicum seems now outdone
by hates between scientific cliques and dogmas ; that as a rule it
is now impossible to secure an impartial opinion from one scien
tific man regarding another; and that these gentlemen, in their
jealousies and bickerings, are evidently only awaiting some one
with a spark of the Moliere genius to cover them before the country
with ridicule and contempt, we do not think that the Board is
likely to give too much importance to this.
We advise that in the common law of the University it be a
fundamental principle, that harmony and hearty co-operation in
the work here are far more essential than any one or any half
dozen professors, and that in case feuds and quarrels arise, every
professor concerned be at once requested to resign, unless the dis
turbing person can be identified beyond a reasonable doubt ; that
if ever a general want of harmony be observed, and a rapid adjust
ment is impossible, the Gordian knot be cut, and that all con
cerned be replaced by others who can work together. Better to
have science taught less brilliantly, than to have it rendered con
temptible.
�23
How shall Professors be Found ?
Various methods of securing the best mon have been resorted
to, in the institutions already established.
One method is, to give notice quietly that a position is vacant;
to receive testimonials regarding candidates, consisting of their
own statements and the written recommendations of their friends :
and to select the person whose recommendations are the most
numerous or laudatory.
We believe such a method wretchedly delusive. A sad sort of
common law obtains in our country, by which a candidate for any
place has a right to demand that his townsman, neighbor or friend
shall put his name to any statement necessary to secure an elec
tion. No man of recent experience can doubt that an immense
array of petitions could be obtained for the rebuilding of the
Tower of Babel, and that an immense array of testimonials could
be obtained, attesting the fitness of the most knavish contractor
to build it.
Considering this facility with which recommendations are ob
tained, they ought never to be considered final, though they ought
always to be demanded.
It should also be laid down at the outset, as a fundamental law,
that no testimonials are to have any weight, no matter how great
the abilities of the giver, except as they are statements upon im
portant qualifications from persons who are unquestionable authothorities upon these particular qualifications. It ought to be fully
understood that the vague testimony of the foremost lawyer in
the State, as to attainments in organic chemistry or microscopic
anatomy, or other branches of science in which the legal gentle
man is not an expert, pass with this Board as so much blank paper.
Another method sometimes resorted to in Great Britain is, to
advertise for candidates—stating duties, salary, with testimonials
or tests. This has some advantages ; but after correspondence
regarding this plan, with some leading men who have thought and
wrought much for higher education, we do not recommend it.
The only safe method would seem that, by committee or other
wise, we make investigations for ourselves ; to obtain confidential
statements as to the abilities of candidates—statements sud sigillo
confessionis from those who desire our success and the promotion
of the most worthy, and who can give us real information and not
conventional praise.
It has happened that the papers of candidates have been thus
�24
far referred to this committee, and so far as possible, in the
absence of full powers, we have acted upon the plan here sug
gested. We recommend that some existing committee or some
new committee be authorized to receive the testimonials of candi
dates ] to make the investigations required, and to report to the
Board at a very early day.
The Administering Body.
Thus far the committee have occupied themselves with the
Instructing Body. They now turn to the question of the Admin
istering Body.
The immediate administering or governing body, subject to the
trustees, is naturally, as regards discipline, details of instruction,
&c., the Faculty. At the head of the Faculty should stand a Pre
sident, and in so large an institution there are reasons why it might
be well to name a Vice-President. These, while taking part in
the instruction, should take the lead'in the administration. The
experience of all institutions of learning puts it beyond a doubt
that such headship is necessary. The single attempt to dispense
with it, is one of the most wretched failures in the educational
history of this country.
The committee recommend that there be elected at an early
day a President of the University.
Method
of
Administration.
The question now arises, how shall the government or adminis
tration by the Faculty be conducted ?
Two methods have been in existence :
First. The discipline of students, and, indeed, the great mass
of ordinary business of the institution, is committed to the Presi
dent. The Faculty, in this plan, merely, as a rule, present reports
and give advice, leaving the initiation of measures and the final
decision and action upon them, to the head of the instructing body,
This is the method practiced in many colleges of New England,
and generally, it is believed, in those of New York.
According to the other method, the Faculty occupy altogether
a different position. They are not merely advisors, but legisla
tors. They cannot throw the responsibility upon the head of the
institution; they must take part in it themselves. This is the
system adopted in a few of the American colleges, and, among
them, in the State University of Michigan.
�25
Your committee are decidedly in favor of the latter method.
They believe that to the looseness of method incident to the
former system, are due many of the difficulties which disgrace
Faculties, and much of the bad discipline which ruins students.
Your committee recommend, therefore, that in each department
of the University, the Faculty belonging to that department form
a legislative body, with sittings at regular and short intervals,
presided over by the President, Vice-President, or a Dean elected
for that purpose ; that rules of order be observed ; that in cases
of discipline, or conferring degrees, every resident and non-resi
dent professor have a vote, and that such vote be by ballot.
The committee recommend that the combined Faculty of the
whole University also have stated meetings at regular intervals not
greater than once a month, presided over by the President, VicePresident, or a President pro tempore, for the purpose of conduct
ing the general administration of the institution and memorializing
the trustees ; discussing general questions of educational policy ;
presenting papers upon special subjects in literature, science and
the arts ;—that this body be known as the Academic Senate ; that
its proceedings be conducted according to rules of order; that
every person engaged in instruction, whether resident professors,
non-resident professors, lecturers or instructors, have permission
to speak, but that the right of voting be confined to the resident,
non-resident professors, and to assistant professors representing
complete departments in which no professor is appointed.
Official Term
of
Professors.
As regards the term of office of professors, the committee ask
your attention to the following considerations :
The usual, in fact the universal plan hitherto has been, to elect
professors to serve indefinitely. The power of removal in such
cases remains in the trustees ; but practically it has been found
difficult to exercise it, even where there has been great reason for
it. In his work on University Education, Dr. Wayland alludes
to the great difficulty under the existing system of removing
incompetent or superannuated professors. It has been a great
difficulty. Hardly a college which has not suffered from retaining
men not sufficiently capable, because it required positive action to
remove them, which action no one wished to initiate.
On the other hand, it is a matter of difficulty to engage good
men for short terms of service in a Faculty. The acquirements
�of a professor are not like those of a lawyer or physician, whichs
if not appreciated in one town, can be exercised in the next. His
fields of labor are comparatively few, and he naturally hesitates
greatly to commit himself to the chance of being cast out in a few
years. He will be very likely, under such circumstances, to prefer
a place of less honor and more permanence. To overcome this
feeling, salaries would have to be much larger than under the
usual system.
Again : It is not improbable that such reelections might lead to
cabals and intrigue, thus distracting the institution, defiling it,
and thwarting the purposes of this provision.
The advantages of engaging professors for short terms are appa
rent. Incompetent men would easily drop out at the end of six
years, if not before. Such a system, too, would probably inspire
every member of the Faculty to constant exertion. It is a ques
tion, however, whether his exertion would be mainly directed to
retaining his professorship by energy in instruction, or energy in
intrigue.
Your committee are not prepared to make any recommendation
regarding the term of service of the Faculty, leaving it entirely
to the future discussions of the Board.
Salaries of Professors.
Another question arises, of much immediate importance, regard
ing the salaries of the Faculty.
Professors’ salaries in the United States vary greatly. The sala
ries at Columbia College are generally about four to five thousand
dollars per annum; at Brown University, Providence, they are
fixed at about twenty-five hundred dollars ; at Yale College, at
about twenty-three hundred dollars ; at Union College, at about
eighteen hundred to two thousand dollars ; at Hamilton College,
at about twelve hundred dollars ; at Hobart College, at about one
thousand to fourteen hundred dollars; at the University of
Michigan, at about seventeen hundred dollars.
Your committee would be glad to see their way clearly to a
recommendation that each professor be paid according to an agree
ment with the trustees, having in view the value of services ; but
practically, they fear, this would be a matter of great difficulty.
The main value of one professor consists in his earnestness ; of
another, in his quickness ; of another, in his eloquence; of ano
ther, in his reputation. The value of one professor is determined
�27
by many hours, every day, of hard labor; the value of another,
by a single hour, every day, of brilliant labor. To balance the
claims of these is very difficult. To do it at all, without arousing
jealousies which would be likely to interfere with the easy work
ing of the institution, your committee fear would be impossible.
The committee, however, recommend for trial, that grades of
salary be established for resident professors and assistant profess
ors, which grades, however, shall make no difference in the stand
ing of such professors or assistant professors. The grade shall be
determined in each case at the election of the professor, and the
grade may be raised at any time by a vote of the trustees, regard
being had to the amount and value of services rendered, or to the
experience of the persons rendering them. Tn this view, they
present the following
Schedule of Salaries.
I. Resident Professors.
x
1st grade_________________________ _____ ___ $2,250
2d grade........ . ............. . ..................... ..... ................. 2,000
3d grade____ __________ _________ ______ ___
1,750
II. Resident Assistant Professors.
1st grade........ . ..................... ............. ......................... $1,750
2d grade___________________________ _______
1,500
3d grade............ ........... ......... ................... ............... .. 1,200
4th grade_____________ _____ ______ _________
1,000
The compensation of the non-resident professors, special pro
fessors and lecturers should be arranged by special agreement in
each case.
In addition to the officers already named for administrative pur
poses, will be required a Steward, who should occupy an office'
upon the grounds, keep close watch of the grounds and buildings,
superintend repairs, present certificates, receive dues, keep books,
etc., etc. His salary also should be matter of agreement.
Modification
in the
Official Term of Trustees.
In considering the arrangement of the governing body, the com
mittee cannot forbear to make a suggestion as to a modification of
the present charter. By that, the Board of Trustees are a selfperpetuating body; each trustee elected for life, and the whole
body form a close corporation. None can deny that while such
�28
an organization lias advantages as regards stability, it has disad
vantages as regards progress and activity. Your committee be
lieve that the history of great educational institutions, when fully
written, will show that this method of electing trustees is the
great cause why institutions of learning have so often been
dragged on behind the age, instead of being recognized as leaders
of the age. We are not prepared to present in all its details a
plan for the change desired ; but we recommend that as soon as it
shall be deemed expedient, some legislation be had by which the
term of office for trustees shall be six years; that the elected
trustees be classified by lot, and that a certain number of trustees
be elected each year. The committee would suggest that each
year, three new members be elected into the Board by the trus
tees, to take the places of three who annually leave it. They
recommend that this continue until such time as the graduates of
the University shall number one hundred ; that thereafter two
persons be elected annually into the Board by the Trustees, and
one be elected by the graduates. They also recommend that the
elections of the Board of Trustees be conducted in every case by
ballot, and that it require a two-thirds vote of the electing body
to re-elect a former trustee.
The advantages of this plan in general are evident. First, it
secures an influx of new life into the Board. Secondly, it does
this without any jar or disturbance of harmony. - Thirdly, it
recognizes the fact that the alumni of the institution never lose
their vital connection with it. Fourthly, it prompts every alumnus
to maintain a deep interest in the institution.
The committee recommend that by the same legislation, the
number of absences from meetings of the Board allowed by the
Revised Statutes, be diminished. It is surely not too much to ask
that men having the honor of a position in a Board of Trustees
like this, should discharge the duties, or that if they cannot dis
charge them, they give place to those who can. On a full attend
ance upon the meetings of the Board, depends in a great measuie
the success of this noble enterprise.
The Equipment
and
Illustrative Collections.
The next point to which the committee would call attention, is
the Equipment.
For the department of Agriculture there are two sorts of equip
ments. First, some farm buildings and tools are necessary at an
�29
/
early day to meet the demands of simple practical instruction.
Secondly, to give the department the character and efficiency it
deserves, there must be begun and carried on as rapidly as pos
sible, a Museum of Agriculture, embracing collections of imple
ments, productions, and matters generally relating to the depart
ment, in character similar to the State Agricultural collection at
Albany.
In the department of the Mechanic Arts, your committee believe
that the order of equipment needed is exactly the reverse; that
whereas in the Agricultural department an experimental farm is
first needed and the illustrative collection is secondary, in the
department of Mechanics the illustrative collection is first needed,
and the model workshop is secondary.
The reasons for this belief are as follows:
For the experiments in agriculture one farm is sufficient; the
main outlines of procedure in practical culture and experiments
are simple ; a small range of implements is sufficient for the whole
work.
To cover an equally extensive field in the mechanic arts would
necessitate a very great number of shops, with scores of processes
entirely dissimilar, with an immense range of machines and tools.
In agriculture one field will answer for nearly all the different
processes and experiments ; in mechanics, as a rule, one workshop
will only answer for each single branch to which it is devoted.
But, in addition to this great difference between the two depart
ments, in the ease of simple instruction in elementary practice,
your committee conceive there is a radical difference between the
necessities of the two departments. Scientific agriculture depends
largely on experiments. Whatever may be the results of strictly
scientific deductions, these results are not to be accepted until
experiment has proved them useful. Thus, agricultural chemistry
alone,, as a science coming out of the laboratory, is inadequate.
Its results must be submitted to practice on the farm. In actual
practice a great number of elements constantly arise to disturb
theoretical results.
In the department of Mechanic Arts, on the other hand, the
results of strict scientific investigation are seldom modified by
practice. Every calculation given by mathematical theory will be
found to work in practice.
In machines, theoretical calculations of power, modified by cal
culations of friction will, as a general rule, express practical
�30
results. There is, then, no such need of experimental workshops
in this department as of experimental farms in the other.
There are other reasons which might be adduced, but the com
mittee would pass them, and recommend at an early day that there
be commenced in this department a general collection, embracing
drawings, casts, sectional and working models, in general character
like the “Conservatory of Arts and Trades” at Paris.
They also recommend that the Board take into consideration the
establishment of a workshop, where young men may be employed
in making sundry implements and machines for the agricultural
department, and models for the collections illustrating various
other departments.
In the department of Engineering, collections are necessary of
drawings, engravings, models, casts, &c., in general scope like
that at Union College ; and among these the committee recom
mend at an early day, in the department of Mathematics, the
acquisition of a collection of the Olivier models, similar to those
at the Paris Conservatory, and at Union, Harvard and Columbia
Colleges, and at the Military Academy at West Point.
In the division of Science, Literature, and the Arts in general,
various collections are necessary. Of these, collections in Geology.
Mineralogy, Zoology, Comparative Anatomy and Botany, are those
most immediately needed. The University, by the munificence
of its founder, possesses already one of the finest collections extant
in Geology, only needing small additions in Lithology to make it
sufficient. It is here submitted that much might be done in build
ing up the collections, by employing active students in the work
of collecting specimens most accessible, and in conducting ex
changes. At the same time it will probably be advantageous to
keep watch of the collections which are from time to time offered
for sale in this country and in Europe, and thus secure, at comparativelv small cost, such collections as the Ward collection at
Rochester; the Lederer collection at Ann Arbor, and the Gibbs
collection at New Haven.
Philosophical Apparatus.
Another very important part of the equipment of any institution
of a high class is its collection of Philosophical Apparatus. It
is undoubtedly true that a skillful professor, with little apparatus,
is better than a bungler with much ; yet as it is our ambition to
have not only the best instructors, but also the best means of illus
�31
tration, it is our duty to look carefully to this portion of the
equipment, and to decide upon a policy regarding it.
The committee believe that the trustees should make every effort
to have the best; and that our policy should be two-fold : First,
the professors in the department of General Chemistry, Physics,
and kindred departments, should be furnished with the means of
illustrating the latest results of research and initiating new re
searches. Secondly, they should have the means of publicly illus
trating these brilliantly. We therefore hope to see, at an early
day, in the collections of the University, such comparatively rare
pieces of apparatus as that of Bianchi or Thilorier for the solidi
fication of carbonic acid ; the English apparatus for the direct
generation on a large scale of electricity from steam; the Boston
modification of Ruhmkorf’s coil for presenting on a large scale the
effects of electricity induced by the Galvanic current; the new
French apparatus for experimenting upon light; and in general
those aids to instruction and illustration proper to an institution
which we hope to place among the first of this country.
The earlier the philosophical apparatus is put on this footing,
the better; and while the committee do not urge an immediate
outlay sufficient to compass all that these departments should con
tain, they earnestly recommend at an early day a liberal expendi
ture toward a worthy beginning.
Collections Illustrative
of
Art.
The University can never attain to the proportions we hope for
it, without some collections illustrative of the great Arts of Architecture, Sculpture and Painting.
While galleries of statues and paintings by artists just now in
fashion, are too expensive to be thought of, art-collections of far
greater educational value can be formed at an outlay compara
tively trifling.
The collections of casts at the German University at Bonn, and
in the institutions at Boston, Ann Arbor and Toronto • the collec
tions of photographs and medallions illustrating architecture and
sculpture, and the collection of engravings illustrating the History
of Painting, now forming at the University of Michigan, furnish
examples of the equipment which ought ere long to be given to
this department.
�32
The Observatory.
In the ordinary working of an ordinary college, an observatory
can be dispensed with. But when an institution is to be made a
centre for men of the highest intellect,—when it is sought to in
crease knowledge,—when the aim is to bring every appliance to
bear in revealing the power of God and in developing the power
of man,—those in charge will naturally think of the establishment
of an observatory. So it has been almost without exception in
the great universities of the old world. So it has been at Har
vard College, at Yale, at the, University of Michigan, at the Uni
versity at Chicago, at the University of Alabama, at Hamilton Col
lege, and at Vassar College, in our own country.
It may be said that an observatory gives no part of what is
known as practical instruction. Even if it did not, the investi
gations which it aids are so noble, that the most severely practical
men have always held them in honor. But every man at all ac
quainted with higher education, will declare that the observatory
does promote practical education. From the observatories have
come some of the most practical benefactois of the race, and among
them, Newton, LaPlace, Lalande, Oersted, Arago, Mitchell. No
observatory was ever planned in a collegiate town, without stimu
lating greatly the study of the exact sciences, and thus promoting
progress and achievement in the departments where the exact
sciences bear practically upon the welfare of mankind.
We are sure that all the trustees join in our hope to see, at no
distant day, standing upon our grounds, an observatory which
shall be an honor to the State and Nation. No better gift could
be made by any of our wealthy citizens, and no nobler monument
could be reared by those who long to live in the memories of their
fellow men.
The cost of a suitable observatory varies. To erect a building
and place in it a telescope, meridian circle, astronomical clock, and
chronograph, wrould cost from forty thousand to eighty thousand
dollars, according to the size and perfection of the instruments.
The committee urge that this part of the equipment be not lost
sight of, though at present they do not recommend any applica
tion of funds for it.
�33
The Library.
The part of the equipment to which the committee would call
attention, finally, is the library. It is the culmination of all
touching all departments—meeting the needs of teachers and
taught. In it all Sciences and Arts meet; from it they draw a
vast part of their sustenance. We believe that, from the first, the
building up of a library suited to the wants of the institution, and
worthy of its aims, should be steadily kept in view. A large
library is absolutely necessary to the efficiency of the various de
partments. Without it, our men of the highest ability will be
frequently plodding in old circles and stumbling into old errors.
Say what we may of the necessity of original investigation, the
fact remains that science has never made great achievements save
when its votaries have had a plentiful supply of books wherein
to find necessary information and hints as to studies and investiga
tions. The history of the progress of modern science is the history
of development and accretion—development out of previous
thought and work—accretion upon previous thought and work.
The great progress in modern science is, to a very small degree,
the result of the original investigations of men removed from
access to the recorded labors of their predecessors.
This is the case with every science. To attempt either -of the
great functions of an university—the discovery of truth, or the
diffusion of truth, regarding the two main branches of our in
struction, Agriculture and Mechanics—without a liberal library,
would be to cripple these departments ; and to continue instruc
tion long in the departments generally without an ample library,
would be a farce, were it not so sad to see a body of professors,
ambitious to render services to science and to the institutions with
which they are connected, crippled by want of books.
What should be the character of the books ? It has been su<rgested that a library should be of the newest and best; that it
need only present the latest works as embodying the highest
results of thought. There is a germ of truth in this, which ought
to be borne in mind ; yet it should not be forgotten that there is
not a science or an art in which there are not some old investio-ations never superseded or surpassed.
There are multitudes of old works which must be within reach,
in order to an understanding of almost any science or art. The
general rule is, that a worthy library should possess the works of
every man who has made his mark in literature, science or the
3
�arts. This is true of different sciences and arts in different de
grees, but it is sufficiently true even of the most recent sciences
and arts, to show that no talk about old books and musty tomes
should for a moment delude us.
How should these books be obtained ?
Three methods suggest themselves : First, the different mem
bers of the Faculty might present lists of works in their several
departments, with indication of those most needed, and after a
collation of these lists by a committee, and a classification accord
ing to comparative necessity, purchases might be made from year
to year. This is an approved practical method, and is recom
mended.
But this does not cover the whole want of the institution. There
must be a reserved force of books. Very often a book necessary
to the success of an important investigation is not thought of until
the moment it is wanted. Very often a professor of great acquire
ments does not know where to find the record of an experiment;
and that hint at a method or fact of immense value to him, he
must seek in a full collection of works in his department, many
of which he would not think of naming as those most immediately
necessary.
The successful use of recent books, too, necessitates a large col
lection of those partially superseded. Partial quotations must
often be known wholly; doubtful quotations must often be verified.
A collection is needed as a centre to which men in all grades in
every kind of investigation may gather.
This can only be obtained by other methods. One of these is,
to take the catalogues of leading publishers and booksellers, and
having marked their valuable works, receive proposals for their
purchase. This is often a useful way, and is also recommended.
Another method of use in beginning a library, is the purchase
wholly, or in part, of carefully gathered special collections of
private individuals. Thus the University of Rochester purchased
the Neander Library, and Yale College the Thilo Library.
When and how can this be done ? Not in this country to any
extent, for nowhere in the world are valuable books sought so
eagerly and held so tenaciously. It is in foreign cities, and espe
cially in London, that collections of works in every department,
made by the most distinguished scholars, are brought under the
hammer of the auctioneer. Hardly a number of the London
Atheneeum is issued without advertisements of such collections.
�35
Within a very few years, the private library of Buckle, so full in
all its departments ; the private library of Lord Macaulay, con
taining vast stores in English history; the library of Humboldt,
containing the accumulations of his life ; and scores of others even
more important, have been thus broken up in the London market.
Your committee find that the prices of books thus disposed of
in mass are very low, except in the case of rarities competed for by
bibliomaniacs, and these are the very things for which the Univer
sity cares little or nothing. The solid material of a large library
*—the standard authorities and works of reference—the sets of
lieviews, periodicals and Journals of Societies, with few excep
tions, go at low prices. The committee are assured by one of its
members, who has himself frequented, and bought largely in these
sales, that collections of vast value, selected during a lifetime by
the most eminent scholars in various branched, and enriched often
with their notes, references and corrections, are constantly sold at
prices astonishingly low.
The committee, therefore, without recommending any hasty
action, would suggest that an eye be kept upon these frequent
sales, and that at the earliest convenient season an attempt be
made to avail ourselves of them.
It is also recommended that steps be taken to obtain for the
library certain valuable works published by foreign governments;
such as the wonderful Monographs upon the European Rural Popu
lation, by LePlay, published by the French government; and,
above all, in the department of Industrial Mechanics, the great
series of Patent Reports published by the English government,
copies of which are in the State Library at Albany, in the Astor
Library at New York, and in the Public Library at Boston. It
is believed that a copy can be obtained ot the English government
at the mere cost of mounting the plates and binding the several
volumes. A more valuable and appropriate work for that depart
ment could hardly be designated.
Preparation
of a
Code for
the
University.
To this committee was entrusted the preparation of a code of
laws for the government of the University. A large collection
of the statutes of different colleges has been made, but at the out
set a question meets us : What shall be the theory of discipline in
the institution ? Shall it be after the military pattern ; shall it be
the oidinaiy collegiate discipline which has been in part inherited
�36
from England ; shall it be an adaptation of the free university
system of continental Europe, where comparatively little is done
by college police, and much is left to the students themselves ? It
will be seen at once that this question must be decided before any
body of statutes is framed; for the radical difference between
these fundamental systems involves an entire difference between
the codes which express them. The first, the military system, has
undoubted advantages. It puts all students upon an equality in
mere outward advantages of dress, style and living ; it subjects
students to a more perfect control; it gives from among the stu
dents, officers to aid in enforcing rigid discipline. On the other
hand, the uniformity in dress, which is admired by some as con
tributing to equality, deprives the professor of one of his best
means of knowing who are before him in the lecture room,—how
he shall deal with individuals, and what allowances are to be made.
None acquainted with the best American colleges, will hesitate to
declare that, as a rule, no student loses anything among his pro
fessors or his fellow students, by clothing indicating poverty
and frugality. It is only in after life that this makes an impor
tant difference. In no community on earth is man estimated so
exactly by what is supposed to be his real worth, as in a commu
nity of college students. No collections of men were ever more
democratic. The rigid military government, it is believed, could
not possibly be applied to the whole University: for, by the fun
damental theory of the institution, there will be students of a great
number of different grades,—some attending merely courses of
lectures for a single season; some in regular courses of several
years ; some men not far from middle age ; some far below their
majority • some residing in the college building; some residing
in the town. While, therefore, military instruction must always
form part of the courses, it is not recommended that the govern
ment be military, except, perhaps, in some single departments,
where efficiency may be promoted by military forms.
As to the next system, the ordinary collegiate plan, although
to a certain extent it may have to be adopted on account of our
partial resort to dormitories, yet the system as a finality is not
favored by the committee.
The system of university freedom of government is believed by
the committee to be our best government. In this system laws
are few but speedily executed, and the University is regarded
neither as an asylum nor a reform school. Much is trusted to the
�manliness of the students. The attempt is to teach the students
to govern themselves, and to cultivate acquaintance and confidence
between Faculty and students. This the committee believe is pos
sible. They believe that by rigid execution of a few disciplinary
laws • by promotion of pleasant, extra-official intercourse between
teachers and taught, in ways hereafter to be specified ■ by placing
professors over students, not as police, but as a body of friends,
this government may be made to work better than any other. The
boundaries between government of students by university autho
rities and government by town authorities, will be discussed else
where.
The committee will, on a future day, recommend a simple pledge
and ceremony of matriculation, having in view self-governmenf by
the students.
Having thus given a basis for a code, we think it best to defer
details until a future report. The necessity for by-laws is not im
mediate, and much light can, it is believed, be gained from the
Faculty about to be chosen.
Remunerative Manual Labor
by
Students.
One of the most interesting questions which arises in the estab
lishment of our departments of Agriculture and the Mechanic Arts,
regards the experiment of employing students at manual labor
during a portion of the day.
The argument generally used of late against this experiment is,
that it has been tried several times unsuccessfully.
This argument would have more force were it shown that the
institutions where the manual labor system has failed, have had
the means of trying the experiments fully and fairly. It is be
lieved that such has not been the case, and that our country has
seen no institution having such ample means of trying this experi
ment as has the Cornell University. Nor is it true, as is often
loosely stated, that this experiment has uniformly failed. The
reports of the State Agricultural College of Michigan, at Lansing,
show that its success there, if not brilliant, is substantial. Several
young men have supported themselves entirely, paying their fee
of tuition, room rent, board, fuel, washing, clothing, books and
traveling expenses out of their earnings upon the college pro
perty ; and a very large number in the same way have paid their
expenses partially.
Your committee are satisfied that the University ought to try
�38
this experiment. We are not, however, prepared to recommend
that every student in the University be required to do a certain
amount of manual labor. This we think would impose fetters
upon the student body, very dangerous to that character of
breadth and freedom which we hope to establish.
If, as is certain to be frequently the case, a student advanced
in years considerably beyond the usual student age, and who
already has labored and accumulated means to defray his expenses,
presents himself and wishes, in the shortest time possible, to tit
himself for a place as engineer, superintendent of chemical works,
or scientific miner, it would seem doubtful policy to force him
to give those hours which he desires to crowd with study, to
manual labor in which he has had full experience, and remunera
tion which he does not need.
True, it is often urged that the student can do more and better
mental work, with deduction of two or three hours of physical
labor, than without it. Though not one man in a million among
men at large acts upon this belief, it may be so among students.
But, until this theory proves itself by practice, we believe that it
would be a great mistake to attempt to place the entire University
rigidly upon this basis. When, in our progress here, this theory
shall be substantiated, there will be ample opportunity to enforce
this system in all the departments.
Again : Your committee are by no means certain that physical
labor among young men can be made to take wholly the place of
athletic sports and gymnastic exercises in giving restoration from
mental labor. Even if it keep up bodily strength, it seems hardly
possible that the minds of young men could be kept fresh, elastic
and energetic, when the only relief from tension is the change
from one form of labor to another.
We understand that even in manual labor schools it has been
found necessary to give some time to free, manly sports and games.
But there is one practical objection which will doubtless be
conclusive, even if theoretical objections are not.
If any such number of students as we expect, enter the Univer
sity, we could not provide labor for all of them.
The State University of Michigan, with far less attractions than
we hope to present, has fifteen hundred (1500) students. At two
hours a day of manual labor by each student,—and this is an hour
less than the usual allowance,—granting that the different divi
sions of working students succeed each other with perfect preci
�39
sion, one corps taking up the tools the instant the previous corps
throws them down, there would be a constant force to be profitably
employed and paid, equivalent to three hundred (300) laborers,
and the University cannot employ any such force with profit for
any long time.
But while we do not recommend general compulsory labor, we
are in favor of organizing corps of laboring students, and holding
out every inducement to join them ; and we are not prepared to
say that it may not be necessary to require manual labor from all
the students in some special departments.
We believe that a system of manual labor, rightly organized,
will work to the mutual advantage of the University and the stu
dents. There is a large amount of labor required at once upon
the ornamental grounds and the farm. There are trees to be
felled, roads and paths to be cut, depressions to be filled, eleva
tions to be graded down. There will be much work requiring
mere physical ability, and there will be much requiring the scien
tific guidance of the Professors of Agriculture, of LandscapeGardening and Engineering.
It will also be of use to the students in their muscular develop
ment, and we believe can be made to give substantial aid to many
pecuniarily.
Physical Culture.
Many plans of education have given goodly place to Physical
Culture in theory ; very few have given any adequate place to it
in practice.
No mistake could be more unfortunate. Better the mere rudi
ments of knowledge with a body sound, firm and strong, than the
best culture of the schools with a body permanently emaciated and
debilitated.
It is one of the strange things in the history of education, that
American votaries of classical scholarship have been so neglectful
of that bodily culture which, in the ancient civilization they justly
honor, was the main culture.
We cannot insist upon this part of an education too strongly.
As long as highly educated men are dyspeptics, so long will they
be deprived of their supremacy in society by uneducated eupevand so it ought to be.
We recommend: First, that in all, except the Optional Course,
attendance be required on a plain series of lectures upon Anatomy,
Physiology and Hygiene.
�40
Secondly, that there be provided, at the opening of the Univer
sity, a well-equipped Gymnasium, and that training in it, or equi
valent training in manual labor or exercises in the open air, be
obligatory upon all.
Thirdly, that an instructor in Gymnastics be appointed, who
shall conduct exercises at the gymnasium under some careful pro
gressive system, with as much regularity and under as stringent
rules regarding attendance and decorum, as are observed in any
college exercise whatever.
Fourthly, that in arranging hours for study, recitations or lec
tures, physical training be regarded as equally entitled to conside
ration with mental training, and that a regular and sufficient time
be always allowed for that purpose.
Fifthly, that grounds be set apart for the national game of base
ball, and that the formation of clubs be encouraged; also that
encouragement be given to the formation of clubs for boating upon
Lake Cayuga.
Sixthly, that the experiment be tried of framing an university
statute to the effect that deterioration in physical culture will be
held in the same category with want of progress in mental cul
ture, and that either will subject the delinquent to deprivation of
university privileges.
Seventhly, in view of the importance and practical novelty of
this whole subject, it is recommended that to the regular standing
committees of the Board of Trustees there be added a “ Committee
upon Physical Culture.”
Military Education.
It is recommended that the requirements of the congressional
law be met by careful provisions for teaching Military Engineer
ing and Tactics, and that the Board of Trustees at an early day
adopt some plan for encouraging military drill, or for making it
obligatory.
Actual Commencement of Instruction.
4
The committee would also report as to the actual commencement of instruction,—the practical beginning of general university
operations.
A sufficient number of professors having been secured, it is
recommended that at least three (3) months before the opening
of the University, an advertisement be inserted in papers of wide
�41
circulation, stating concisely the day when the examinations for
admissions begin, the courses of instruction, the professors and
their departments, the charges for instruction, the approximate
charges for board and lodging, the number and character of free
Scholarships, the duties of school commissioners in examining can
didates for them under the charter, and the names of persons to
■whom applications may be made for further details.
The University Year.
It is recommended that there be two terms in the University
year ; the first commencing on the second Thursday of September
and ending on the third week-day preceding Christmas ; the
second term commencing on the third week-day following New
Year’s day, and ending upon the third Thursday in June, when
shall be held the annual Commencement.
In order, however, to commemorate an event which the insti
tution ought ever to hold in remembrance, and, incidentally, to
give some intermission in the second term, which is much longer
than the first, it is recommended that the ordinary exercises be
Suspended on the fourteenth day of May, the day wThen the act
incorporating the University was passed, and that that day be
forever known as Founder’s Day, and that exercises be then held
expressive of gratitude to the benefactors of the University, and
to renew the memory of their benefactions.
It is recommended that some inaugural exercises be held at or
near the beginning of the first term.
Fees.
In nothing do American institutions of learning vary more than
in the fees required of students. At Yale College the charges
are as follows :
For tuition .................
$45
rent and care of one-half* room, average_________ 20
expenses of public rooms, repairs, &c._______ ___ 10
use of gymnasium_____ ______ _________ ____
4
society tax________________ ____ ____
g
Besides these, there are charges at graduation amounting to
average price of board, $5.50.
I11 the Massachusetts Institute of' Technology, at Boston, the
�42
fees in the first year arc $100; second year, $125; third and
fourth, $150 each.
At Harvard College the fees are as follows :
Instruction, library and lecture rooms, and gymnasium___ $104
Rent and care of room, &c._________________________
28
Special repairs_________ _______ ______________ ____
1
$133
Board is said to range from $4.50 to $7 per week.
In the Lawrence Scientific School, at Cambridge, the student
taking the courses of chemistry, engineering, botany, &c., pays in
regular fees each year, from $250 to $300.
In the Cambridge School of Mines, the fees are, for the first
year, $150, and $200 for each succeeding year.
At the State University of Michigan, by the catalogue of 1866,
any student from without the State pays a matriculation fee of
$20, and an annual fee of $-5.
At Dartmouth College, tuition in the Scientific School is, per
annum, $36 in the third and fourth, and $42 per annum in the
first and second years. In the College proper, the fees are :
For tuition.........................
$51
room rent from $6 to------------- ----------------------- 12
$57 to $63
At Hamilton College the tuition is .................
$45
Room rent........ ............
9
Sweeping and contingencies--------------- ------------------ 21
$75
At the State Agricultural College of Michigan, at Lansing,
tuition to students from that State is free, but from all other
States, per annum, $20 ; room rent, $4 ; matriculation fee, $5.
From this great diversity no rule can be deduced. After con
sideration, the committee, although there are one hundred and
twenty-eight (128) free scholarships already provided by law, and
although it is believed that instruction of the very best kind will
be furnished, have concluded to suggest that the charges for the
first year be very low, and they present the following schedule :
Matriculation fee------------------ --------------------------- - $15
Annual fees at $10 per term........................................... 20
$35
�43
For room rent they have based their calculations upon the per
centage which the dormitories ought to contribute upon the outlay
for them, arranging the rents so as to give a return of seven (7)
per cent per annum. The rent of a full suite of rooms in the main
building would be 55 cents, 73 cents, 109 cents per week for each
student, according as they have four, three or two occupants.
Arranging rents so as to bring a return of four per cent per
annum, the charges would be 32 cents, 42 cents, 63 cents per
week, according as the suites of rooms are occupied by four, three
or two persons.
But it is not expected that any large number of the students
can be accommodated in the University dormitories. There are
provided in the first building, accommodations for from sixtv-four
to one hundred and twenty-eight students. But it is believed
that these will fall short of the accommodations required.
It is not doubted that the citizens of Ithaca will do their utmost,
even subjecting themselves to inconvenience, in providing rooms
for students. And it is believed that they will do this at the
lowest terms possible ; for nothing could be more unfortunate for
the town and University than at the outset to have the impression
gain ground that student lodgings in Ithaca are costly.
Board.
In regard to board, the committee are decidedly .of the opinion
that the trustees should have nothing to do with furnishing it,
unless events force them to do so. For this the citizens of Ithaca
must be relied upon entirely. The same necessity for liberal
treatment and low prices obtains in regard to board as in regard
to lodgings. And in view of the great importance of a right
beginning in this matter, it is recommended that the President of
the Board designate a committee of the citizens of Ithaca, who
shall bring the matter before their fellow citizens and obtain assur
ances which shall enable the trustees in their first announcement
to offer, with the other attractions of the institution, the very
decided one of cheap rates of lodgings and board.
The same citizen’s committee should also be relied upon to fur
nish the University steward with names of persons willing to
accommodate students, and with lists of prices, so as to provide
at once for students on their arrival.
If, however, such appeal be unsuccessful, which is not believed
possible, it is recommended that the executive committee be em
�44
powered to lease in the town, or erect upon the college grounds,
a dining hall and kitchen, with the full understanding, however,
that the University shall not undertake to manage it further than
to lease it to the students. The students thus leasing it, shall
choose their own stewards, employ their own servants, purchase
their own provisions, and manage it in their own way, except that
the trustees may vote to advance money to the clubs thus formed,
to purchase leading articles of supply at wholesale, according to
the system recently established in the Yale College dining clubs ;
and the University authorities shall take measures, in case of need,
to preserve general decency and order.
Fuel.
It is strongly recommended that the University purchase fuel
at wholesale, to be retailed to the students at cost. This plan is
found to work beneficially at Yale, Harvard and many other
colleges.
The Dormitory System.
Two radically different ideas as to the function of an Univer
sity have produced two different systems of lodging students and
of supervision of them while not engaged in public exercises.
Under the first, the student is lodged in a dormitory and kept,
or rather supposed to be kept, under surveillance of the Univer
sity authorities. Under the second, lodging and any other than
general surveillance are looked upon as outside the proper
function of an University, and the student left to make arrange
ment for his lodging as any other person coming for a time into
the town would do, subject to certain general regulations by the
University. Care of him as a citizen is left to the town authori
ties ■ care of him as a member of a family, to the household with
which he is lodged—the University, of course, reserving the right
to inflict penalties for offences against University common law and
statutes.
The committee believe the latter system the more sound in
theory and the more satisfactory in practice. Large bodies of
students collected in dormitories often arrive at a degree of tur
bulence which small parties, gathered in the houses of citizens,
seldom if ever reach. No private citizen, who lets rooms in his
own house to four or six students, would tolerate for an hour the
anarchy which most tutors in charge of college dormitories are
compelled to overlook.
�45
But even were the discipline of dormitories thoroughly en
forced; the system tends to put the professorial corps in the atti
tude of policemen. And the situation is made all the worse by
the fact that the professor is armed with no authority under the
law of the land, and so comes to be regarded not even as a police
man, but as a spy—not as a judge, but as an inquisitor. Nothing
could be more fatal to hearty, kindly relations between teachers
and taught.
The dormitory system, as it has existed at Oxford and Cam
bridge, has been carried out logically in the construction of quad
rangles—great enclosures from which egress at unsuitable hours
is supposed to be rendered difficult, and in which good order can
be more easily maintained. That even this most costly plan has
failed every one knows, who has at all looked into the subject;
blit even the poor merit of the English system seems wanting
among ns,
The reasons for adopting even temporarily any modification of
the dormitory system in a new institution like ours, are two :
First, the necessity of some check upon persons disposed to ask
too large a price for student lodgings. Secondly, the necessity
of observations, experiments and work upon the college land by
large numbers of students. Of these reasons the first weighs
little ; the second, it is hoped, will weigh less and less as the
village of Ithaca is extended nearer and nearer to the University
domain ;—but they have been strong enough to induce the Board
of Trustees to erect a dormitory in which are provided tasteful
and well-ventilated study and sleeping rooms for from sixty-four
to ninety-six students. It is believed that no better accommoda
tions are afforded in any college within the United States.
It is recommended, however, that at the outset the policy of
tbe trustees be declared to be in favor of making residence in the
college buildings a reward of good work and conduct, and that
good order in every student hall be entrusted to the self-govern
ing powers of the students residing in it, with a full understanding
that the University authorities will enter into no inquisitorial pro
cess to discover the authors of disorder, but that if the tenants are
not able to maintain good order, they must give place en masse
to those who can. If this does not accomplish the purpose, the
hall should be closed altogether.
It is hoped that ere many years accommodations for students
may be mainly provided among citizens residing in neat, tidy
�46
dwellings bordering upon the University property. In these a|
kindly, restraining family influence would be exercised upon stu-|nja^|ofi(|#1 1
dents, never found in the prevalent poor imitation of the EnglisMaH^ifeEW
semi-monastic system.
1
The committee are decidedly opposed to any large adoption ofl
a dormitory system.
Relations between the Cornell University and other Insti-I
tutions of Learning in the State.
It is believed that the institution now to be founded can be
brought into perfect harmony with the sister institutions of the hl
State, While we hope for large numbers of students, it is highly fmmiQi,
4-1------------------ K---------- . .U„
-ly
[ij
improbable that the number at the .a.._ collegeswill 1be any M*
other
smaller than at present. Facilities for education, like facilities'!
for travel, increase the number of those using them. In this great,
commonwealth of four million souls, there is work for all.
.[Ji
So far from injuring the existing colleges, it is hoped that we s*'
can benefit them in one way at least most gratifying to their officers. In the Faculties of these colleges are some of the best^W Wp
minds in the country—some of the noblest men.' They are to-dayj
almost without exception, kept upon salaries wretchedly inadequate, and to a number of students far less than ought to enjdJ^MjW^W
the benefit of their teachings.
By our plan of Non-resident Professors, we can avail ourselvew
of the talents of these men—can give them a larger field and
newer, and can add to their salaries sums which will enable them |i
to work more freely in the colleges with which they are immediately connected. This plan also offers an incentive to every active
professor in every college, to distinguish himself as an investigatoiwO^bsfci
or instructor in some department, and thus will benefit science amH
education at large.
•
a
Relations
of the
a
University with the School System of the !
State.
The provisions of the charter of the Cornell University show k
that its promoters recognized the necessity of a vital connection
with the school system of the State. As that system is the sulm
stratum of all we hope to build, it cannot be left out of sight. It
ought never to be forgotten that we arc to draw life from it, and
that we must return life into it. No scholastic traditions should jWfemi.-fi
lead us to slight or undervalue this relation. It will be a greatj
�47
honor to us if we knit our work as an esteemed part, into the fabric
of education for a commonwealth of four millions of people.
Pains have been taken to establish a relation such as has never
existed between the system and any existing college. The Super
intendent of Public Instruction is ex officio a trustee, and thus
forms a vital link in the connection. The provision in the act of
incorporation regarding the choice of students to scholarships in
the different assembly districts, brings us directly into relations
with the whole body of school commissioners throughout the
State. Our labor should be to strengthen the ties thus established.
Entering heartily into this vast educational work, so cherished by
the people of this State, we are strong—holding ourselves aloof
from it, we are weak indeed.
irrnt
-»q
fonii
arm!
>" 9flt
itav<
iufeH
A Special Test in our Work.
In the arrangement of departments and in provision for them,
there is one test very simple and very effectual—the original Law
of Congress. That law we must neither wrest nor warp. We
f^iica must satisfy its requirements without mental reservation. We
must never lose sight of that great body of men to whose mental
needs the act makes special reference, and of whom it speaks as
the “ industrial classes.’7
ff. p The munificence of our founder does, indeed, enable us to add
to this provision; but nothing can allow us to take from it.
The monstrous perversion of trusts recently revealed by the
il'is^l Parliamentary Commission on Collegiate Education in England,
fguig must find no parallel here.
iiT 5
That original law will not fetter us in our endeavors to give the
qoaq people of this State the most advanced university privileges.
irrsq Having guarded us from a common error, and secured certain
faoT •;reat branches of practical education, it gives us by express declaroiii; ations the largest university scope—only insisting that we keep
n view the real wants of this land and people.
bl J
[tT J
The General Test
in
University Education.
The committee have now considered the practical questions
most likely to arise at the beginning of our work. That all such
questions have been met, is not claimed. In regard, however,
Ito those which may hereafter arise, we desire in conclusion to
present a general principle, fundamental and formative—a prin
ciple to serve as a test and guide ;—it is the principle so admirably
T
�enunciated by Wilhelm von Humboldt, and elaborated by John
Stuart Mill: “ The. great and leading principle is the absolute and
essential importance of human development in its richest diversity.”
This we conceive to express the object of any really great institu
tion of learning; this our founder proclaimed in his declaration
already cited.
This principle we believe can only be made operative through
the greatest freedom in study consistent with an University organ
ization—freedom in choice of studies—freedom in range of studies.
Development under this principle—moral, intellectual and phy
sical—Can only be normal and healthful in an atmosphere of love
of truth, beauty and goodness,’and adoration of the Centre of
truth, beauty and goodness.
We have under our charter no right to favor any sect or to pro
mote any creed. No one can be accepted or rejected as trustee,
professor or student, because of any opinions and theories which
he may or may not hold. On that point our charter is most care
fully guarded, and made to conform to the fundamental ideas of
our Republic—ideas which too many institutions of learning have
forgotten. Fervor, valor and strength in labors for truth, goodness and beauty, are the qualities to be sought in those who are
to work here; and if we secure men of this fervor, valor and
strength, we may be sure that, whatever their individual theories
on this or that dogma, their joint labors will be for the glory of
God and the elevation of man.
Upon the members of the Board the committee desire to im
press the necessity of earnest thought and energetic action. A
trusteeship of this University will be no sinecure. Never was a
nobler trust confided to any body of men. May we all feel our
great responsibilities in this matter, and work earnestly to dis
charge them; and in laying these foundations may we have the
blessing of Heaven, that all may be fitly builded.
ANDREW D. WHITE,
(Signed.)
Tor the Committee on Organization.
1
I
���
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Report of the Committee on Organization, presented to the trustees of the Cornell University, October 21st 1866
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Cornell University
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Albany, USA
Collation: 48 p. ; 24 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1867
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5690
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Report of the Committee on Organization, presented to the trustees of the Cornell University, October 21st 1866), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Cornell University
Education-United States
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/16e9506922b777816d99a6f419b2195d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=dFfDg-cWswN8a%7E6l-J840ZTkr2nO4y7aTr%7ERwy3H0wc0iUEJR6YLfDTn3cLKm3DA7jVtxbHpYEY02ju1yE87VHY4C4ApNqF5zLuM9NUpnpNMticua3ZrtRRCU3BpZYo0hBMWjLk1y6aTXS-5BWj7U2A98u0xHY5QELCj5-BFaQEk7u8d3XRJ6fOqc-i1Frg2Z5tZgzql9VANswC3zSuctRHSA3iCsxfsjnuQH2pNTBd24JtYBC687J3EHtY6T7WOSmyK8CzqtCDT7dEFE%7EkXEM6N6McyGn1XJX7bXEyvav3xAu9rl%7E88C%7E3ZdbOosWHTCKMPz6ifY8yaLW754Zifdg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f414eefa0ab0749c7d0c1b7743df6c34
PDF Text
Text
REPORT
. \
OF THE
FIRST GENERAL MEETING OF MEMBERS
OF THE
I
NATIONAL EDUCATION LEAGUE,
HELD AT BIRMINGHAM,
4*.
TUESDAY AND WEDNESDAY, OCT. 12 & 13, 1869.
PRICE, TO NON-MEMBERS, ONE SHILLING.
BIRMINGHAM:
“THE JOURNAL” PRINTING OFFICES, NEW STREET.
1869.
��NATIONAL
EDUCATION LEAGUE.
Offices: 47, ANN STREET, BIRMINGHAM.
PROVISIONAL
COMMITTEE.
GEORGE DIXON, Esq., M.P., Chairman, Birmingham.
J. CHAMBERLAIN, Esq., Vice-Chairman.
JOHN JAFFRAY, Esq., Treasurer.
COUNCILLOR JESSE COLLINGS, Hon. Sec.
FRANCIS ADAMS, Secretary.
Holland Henry, Mayor of Birmingham.
Baker, George, Councillor, Tennant Street, Birmingham.
Beale, W. J., Westbourne Road, Edgbaston.
Bunce, J. Thackray, F.S.S., Wordsworth Place, Small Heath, Birm.
Chamberlain, J. H., Christ Church Buildings, New Street, Birmingham.
Chance, R. L., Chad Hill House, Harborne Road. Edgbaston.
Clarke, Rev. C., F.L.S., Edgbaston.
Crosskey, Rev. Henry W., F.G.S., George Street, Edgbaston.
Dawson, George, M.A., Hawksley, West Heath, Worcestershire.
Field, A., Parade, Birmingham.
Harris, W., Councillor, Stratford Road, Camp Hill, Birmingham.
Hawkes, H., Aiderman, Grampian House, Bristol Road, Edgbaston.
Heslop, T. P., M.D., Temple Row West, Birmingham.
Holliday, W., J.P., Chad Valley, Edgbaston.
Johnson, G. J., Waterloo Street, Birmingham.
Kenrick, Timothy, J.P., Maple Bank, Edgbaston.
Kenrick, John Arthur, J.P., Fallowiield, Edgbaston.
Kenrick, Wm., Mountlands, Edgbaston.
Lloyd, G. B., Wellington Road, Edgbaston.
Mathews, C. E., Augustus Road, Edgbaston.
Middlemore, Wm., J.P., Elvetham Road, Edgbaston.
Osborne, E. C., Aiderman, Carpenter Road, Edgbaston.
Osler, Follett, F.R.S., South Bank, Edgbaston.
Ryland, Arthur, Aiderman, Cannon Street, Birmingham.
Ryland, Wm., Noel Road, Edgbaston.
Timmins,-Samuel, F.R.S.L., Elvetham Lodge, Edgbaston.
Vince, Rev. C., Hockley Hill, Birmingham.
Wiggin, H., J.P., Aiderman, Metchley Grange, Harhorne.
Wright, J. S., Church Hill, Handsworth.
�The following is a copy of the first circular which was issued by
the Provisional Committee.
NATIONAL EDUCATION LEAGUE.
Birmingham, February, 1869.
Sir,
I am requested by the Provisional Committee, formed for the
promotion of a National Education League, to forward to you the annexed
draft of a scheme which they have drawn up for the furtherance of a system
of education which shall reach all those children who are now growing up in
a degree of ignorance injurious alike to their own interests and to that of
the community at large.
The Provisional Committee are of opinion, that in those parts of the
country where a sufficient school organization does not exist, the deficiency
can be speedily and adequately supplied only by the combined action of the
central and local authorities.
The new machinery to be provided by this
joint action need not injuriously interfere with those existing schools which
are satisfactorily educating the people ; but the Provisional Committee are of
opinion that it is all-important that no time should be lost in bringing a good
education within the reach of even the poorest and the most neglected
children in the country ; and they are also of opinion, that when the means
of education shall everywhere exist, the poverty or apathy of parents ought
not to be allowed to prevent those means being availed of by their children.
If you are willing to assist in carrying out the objects of the proposed
League, I shall feel obliged by you signing and returning to me the enclosed
form.
I am
Your obedient servant,
GEORGE DIXON-
�NATIONAL EDUCATION LEAGUE.
'
OBJECT.
The establishment of a system which shall secure the education of every
child in England and Wales.
1.
MEANS.
Local Authorities shall be compelled by law to see that sufficient school
accommodation is provided for every child in their district.
2.
The cost of founding and maintaining such schools as may be required
shall be provided out of the Local Rates, supplemented by Government
Grants.
3.
All Schools aided by Local Rates shall be under the management of Local
Authorities and subject to Government Inspection.
4.
AU Schools aided by Local Rates shaU be Unsectarian.
5.
To aU Schools aided by Local Rates admission shall be free.
6.
School Accommodation being provided, the State or the Local Authorities
shall have power to compel the attendance of children of suitable age
not otherwise receiving education.
The payment of an annual subscription shaU constitute membership.
The Executive Body shaU be a Council elected at a general meeting of
the members, convened for that purpose.
The Council shall appoint a Chairman, an Honorary Secretary, a Treasurer,
and such paid officers as may be required.
The general business of the League shall be conducted by the Council, and
they shall make aU arrangements for the formation of branch societies, collect
and disseminate information, and prepare the way for such legislation as wiU
carry out the objects of the League.
�The following is a copy of the invitation to the General
Meeting.
NATIONAL EDUCATION LEAGUE.
Offices—47, Ann Street, Birmingham.
September 16tli, 1869.
Sir,
We beg to inform you that a General Meeting of the
Members of the National Education League will be held at the
Exchange Assembly Rooms, Birmingham, on Tuesday and Wednesday,
the 12th and 13th of October, and to hand you a Programme of theproceedings.
The Provisional Committee desire to express their earnest hope that
you will be able to attend dming the whole, or at least a part of this very
important Meeting, at which a large number of the leading Members of
the League are expected to be present.
It will much facilitate the completion of the arrangements for the
Meeting if you will inform us at your earliest convenience whether you
will be able to attend.
We are, Sir,
Yours respectfully,
GEORGE DIXON, Chairman.
JESSE COLLINGS, Hon. Sec.
FRANCIS ADAMS, Secretary.
�PROGRAMME
FOR THE FIRST
GENERAL MEETING TO BE HELD AT BIRMINGHAM,
On Tuesday and, Wednesday, October 12th and, 13th, 18G9.
TUESDA Y,
OCTOBER 12tli.
Morning Sitting, from Ten o’clock a.m. till One p.m.
Election of Chairman.
The Report of the Provisional Committee to be read.
Election of the Council, Chairman, Treasurer, and Executive Committee.
The following Resolution will be submitted to the Meeting :—
“Resolved, that a Bill, embodying the principles of the League,
be prepared for introduction into Parliament early next
Session.”
Afternoon Sitting, Three p.m. to Five
p.m.
Papers and Discussion on the best system for National Schools, based
upon Local Rates and Government Grants.
Evening, Eight p.m.
Soiree at the Town Hall, given by the Mayor of Birmingham.
WEDNESDAY,
OCTOBER 13th.
Morning Sitting, Ten
a.m.
to
One p.m.
Papers and Discussion on Compulsory Attendance, and on the best
means of enforcing it.
Afternoon Sitting, Three p.m.
to
Five p.m.
Papers and Discussion on Unsectarian and Free Schools.
Evening, Half-past Seven p.m.
Public Meeting in the Town Hall; the Mayor in the Chair.
Members wishing to contribute Papers are requested to communicat
with the Secretary.
��NATIONAL
EDUCATION
LEAGUE.
FIRST MEETING OF MEMBERS.
APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN.
Henry Holland, Esq., Mayor of Birmingham, moved that Mr.
George Dixon, M.P., be elected Chairman. He said that Mr.
Dixon, as the originator of the League, and by the zeal, ability,
and devotion which he had shown, not only of late but in past
years, in the cause of education, was deserving of the position
which it was proposed that he should occupy. The appointment
of Mr. Dixon would give satisfaction, not only to the ladies and
gentlemen present, but to those friends of education throughout
the kingdom who were with the League in spirit, though there
were many of them who could not attend the meeting.
Mr. Edmund Potter, M.P., delegate from Carlisle, seconded
the motion, which was carried.
THE CHAIRMAN’S ADDRESS.
The Chairman said: The movement which we have met to in
augurate to-day is one of momentous national importance, involving
in its issues not merely the future material prosperity of the
nation, but its intellectual moral, and I will venture to add, its
religious progress. The originators of this movement have met
with a response far exceeding their expectations. On their behalf, I
very heartily welcome here the many eminent men who have come
from various parts of the country to assist in the deliberations of
the League, to return to their homes, I trust, with a deepened
sense of the importance of the scheme, and with a stronger
�10
determination to exercise all their influence in its favour. We
have as yet made no appeal for subscriptions; but our expenses
have been heavy, and will rapidly increase as the area of our
operations widens. To collect information upon all the various
branches of the great subject we have taken up, to put this
information into a popular form, and to circulate it everywhere,
especially among the working classes, will require very large funds
indeed. But, in addition, we desire to send able lecturers all
through the country, who shall explain our views, and excite
discussion upon them everywhere. To create an irresistible
public opinion is a work of the greatest magnitude, and one which
will task our powers to the utmost. Our success will largely
depend upon the means placed at our disposal. You will see, by
the paper which has been placed in your hands, that a few friends
have commenced a subscription list, upon a scale which, if
imitated in other parts of the country, will give us all we want;
and I invite you to fill up the forms with as large amounts as
you are able. And to stimulate you further in this good work, I
will read you a few letters which have been received by me. The
first is from the Secretary to the Society for the Encouragement of
Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce in London, Mr. P. Le Neve
Foster. He says :—
“The Council of this Society have much pleasure in sending
(enclosed) a cheque for twenty guineas as a donation to the funds of the
National Education League, and have directed me to attend with a depu
tation, and represent the Society at the meetings of the League at
Birmingham next week. The Rev. Wm. Rogers, and Messrs. E. Chadwick,
C.B., and E. Carleton Tufnell, have been requested to form the deputation.
The Council think it right to say that they cordially concur in the programme
of the League in so far as its object is to ensure the groundwork of
instruction to all the children of the United Kingdom, and that they shall
not be less well educated than children in Germany, Switzerland, Sweden,
and Norway ; but as a question of general policy, and as representing many
different opinions among the numerous members of the Society, they hesitate
at the present time to pledge the Society to all the details of the League
programme. The Council think it desirable that all the various modes of
ensuring universal instruction to the children of the United Kingdom should
be amply discussed from many points of view, and they intend to invite
members of the Society and others to a discussion of them after the meetings
�11
have been held in Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle, &c. For the con
sideration of the Birmingham meeting the Council transmit a paper, which
has been prepared by some members of the Council, and which appears to be
worthy of serious attention.”
On the paper you have in your hand you will find some subscrip
tions of unusually large amount for Birmingham; hut I will
venture to say that no subscription has given greater encouragement
to the Provisional Committee than that from a working man,
whose letter I am now going to read :
“Dear Sir,—Would you kindly forward me a prospectus or programme of
the National Education League, of which I am informed you are president,
and say if it is open to mechanics to become members, as I understand
from the report of your Sheffield address. I am myself an engineer, and am
at times utterly astonished at the fearful amount of ignorance among my
fellow workmen. In the works in which I am foreman, out of 200 hands not
20 either read the daily papers or care for the welfare of their fellows. Sir, I
assure you this is a deplorable fact, and if it was not for our glorious Free
Library it would be much worse. If I can do anything towards improving
this state of things I will willingly subscribe 7s. 6d. (a day’s wages) every
month. I know the want of education, as I could not write until I was
fifteen. If you could send me a few papers, so that I could interest my
fellow-workmen in this good work, I should be pleased.”
Now, the programme of the meeting, which yon have all read,
tells you exactly what the course of business is to be. The
arrangements are not, in some respects, so perfect as we could have
wished, but they are the result of full and anxious consideration;
and I hope, therefore, that if anyone should find that they are not
quite what he thinks best, he will accept them as a whole, and try
to be satisfied with them. One of the greatest difficulties which we
have to encounter is that the time at our disposal is extremely
short. We dare not ask our friends at a distance to come here for
more than two days; but we have a great deal more work to do in
those two days than we shall be able to get through to our satis
faction. We have had more papers sent to us than there will be
time to read; and after the papers are read there will be, I am
sorry to say, but very little time left for discussion. I have,
therefore, to beg not only that papers may be read as quickly as
possible, but that the speeches afterwards be as short and con
tain as much as possible. Next year, when we again have a
�12
general meeting of members, we shall be better acquainted with
each other, we shall know who are really the leading spirits in this
movement throughout the country • and then our arrangements will
no doubt be more perfect. There is one thing to which I wish
most particularly to call your attention. It is that we are not
met here for the purpose of discussing our principles.
Our
platform is already laid. We have accepted the bases of our
constitution, and we must not stray from them. But we have
met to discuss the best manner in which we can carry out our
principles. Upon that part of the question we may differ, and we
want all the light thrown upon it that it is possible for us to get.
This meeting has been called, by mistake, a conference. It is not
a conference. It is a meeting of the members of the League and
their friends, pledged to a certain course of action. We are not
answerable, as a League, for the individual opinions that will be
expressed in the papers and in the discussions. We are only
answerable for that programme, for that scheme, which has been
circulated throughout the country; but it is right that I should
explain one word in that scheme. We have had a great number of
letters upon the subject, and I believe that there are differences of
opinion upon it. There are some who do not understand what is
meant when we say that “ all schools aided by local rates ” are to be
“unsectarian.” Now, what we mean by this word “unsectarian” is
that in all national rate-schools it shall be prohibited to teach cate
chisms, creeds, or theological tenets peculiar to particular sects. These
are not to be taught during school hours. But beyond this prohi
bition we are not going; we leave everything else to be decided by
the school managers, who as the representatives of the ratepayers
will follow the best guides in these matters, viz., the wishes of the
inhabitants of their districts. School managers, for instance, will
have power to permit or prohibit the use of the Bible; but if
sanctioned it must be read without note or comment. Then they
will also have power to grant or to refuse the use of class-rooms,
out of school hours, for the purpose of religious instruction; but
of course an unjust preference must not be given to particular sects.
I trust we are all agreed that the best way of dealing with what is
called the religious difficulty is to put it on one side. Having
�13
decided to adopt the principle of excluding from the curriculum of
our primary schools all those religious subjects about which there
are differences of opinion, let us leave the carrying out of that
principle to the school authorities in a spirit of generous confidence.
A self-governing people ought to have faith in the discretion of
representatives whom it chooses and can remove. I will now call
upon the Secretary, Mr. Adams, to read letters from gentlemen who
are unable to attend here to-day.
LETTERS.
Mr. Francis Adams (Secretary) then read the following letters:—
From Edward Miall, Esq., M.P.
Welland House, Forest Hill, S.E., October 9th, 1869.
Dear Mr. Dixon,
I find it quite impracticable so to arrange my engagements
as to leave me at liberty to be present at the Education Conference, on
Tuesday and Wednesday next. I much regret this, because I had hoped to
derive from the papers to be read, and the discussions which may be had
upon them, clearer views of one or two of the principles of the League than
I can pretend to hold at present. I trust, however, that due care 'will be
taken to give publicity to the proceedings, and that I and others who happen
to be precluded from availing ourselves of your courteous invitation, will have
an opportunity of making ourselves fully acquainted -with what has been
said and done at the Conference.
As I have already made you aware, I heartily concur in the “object”
which the Conference has been assembled to promote, and generally in the
“means” to be adopted -with a view to it. I am anxious, however, to
reserve my freedom of action, as well as of speech, [to thejextent which I will,
with your leave, endeavour to describe.
With regard to the 6th article in the programme, that “the State or the
local authorities shall have power to compel the attendance of children of
suitable age, not otherwise receiving education,” I give in my adhesion to
the principle involved. I confess I have tried hard to escape the necessity
of acceding to a resort to compulsion in furtherance of the end we have in
view, and have been driven only by the force of facts to surrender my
objections to it. Consequently, I am a little more sensitive on this point
than on others, and I can easily imagine modes of compulsion resorted to
which I could not bring my mind to approve. I wish, therefore, while
agreeing to the principle, to refrain from committing myself beforehand to
any particular scheme for carrying it into effect.
�u
As to free. admission to all schools aided by local rates, I suggest that the
provision should be coupled with this condition : That in every case in which
a school is rate-supported, it should be by a separate rate, to be called a
“ SCHOOL RATE.” In order to prevent that non-appreciation of education
which would inevitably come of the idea that it can be got for nothing, every
ratepayer should be made to understand distinctly that, in availing himself
of a free school for his children, he is but receiving back in value that which
in proportion to his means he has paid for. He will readily understand and
feel this, if he is periodically called upon to pay a specific rate for the purpose,
and I think he will be the less disposed to trifle with the right he has thus
acquired.
My chief anxiety, however, is to guard myself from being committed,
under the fourth article of the programme, to conclusions which in my
honest judgment I reject. In that article, as now worded, I thoroughly
concur. It is of the utmost importance that schools aided by local rates shaU
be unsectarian. Denominational education I take to be the greatest obstacle
to National education. It causes an enormous waste of teaching power. It
misleads a large proportion of the public as to the true end of public schools,
and it serves to stereotype instead of softening down religious disctinctions. I
do not believe it to be in any sense necessary. The public, generally, do not
care to perpetuate it. The demand for it is almost exclusively a clerical
demand, and I think the time is come for attempting to get rid of it—
cautiously and gradually, of course, but, in due time, effectually. But whilst
I attach high importance to unsectarian education, I am bound to say that I do
not feel obliged to exclude the religious element from rate-supported schools.
1 would not insist upon it as a condition of receiving public aid, but neither
would I insist upon its being eliminated from primary education. Thus
much, I think, might be safely left to the decision of the local authorities—
to be authorised to open and close their schools, if they please, with some
catholic form of devotion, and to adopt the Bible as one of the books to be
read; of course, protecting every parent from being compelled to subject his
children to either. My reason is this : I feel convinced that if by “unsectarian” schools, the interpretation is to be the rigid exclusion of all
religion from the schools, the nation will lose the very best teachers, for,
ceeteris paribus, they are the best teachers who bring a religious spirit and
motive to their work. I am sure the working classes, as a body, would not
care to shut out Christianity altogether from the schools to which they send
their children. I think it would be a mistake so tightly to tie up the hands
of teachers as to make all reference to the great facts aud precepts of
Christianity a forbidden thing to them. At any rate, it might well be left to
the local authorities to exercise their free choice in the matter. Such being
my opinion, I beg to hold myself uncommitted to the article in question, if
by the epithet “unsectarian” be meant “ necessarily and exclusively secular. ”
�15
I have no objection to give public aid to schools confined to secular educa
tion ; but I do not think it would be wise to impose upon local authorities the
obligation to shut out the religious element to this extent.
Pardon the liberty I have taken, and believe me to be,
,
Dear Mr. Dixon,
Yours, very faithfully,
EDWARD MIALL.
George Dixox, Esq., M.P.
From J. C. Buchnaster, Esq.
St. John’s Hill, Wandsworth, S.W., October lltli, 1869.
Dear Sir,
I regret very much that I am quite unable to accept your
invitation for the 13th. I cheerfully give my adhesion to the general principles
of the Education League, because I believe it offers the only equitable solution
of the educational difficulty. I wish the working classes (who are mostly
interested in this matter) would give some expression of opinion on the
subject, so as to help you and others in Parliament to obtain a national system
of education. Hitherto all our arrangements for the education of the children
of the working classes have been settled by the political influence of religious
parties, and, to avoid as much as possible all difficulty, every denomination has
been tempted to receive,' State assistance. The result is a great waste of
educational effort. I frequently find two and three schools in places with a
population scarcely sufficient to maintain one with efficiency. We have the same
number of inspectors without any concert with each other, going every year
to the same place to do precisely the same work. Ever since the Committee
of Council came into existence I have been in various ways connected with
the present system, and I believe it was the only scheme at that time capable
of meeting the enormous difficulties and resistance of religious bodies. This
opposition, controlled, as it appeared to me, by no reason, was a great national
calamity, and a source of much sorrow. I have carefully watched and taken
part in the working of the present system, and I am reluctantly compelled to
admit that the denominational system fails to accomplish its object. T have
been for several years Churchwarden of the parish in which I reside. I have
taught in elementary schools aided by the State, and Sunday schools, and
when at home I go regularly to church on Sunday, and at the corner of almost
every street I see a number of men with short pipes and unlaced boots, whose
faces twenty years ago were familiar to me as pupils in the parish school and
Sunday school. Why don’t they go to some place of religious worship ? When
at the parish school theyheard prayers and scripture lessons every morning from
students in the Training College—twice or three times a week lessons in the
Catechism and Liturgy from the curate or vicar—twice on Sunday religious
instruction in the Sunday school and two sermons; and where is the result of
�16
all this in the after life and character of the pupils ? If a purely secular
system had been inaugurated by the minutes of 1846 and 1847 this indiffer
ence to religious worship and conduct would have been charged on that
system. Some time ago I made enquiries, as far as I was able, as to the
practical result of the religious instruction given in our parish schools. 120
pupils were grown up and still living in the parish ; some of them married,
with children passing through the same course of religious instruction. Only
nine were in the habit of attending any place of worship regularly, and two
of these were paid singers. Ninety, so far as I could learn, had never been
either to church or chapel since they earned their own living, except to a
wedding or a baptism. The complaint that the working classes as a rule never
go to any place of worship is, I fear, a sad reality; but where is the result of all
our denominational teaching, and religious instruction? Theology and
Scripture proofs of various doctrines are no doubt taught in most of our
schools, but religion is not taught, and cannot be taught. The one is a
science, the other a sentiment; and we have been mistaking the one for the
other. You must not infer from this that I am insensible to the great
blessings of a religious life; but the teaching of dogmatic theology never
secures it. The tone and atmosphere of a school-room should stand in contrast
with the wretched dirty homes from which many of the children come. They
should be surrounded, as far as possible, with everything which tends to
soften and refine their hearts and feelings ; for it is through the senses that
the better impulses of our nature are called into activity and life. We want
clean and cheerful school-rooms, with good pictures on the walls, and specimens
of good art, and these may now be obtained at a small cost. The obstacle in
the way of progress is the ever active spirit which seeks to obtain supporters
to particular views and disciples for particular sects. The love of power un
consciously takes the semblance of religious anxiety, and every man acts as
if he alone had the true faith which ought to be taught to the young. The
only practical way is for the State to restrict itself to teaching those truths
upon which we all agree. All knowledge which is cognisable by our senses
may be safely taught at the public expense. It is only when we leave the
things of this world, and enter upon the consideration of those of the next,
that we lose the means of deciding who is right and who is wrong.
But I
think we must all agree that the more perfectly men are educated in a
knowledge of undisputed truths the better they will be prepared for the. study
of Divine truth. This is most assuredly the basis upon which we ought to
start. Society and human nature must be taken as it is, and not as some
think it should be. For these and other reasons I shall have much pleasure
in rendering what assistance I can in promoting the objects you have in view.
Yours truly,
J. C. BUCKMASTER.
George Dixon, Esq., M.P.
�17
From the Marquis of Lome, M.P. for Argyleshire.
The Queen’s Hotel, Glasgow, Sept. 17th, 1869.
Dear Mr. Dixon,
Your very kind letter has only just reached me, and I
therefore hope you will excuse my apparent neglect in not having answered
before this.
1 shall not be able, I am very sorry to say, to attend the meeting, as I
mean to spend the time between this and November in Ireland.
With many thanks,
Believe me,
Yours very truly,
LORNE.
To George Dixon, Esq., M.P.
From the Rev. Charles Kingsley.
Eversley Rectory, Winchfield, Sep. 17th, 1869.
My dear Sir,
I am still more sorry that I cannot attend your meeting on
reading through your Education Society’s Report. It seems to me a con
vincing proof that the voluntary denominational system is in great towns a
failure, and unless you forbid me, I shall use its statistics to that effect at
Bristol. That it is a failure in country parishes I know from 27 years’
experience as a parson.
I remain,
Your much obliged,
C. KINGSLEY.
I am much gratified by finding in your second Education League list so
many names personally dear to me, and so many of my own cloth.
From Sir Henry A. Hoare, M.P. for Chelsea.
*
Stourhead, Bath, 17th Sep. 1869.
Dear Mr. Dixon,
I received yours of the loth this morning. I cannot, as I
told you in town, undertake to be present in Birmingham on the 12th and
following day, but I shall be truly glad to hear that the General Meeting has
done something.
I do hope that with respect to the principle of compulsion there will be no
faint-heartedness, and no dilution whatsoever of the power to enforce
attendance.
I remain,
Yours very truly,
HENRY A. HOARE.
»
B
�18
From Professor Huxley.
Swanage, Dorset, September 21, 1869.
My dear Sir,
I received your letter of the 17th yesterday, after I had.
written a reply to that of earlier date.
I wish again to say how very sorry I am I cannot do what you and the
Committee desire of me ; but not being a bird, as Mr. Boyle Poach said, I
cannot be in two places at once, and I am bound to be lecturing in London on
both the twelfth and the thirteenth of October.
I am, very faithfully, yours,
T. W. HUXLEY.
To George Dixon, Esq., M.P.
From Dr. Schmitz.
The London International College,
Spring Grove, Middlesex, W., Sep. 16th, 1869.
Dear Sir,
It would give me the greatest pleasure at the approaching
Meeting of the National Education League, at Birmingham, to read a paper
on the great necessity there is in this country for compulsory education, a
subject upon which I feel very strongly, but unfortunately the time of the
meeting coincides with the reassembling of our College, so that it is even
more than doubtful whether I shall be able to attend the meeting.
I am extremely sorry, therefore, that I am unable to have the honour
which your Committee has assigned to me, by inviting me to prepare a paper
for the occasion.
I am, dear Sir, yours truly,
L. SCHMITZ.
From E. H. Brodie, Esq., Inspector of Schools.
Education Department, Council Office, Downing Street, London,
September 29th, 1869.
Dear Sir,
It is with the greatest regret that I write to say that I am
unable to attend the meeting of the National Education League, at
Birmingham.
My official engagements for October are heavy and numerous, and I cannot
spare even half-a-day.
I shall read the newspaper accounts of the meeting with the deepest
interest.
�19
After 10| years’ experience of the present system of education, I have
quite come to the conclusion that the poor both are not and never will be
reached by it, except very partially, especially in our large towns, so fruitful
of the criminal class. Assuring you of my sincerest sympathy for the cause,
and regretting my unavoidable absence,
I remain, dear Sir,
Faithful yours,
E. H. BRODIE.
To Jesse Collings, Esq.
From P. A. Taylor, Esq., M.P. for Leicester.
Aubrey House, Notting Hill, W., October 9th, 1869.
My dear Mr. Dixon,
I am sony that it will not be in my power to attend the
Conference next week.
Do not attribute my absence to any lukewarmness in the cause.
Of all the great reforms we have before us, this is perhaps the greatest.
I ain entirely at one with your programme.
You may rely on my humble support on all occasions.
&
1
Yours truly,
P. A. TAYLOR.
George Dixon, Esq., M.P.
From an oversight the following important letter was not read
at the meeting.
From the Rev. J. J. Brawn.
Birmingham, 8th Oct., 1869.
My dear Sir,
I beg to inform you that at the Autumnal Session of the
Baptist Union, held at Leicester on the 7th Oct. instant, the following
Resolution was adopted:
“That this Union, without pledging itself to the support of the programme
of the National Education League, hereby requests the Chairman (Dr. Brock)
and Secretary (Rev. J. H. Millard, B.A., Huntingdon), with the Revs. Drs.
Underwood and Haycroft, J. Bigwood, and J. J. Brown, to act as its repre
sentatives at the General Meeting to be held under the auspices of the League
next week at Birmingham.”
I am, dear Sir, yours faithfully,
J. J. BROWN.
To Francis Adams, Esq.
�20
From Blanchard Jerrold, Esq.
SCHOOLS OF SKILL.
Reform Club, S.W., Oct. 13, 1869.
Sir,
Being unavoidably detained away from the meetings of the
League by professional duties, the Executive will, I trust, permit me to state
in a letter the heads of the subject I was anxious to submit viva voce to the
friends of popular education who are at this moment assembled at Birmingham.
It seems to be pretty generally agreed that the distress under wdiich so
many thousands of our fellow countrymen are suffering is caused, not by over
population, but by a superabundance of that labour which the continual
extension of machinery has depreciated. The demand for unskilled labour
is eVer on the decline—a fact on which we should have every reason to
congratulate ourselves if the instruction of labour were keeping pace with
the spread of machinery. But, unfortunately, while the inventive genius of
our race and the energy of our capitalists have given no truce to time, the
friends of popular education have been squabbling all the while because they
go different ways on Sundays—unmindful of Farquhar’s warning. Hence the
growth of blind Labour in the face of the Machine, its mighty and uncon
querable rival ; and hence the increase of pauperism, and of that saddest
condition of life—work w'ithout hope, which “ draws nectar in a sieve.”
The point on wdiich I am anxious to insist, and which will, I am sure, find a
wide acceptance in the Midlands, is this. The superabundance of blind labour
being the cause of the wide-spread distress and heavy poor rates that afflict and
fetter us, our first care must be to teach skill. It is because skill and taste are
■wide-spread among the working population of France that our neighbours
have not the parallel of those townships of even misery wdiich are black spots
upon the map of every considerable city in this kingdom. In the front of the
education movement Trade Schools must be placed. The State is bound to
see that every child is duly provided for the battle of life with those doughty
weapons, the three R’s. Granted. But surely the first duty society owes to
the child is to fortify it so as to assure it, at maturity, the self-dependent
strength of perfect citizenship. The children of the poor should first be taught
some form of skill by the exercise of wdiich they may raise themselves out of
the slough of poverty to which the untutored labour of their parents has sunk
them.
Had the Ragged Schools been sound trade schools, less given to the Old
Hundredth and more to the profitable methods of bread-earning, they would
have effected more good in city lanes and alleys than they can fairly claim to
have done with the teaching of the three R’s.
If the schoolmaster of the poor were himself re-educated, and taught to
implant in his pale scholars the art of living by w’ork—if the primary school
�were a school of skill, as well as one of catechism—the daily practice of industry
with intelligence would strengthen the heart while it informed the hand, and
we should be attending prosperously to
“ The kindred points of Heaven and Home.”
I have honour to remain, Sir,
Your faithful servant,
BLANCHARD JERROLD.
To Francis Adams, Esq.,
Secretary of the National Education League.
Letters expressing regret at not being able to attend were also
received from the following members of the League :—
Jacob Bright, M.P.
Colonel Sykes, M.P.
Josh. Grieve, M.P.
George Melly, M.P.
Peter Rylands, M.P.
James Howard, M.P.
Thomas Hughes, M.P.
P. H. Muntz, M.P.
Sir Sydney Waterlow, M.P.
Captain Sherard Osborne.
Sir John Lubbock.
Dr. Michael Foster.
Russell Martineau.
Rev. George Style.
Professor Roscoe.
Professor Jevons.
John E. Gray.
Dr. Schmitz.
Professor Leone Levi.
Mr. Edwin A. Abbott.
Sir John Bowring.
Mr. Samuel Smiles.
Rev. Charles Voysey.
Hon. George Howard.
Dr. John Shortt.
Mr. M. D. Conway.
Dr. Gotch.
�22
REPORT OF THE PROVISIONAL COMMITTEE.
•
Mr. Jesse Collings (Honorary Secretary) read the following
Report of the Provisional Committee :—
The Provisional Committee think it desirable to lay before the
first meeting of members a brief statement of the reasons
which led to the formation of the National Education League,
the object of the Association, and the steps which have been taken
towards its organization.
On all hands it has long since been admitted that the present
system of education fails to meet the requirements of the country,
that voluntary efforts reach only the richer districts, and these
imperfectly, and that the poorer districts are left practically
uncared for, Government aid being wholly dependent upon
previous local expenditure.
Recent enquiries prove that even in districts best provided
with educational means, the real value of these means is greatly
below what is was supposed to be. The reports of the Manchester
Education Aid Society, and of the Birmingham Education Society,
for instance, reveal a state of things calculated to arrest attention
and excite alarm.
An enquiry instituted by the Manchester Society showed that
in Manchester and Salford the number of children of all classes,
between three years and twelve years, was 100,000. Of these
only 55,000 were on the books of public elementary schools, and
of this latter number the average attendance was but 38,000.
In Birmingham, out of 35,018 children between the ages of
three and twelve visited by the agents of the Education Society,
only 15,490 were at school. Of 45,056 children between three
and fifteen years, 17,023 were at school, 6,337 at work, and 21,696
were neither at school nor at work. Of the 17,023 who were at
school, 10,890 were under nine years of age.
The results of such education as had been given were shown to
be equally unsatisfactory.
In Manchester, in 1,916 families visited, there were, 1,660
persons between the ages of twelve and twenty. Of these, 759
were unable to read. Out of 1,672 fathers, 465 could not
p
�23
read, and out of 1,857 mothers the number unable to read
was 815.
In Birmingham, Mr. Long, one of the masters of the
Worcester, Lichfield, and Hereford Diocesan Training College,
visited a number of the manufactories (fairly chosen to represent
the whole), and examined 988 young persons between the ages of
thirteen and twenty-one. His report was that, “ in reading and
writing nearly one-half of the whole number examined do nothing,
or next to nothing, and only one-third do at all well. In
arithmetic and general knowledge more than three-fourths fail, or
nearly so; and only one in twenty shows anything like a
satisfactory degree of attainment.”
The facts thus ascertained are corroborated by the statements
of the Bight Hon. H. A. Bruce, in a recent address, in which,
quoting from a report of the London Diocesan Board of Education,
he said there were in London from 150 thousand to 200 thousand
children without the means of education, and that during the
preceding five or six years all that had been done served only to
prevent retrogression.
The report of the Committee of Council (1867-8, p. xxiii.)
demonstrates the inefficiency of instruction even in the best
primary schools—those under Government inspection. Of the
children attending a large proportion are declared to be unfit for
examination; and of those examined above ten years of age,
“ only 3.13 per cent, passed in the three higher standards without
failure” : these standards being of an extremely elementary
character.
These and other facts exhibiting the want of educational means
and the defective quality of instruction actually given, naturally
attracted special attention at the moment when, by an extension of
the franchise, a great change had been made in the distribution of
political power. Persons who took an interest in education were
led to the enquiry whether the present voluntary system, based
upon denominational effort, could by any possibility cover in the
future, with increasing population and more urgent demands, the
ground which it had failed to cover in the past. Conceding to the
voluntary principle the utmost conceivable measure of success, the
�24
advocates of education were further driven to enquire whether,
considering the new conditions of political arrangements, and the
rate at which education has hitherto progressed, it would be
prudent to wait until the present system has received a longer
trial. Educational reformers felt themselves compelled to ask yet
another question, whether, considering the right of every child to
education, it would be just to persevere in a system which,
however benevolent its motive and however strenuous its
exertions, experience has proved to reach only part of the children
having the right to instruction, and to deal imperfectly with those
whom it succeeded in reaching.
To all these questions only negative replies could be given.
The advocates of extended education found themselves obliged to
conclude that the voluntary system had failed to meet the wants
of the country, that considering the new political conditions re
sulting from an extended franchise, it would be imprudent to
persevere with a system admitted to be inadequate, and that con
sidering the right of all children to instruction, a national system
was demanded not less by justice than by expediency.
The result of these convictions was the introduction of a bill,
promoted by an influential Committee emanating from the Man
chester Education Aid Society, permitting the imposition of local
rates for the maintenance of schools. A permissive measure being,
however, felt to be inadequate, a subsequent bill was introduced,
allowing Government to compel the imposition of local educational
rates whcrs these might be found necessary. These bills were intro
duced by Mr. Bruce and Mr. Forster, and at the same time it was
intended that Mr. (now Sir Thomas) Bazley should move clauses
enforcing attendance at school.
The measures above mentioned mark the advance of public
opinion. The formation of the National Education League in
dicates a still greater and more important progress. It was felt
by several gentlemen in Birmingham that the time had come for
the establishment of an organisation uniting all those, throughout
the country, who desired to promote a really national system of
education, reaching all places unprovided for, based as to means
upon local taxation supplemented by imperial grants, becoming,
�25
therefore, unsectarian and free, and having the power to compel
attendance as the only way of overcoming parental neglect.
Accordingly, at the beginning of this year, the National
* Education League was formed upon the following basis, and upon
this basis only, which the founders regard as fundamental, were
educational reformers throughout the country invited to join the
League.
Object :
The establishment of a system which shall secure the Education of
every Child in England and Wales.*
Means :
1. —Local Authorities shall be compelled by law to see that sufficient
School Accommodation is provided for every Child in their
district.
2. —The cost of founding and maintaining such Schools as may be
recpiired shall be provided out of Local Rates, supplemented
by Government Grants.
8.—All Schools aided by Local Rates shall be under the manage
ment of Locul Authorities and subject to Government
Inspection.
Jf..—All Schools aided by Local Rates shall be Unsectarian.
5. —To all Schools aided by Local Rates admission shall be free.
6. —School Accommodation being provided, the State or the Local
Authorities shall have power to compel the attendance of
children of suitable age not otherwise receiving education.
That this movement was happily timed, at the moment when
opinion was ripe for it, is proved by the fact that although no
public meeting has been held by the League, no means adopted but
the circulation of the scheme recorded above, near two thousand
five hundred- persons of influence, including forty members of the
* A slight verbal alteration was agreed, to at a meeting of the Provisional
Committee, held 22nd Sept., viz., that in all future circulars, addresses, &c.,
the words “ in the country" should be substituted for the words “ in England
and Wales.”
�House of Commons, and. between three and four hundred ministers
of religion, have already joined the League, by formally assenting
to its principles; and this number is daily increasing.
It is now proposed to complete the working organisation of the
League by electing a Council and an Executive Committee, charged
with the transaction of general business, the appointment of officers,
and the formation of branch committees. The last-mentioned work
has already been commenced. It was intended that it should have
been deferred until after this meeting ; but the response to the
invitation of the Provisional Committee was so great that it was
found necessary to form branch committees without delay, and
branches have accordingly been constituted in London, Manchester,
Bradford, Bristol, Leicester, Sheffield, Liverpool, Leeds, Hudders
field, Exeter, Bath, Warrington, Devonport, Carlisle, Merthyr
Tydvil, Wednesbury, South Hants, and the Isle of Wight.
With reference to the funds necessary for carrying on the
operations of the League, it was thought desirable to abstain from
issuing an appeal until after the general meeting of members ; but
a number of gentlemen, having the work strongly at heart, have
offered the sums undermentioned, payable by annual instalments
extending over ten years :—
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
G. Dixon, M.P., Birmingham....................... .£1,000
A. Brogden, M.P., Ulverstone ................... 1,000
E. L. Chance, Birmingham........................... 1,000
J. Chamberlain, Birmingham ....................... 1,000
Joseph Chamberlain, Birmingham ............... 1,000
G. B. Lloyd, Birmingham ........................... 1,000
A. Field, Birmingham.................................... 1,000
Follett Osler, F.E.S., Birmingham............... 1,000
W. Middlemore, Birmingham....................... 1,000
Archibald Kenrick, Birmingham ............... 1,000
F. S. Bolton, Birmingham ............................ 1,000
Edmund Potter, M.P., Carlisle...................
500
T. Kenrick, Birmingham................................
500
William Kenrick, Birmingham ...................
500
J. Arthur Kenrick, Birmingham...................
500
�27
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
John Jaffray, Birmingham...........................
Harold Lees, Manchester................................
William Dudley, Birmingham ...................
John Webster, Birmingham .......................
H. Swinglehurst, Milnthorpe .......................
500
400
200
200
110
As regards the general meeting of members, it is thought
desirable that it shall be held annually in different parts of the
kingdom. It is proposed that the Council, to be chosen at each
annual meeting, shall be a consultative body, assembling at such
intervals and in such places as may be required, and shall include
all Members of Parliament who may join the League, large donors
to the funds of the association, and at least one representative of
each branch committee. A body so numerous, and consisting of
persons so widely scattered, being obviously too large for the
transaction of current business, it is proposed to appoint an Execu
tive Committee, to whom, subject to resolutions of the annual
meeting, and the general revision of the Council, shall be entrusted
the conduct of the business of the League. This Committee will
meet at the central offices of the League in Birmingham.
The work of the League will be to collect and disseminate
through its various branches, by means of meetings, publications,
lectures, and otherwise, all available information on the subject of
education; to stimulate discussion upon educational reforms; to
create and guide public opinion; to influence Members of Parlia
ment through their constituents ; to hasten and strengthen the
action of Government; and to promote the adoption by the Legis
lature of measures which shall ensure the education of every child
in the country, and which shall provide instruction so accessible
and so graduated that the child of the poorest artisan shall have it
within his power to fit himself for any position capable of being
attained by a citizen of the United Kingdom. To this work the
members of the League have set themselves with a serious convic
tion of its vital importance, and under a sense of personal
responsibility and public duty ; and to this work they intend to
remain constant until it is accomplished, and the reproach and curse
Qf ignorance is wiped away from the land.
�28
TREASURER’S REPORT.
Birmingham, October 8th, 1869.
I have to report that the donations and subscriptions already
received amount to £1,212 10s. 6d. The orders made upon me for
payments are £418 19s., leaving a balance in hand of £793 11s. 6d.
There are liabilities incurred amounting to nearly £600, including
the expenses incidental to the general meeting, and the publication
•of the report of its proceedings.
JOHN JAFFRAY, Treasurer.
The Venerable Archdeacon Sandford said : Mr. Chairman and
gentlemen,—I have been requested to move the adoption of the
concise and lucid and complete report which has just been read to
you; and when I tell you that I am labouring under a serious
attack of indisposition, I am sure you will feel that my presence on
this platform to-day is a proof of my deep and continued interest
in the all-important question which we are met to discuss. I
deeply feel the honour which on this occasion is conferred on me,
and the responsibility which I incur in coming forward to move
the adoption of the report, and I wish to keep distinctly before
my own mind and before yours the object proposed by this Educa
tion League, which justifies, I believe, the course that you and I are
about to adopt. It is to provide the means of education for every
child in England and Wales—that is, to supply education, the best
gift that can be bestowed on any human being, to the multitudes
of the children of our native land who are at this moment ignorant
of those essential truths which are to qualify them for the duties
of this life and for the hopes of a better. I remember hearing it
observed by the late Lord Brougham, some years ago, in the House
of Lords, that he had never met a Frenchman of any condition or
occupation whatever, who did not consider that, after the Emperor,
he was himself the fittest and the sole man to solve the constitu
tional difficulties, and to work out the political destiny of his country.
Now, I am not so aspiring or so self-reliant, but you can understand
that no man can have been connected as a pastor of the people, as
I have been, for more than thirty years, with the education of the
�29
children of the poor, without having rny own views upon this allmomentous subject, and even believing that I could suggest to you
a scheme preferable to that which has been elaborated by my friend
Mr. Dixon and his provisional committee. But in our excellent
chairman we have a commander-in-chief who is not only sagacious
and vigilant, but whom I have found to be inexorable, and what
ever discussions have taken place in the Council, he will allow no
divergence of opinion whatever on the eve of battle and in the
face of the foe. To this very judicious decision I most meekly
submit. My consolation is the belief that in the discussions
which will ensue there will be found gentlemen less compliant,
who will be sure to bring forward and to press those very
objections and those very preferences which have occurred to
myself. Gentlemen, we stand in the presence of an overwhelming
necessity, and of a great national danger, and that necessity
and that danger are involved in the fact, as you have heard
in this luminous report, that there are thousands and tens of
thousands of the children of our people, for whom we are responsible
in the sight of God and man, who are the outcasts, the pariahs of
society, who are growing up without any moral influences whatever
being brought to bear on them, and who in the course of a few
years must constitute a very large and important portion of the
community, invested with legal rights, which they may use for the
injury of themselves and the destruction of society. Now, that is
my reason for keeping back any preferences and objects of my own,
and coming forward, as I believe I ought to do on this occasion,
to endorse the report which has been read to you. What
we want to do is to give the means of education to all those
wretched children ; and it is quite clear from what has been uttered
here, and what has appeared in many and voluminous publications,
that the voluntary system, however admirable it may be, has utterly
failed in providing what is required ; yes, and the character of the
education imparted is very deficient indeed. Well, now, to secure
universal education for our people, I have long believed that we
must have compulsory education. And this is no new light that
has broken upon me since this Education League was proposed,
because I advocated compulsory education months ago, at Man
�30
Chester. Well, then, to have compulsory education you must have
a rate, and to have a rate you must have—I will not call it
secular education, for I abhor the term, and I do not like the
phrase adopted in this report, “ unsectarian education;” I very
much prefer the term “ undenominational education.” It is quite
dear that in a country like ours, with our various denominational
churches, and with our many differences in point of religion, it
will be quite impossible to have an education supported by rate
unless you have the teaching undenominational. Now, with regard
to the rate itself, I believe—and I know that it is the conviction
of many of the inspectors of schools in the country-—that it is
required to compel employers, and to compel parents who do not
discharge their duties in this respect, to bear their portion of the
burden. I am quite satisfied that very many severe things will be
said of your platform. We shall be told, no doubt, that it is a
godless scheme; that it is a revolutionary scheme; that it is a
scheme utterly unsuited to the taste and the feeling of the British
people; that it cannot succeed, that if it is carried out it will flood
the land with a number of atheists and infidels, who will be the
curse of society; that we are departing from the course of duty;
yes, and that we deserve very severe vituperation ourselves because
we have the effrontery to propose this scheme to the public. All I
can say is this, that after a man at my time of life has been pronounced
sacrilegious and an atheist because he has presumed to utter an
opinion not upon a religious but upon a political question, he
becomes rather callous, and is prepared to do his duty, and, if needs
must be, to stand alone, whatever may be said of him by ignorant and
interested parties. I am now about to allude, not towhat is propounded
in this place, and of which for the first time I received a statement
to-day, but to another scheme, which was brought forward a little
time ago with a great flourish of trumpets; and that is, that all
religious sections of the kingdom should be paid to bring up the
children of their denominations in the strictest tenets of their own
faith. Now I confess that I utterly object to that proposition. I
have a very great and affectionate respect for my friend Mr. Vince;
I have an equally great and affectionate respect for my friend
Mr. George Dawson; but I am not prepared to endorse their
�31
theological opinions or to pay for them, for my theological
platform is different from theirs. This scheme, as it appears to me,
proposes that the children of Mr. Vince’s denomination should be
taught, and that the State should provide the means—I suppose
by rate—for their being taught, that Christian baptism is a
delusion ■ and that the children of the school of Mr. Dawson
should be taught that the Christian priesthood is a sham ; yes, and
that the children in Jewish schools should be taught, at the
expense of the State, that the author of Christianity himself is an
impostor. I believe that the proposal of the League, which, at what
ever risk, I am prepared to endorse, shows me to be a much more
sound and conscientious Churchman than he is who professes the
other scheme, which, in my belief, could only tend to per
petuate and to intensify those divisions among Christians which
are, and which have been so long, the bane and the scandal of
Christendom. There are other speakers of far more note and of
far more weight than myself who are to address this meeting, and
therefore I will not trouble you with any further observations of
my own. I am to be followed by one that cometh out of Samaria,
which has supplied redoubtable champions in former times ; and I
am proud and happy to be associated with Mr. Dawson in this work
of education. It is, of course, a most unnatural and a most
monstrous conjunction, and one which twenty years ago, perhaps
ten years ago, would have been quite impossible ; when I, perhaps,
■considered Mr. Dawson somewhat of a firebrand, and he used to
remark on me as an ornamental, but not very useful, appendage to
the Church. Ah ! but, God be praised! things move rapidly in
the present day: to that consummation which as citizens and as
Christians we all ought to desire, when good men of all parties
and of all religious creeds can unite together in the cause of a com
mon country and a common humanity. I have had brought strongly
before me the teachings and example of one who, though himself
born and bred a Jew, though he maintained that salvation was of
the Jews, though he protested against every conceivable form of
error, and at last died a martyr to the truth, yet was on friendly
terms with Samaritans, and has set forth in the Book of Books a
Samaritan as the grand type of practical benevolence for the imita
�tion and admiration of the Church and the world throughout all
time. Before that sublime and magnificent example I bow in loving
adoration. I wish to be imbued with that spirit. I wish to tread
in those footprints, and therefore I rejoice to-day to come forward
to co-operate with my Nonconformist brethren in an endeavour to
redeem and to raise the outcasts of society who are left at this
moment lying in wretchedness and in the dark, and who, but for
this intervention, I believe in God, would be left to perish without
instruction, without moral instincts, without any moral or religious
knowledge at all.
Mr. George Dawson : It is not for me to enter into the reasons
why I have been asked to second this resolution, though I guess it
is because on this question there is no man that holds more extreme
■views than I do. It is certain that if I state my views, I shall
state all yours, and, with regard to many of you, a great deal more
besides. Courtesy demands that I should reciprocate the kindness
of the Archdeacon. He has told you he has ceased to regard me as
a firebrand. Well, I have long since ceased to regard him as
a fogey. We have made mutual concessions ; and it gives me,
as I am sure it gives you, pleasure to see a man so eminent in
the Church discharge the duty of a true leader of the people,
opening his eyes widely and clearly to know the signs of the
times; for his Master and mine pronounced a severe condemna
tion upon those leaders of the people who are unable to know the
signs of the times. One word of congratulation, and that is that
we have advanced. We have not to argue that the poor have a right
to be educated, or ought to be educated. That is gone by. So far,
we have got through the meeting without any gentleman telling
us the difference between instruction and education. That used to
be a stumbling block. We have got to this proposition—th at every
child in this nation ought to be taught. We hold the doctrine of the
family life of the nation. I believe the majority of you do feel as
I do, that every ragged, filthy, untaught, cursing, blaspheming child
should be looked upon as a child of our household, and should bring
shame and disgrace upon us. I would that at heart you and I could
say with him of old, “ Mine eyes run down with tears for the
iniquities of my people.” But at all events we have come to see
�33
that there is no human remedy hut education, and that education
is always good, he it little or much. We dismiss Mr. Alexander
Pope’s couplet about drinking deep or not touching at all as a piece
of antiquated nonsense. We bow, with great respect, those clergy
out of our road, represented by one in this town, who once said
that unless he could have religious education he would shut up the
schoolhouse, put the key in his pocket, and walk away. We have
most of us got rid of that foolish distinction between sacred
and secular. We believe all knowledge to be of God, and
therefore towards good. I believe that he who teaches two
letters of the alphabet to a child who yesterday knew but one, has
furthered that child’s chances of future instruction, and of all
well-being. These things we have not to discuss. A word of
warning : I shall go ' further than you will follow; but, in a
discussion like this, ill-temper would he out of place, and large
allowance for individualism is what we require. We all mean the
same thing, only we travel different paces. We all wish to lay the
foundation of a national educational system. It must be laid with
lucid simplicity and with great breadth, to bear the strain of the
future. We are not here to patch existing systems—-to patch the
garment of semi-charity and semi-ecclesiasticism, which forms a
large part of the present education, but to lay a broad system, by
declaring at once that the world—by which I mean all people that
do not call themselves the Church—has its rights, and that the
world is not to be governed by the good people in anything which
belongs entirely to the world. All men whose opinion is of valuehave come to know that what for present purposes we call secular
education is an affair of the world—an affair of the nation—acting
through its Government. We have got rid of some bugbears—we
are no longer afraid of the Government. This used to be, perhaps, a
necessity; but it is a disgrace if it remains so now. What is the
Government of this country 1 It is the nation itself. There is no
antagonism between the people and the Government now. We
are not here to bury the voluntary principle—its great supporters
buried it long ago. We have lived to hear the recantations of a
Miall and a Baines—to hear them declare that their mistakes about
voluntaryism were what we all knew them to be—well
c
�34
intentioned ; and that voluntaryism is quite an inadequate basis for
a national system. A national system must be laid in simplicity,
and it must be paid for by rates. I am a lover of rates myself. I
was never guilty of that “ ignorant impatience” of taxation which
a great statesman once spoke of. I like to see the tax-gatherer
come, provided the ends to which the taxes are devoted are holy
and noble, and it will be one of the pleasantest sights when the
tax-gatherer comes to lay upon me the noble hand of national com
pulsion, to pay a rate in order that every child in the nation
shall be educated. But, remember, rates mean compulsion. I
hope most of you have done with compulsion as a bugbear. All
life is compulsion. Society is based upon compulsion. What is
government but law made compulsory ? Happy the man who
by-and-by shall escape from the necessities of compulsion, and do
that from the law of liberty which at first he must be made to do
with reluctance. I like rates because they touch everybody,
because I get hold of the fat and selfish manufacturer and
touch him up, because I lay hold of the man that visits no
church and visits no chapel, and make him pay; and I advocate
not only local rates but national taxation for educational purposes.
It is time that a good deal of work that the religious bodies have
burdened themselves with should be given over to the world.
Let society do its own business. What is going on just now is
an operation like what goes on when sheep get mixed. There is
a meeting of shepherds to look over the flocks, and each selects
his own sheep. We have just restored to the Church a sheep
that had got into the State fold. We have handed to the volun
tary principle—to the good people—the Irish Church. Marked
with the sign of the cross, that sheep belonged to the Church, and
it has been restored. Now our turn comes—I mean the world ;
for I never profess anything more than that. Looking over the
Church flock we find a sheep there that belongs to us, and that
is education—theprimary education of the nation. It does not
belong to the Church in any sense—it belongs to the whole
nation. It belongs to the Government, and ought to be done
by the Government. I have no more notion of sectarian
education, or denominational education, in the sense of mere
j
�35
primary instruction, than I have of a denominational wate rcart
or a sectarian vaccinator. What has our history been for years
but the putting of sheep into the right fold ? I am old enough
to remember when nobody could be married except they went
to Church. I sat once at supper with a High Churchman who
asked me whether I was married or not ? I said I was. “ Who
married you ?” I named the person. “ A priest in' the true sue.
cession ?” “ Oh dear, no.” Said he, “You are not married at all.”
I said, “ What am I ?” “ You are only joined together.” “ Well,”
I said, “ as a practical man, for me that will do.” By degrees
society found out that marriage did not belong to priests, and we
established civil marriage. For those who wish to be married in
Church, liberty ; for those who do not, liberty also. Why must
a man be married in the name of a God he does not believe in ?
Why should a Jew be compelled to invoke a Trinity he despises
and abhors ? As to compulsory matters, there is the vaccination
question. Is education, in the sense in which we use the word—the
education about which we are all agreed, the education that relates
to this life—is that a matter that the State should now kindly take
out of the Church’s hand, and do for itself ? I say it is. And
with that education the clergy have no more to do as a matter of
right than the parish doctor or the parish lawyer. I for one am
profoundly thankful to clergy of all sorts for what they have done.
If the squirearchy and the nobility and gentry of England had done
their duty half as well as the clergy, old England would be further
advanced than to be only now laying the foundation stone of a
national system of education. The poor Dissenting minister has
done his duty. He has not had the chances of the Church, but it
was often the poor Nonconformist man who held up the flag of true
liberty, and maintained the fundamental principle of all just poli
tics—“ Do unto others as ye would that they should do
unto you.” Now, however, it is time that the matter should be
taken out of the hands of clergy and ministers. Why should the
Church educate the world in matters about which the world is
entirely capable of looking after itself ? Religious people have quite
enough to do without this. What an advantage it will be to you
Churchmen, if we take all this business, and leave your purse and
�36
your time free ! And, instead of our system being contrary to the
interests of religion, it is the best system for forwarding it. I have
been connected with Sunday schools all my life. We get a child
for an hour and a half every Sunday morning professedly to teach
it religion. The child does not know the alphabet. The hour and
half is spent in the painful attempt to teach it what the world ought
to have done. What an opportunity for those of you who set store
by these things, to pour in the precious dogmas of your theology
into minds which we have made open and receptive ! I have heard
that when the Pope washes the feet of beggars somebody first takes
off the worst of the dirt. We will take these dirty, ignorant children
and take the worst of the dirt off before we hand them over to you
to touch them up with the diaper! To argue that between knowledge
of any kind and true religion there can be any real hostility, would
be to assume that we are speaking to fossils, and not to men who
discern the signs of the times. We want compulsion • we want
rates. If we have rates, we must have free schools ; and if this
system be once adopted, the existing system must go, by a slow,
sure, and I hope, painless form of extinction• and who will regret
it if a wiser thing be put in its place ? For I trust none of you
are idolators, worshippers of mere means. I should be sorry to
think that the interests of your little denominational school weighed
more with you than the interests of the nation. Our people are
ill-taught. Our children die at a rate which is shameful and dis
graceful. Our people live in filth and disease. Large parts of
our great cities are a shame and disgrace, and the odours of cor
poreal nastiness interfere even with the propagation of the Gospel.
We believe we have a remedy for all this ; and, being an extreme
man, I prophesy that, in the end—and that end not distant—
our schools will be supported by rates • and that means com
pulsion, and it means that the schools must be purely secular. Dis
guise it as you may, to that complexion you must come at last. If
we attempt to make school rates to support denominational schools,
we shall have, in fact, our old friend the church-rates back again,
and some John Giles, of Bungay, will go to prison rather than pay
and members of the Society of Friends will allow their umbrellas
to be seized. It is not pleasant to hear how quietly and coolly
�37
the religions world assumes that it has a right to have its dogmas
and doctrines taught. I and many others begin to doubt whether
we ought to pay for your doctrines. I am a Latitudinarian avowedly.
Why should I pay to have done on the week days what I spend
all my Sundays endeavouring to undo ? Is it not time that the
little children should not be plagued with the reverse of what the
scholarship of England and the right learning of the Church have
shown to be the only things that a scholar can hold ? If gentle
men present can show you that Moses did not write the whole of the
Pentateuch, am I to be compelled to pay for telling children that
he did ? Is it not time that children should not build up what it
will be their first duty when they are older to pull down ? Have
not some of us gone through that bitter and painful process of
taking our fathers’ creed slowly down ? And do we not know what
it costs ? Is it pleasant for a man to have to forsake the creed
of his youth? Is the process so agreeable that it is right to
subject the children of this country to it ? Why am I to pay for
teaching a child—as it is stated in a catechism which I shall not name
—that for His good pleasure and greater glory, God elected certain
people to reprobation ? I am willing to pay for teaching the things
about which we are agreed. When they go out of school you
shepherds can catch them, and take them to the fold. Teach them
what you think proper, but do not ask me to pay for that part.
Short of what I have stated I shall not be satisfied, but I shall
travel with you on the same road as far as you will go with me ;
and I hope you will make allowance for me if I go farther
than you do. Compulsory, national, secular education—that is my
faith.
The resolution adopting the report was then put and carried
unanimously.
APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS, COUNCIL, AND
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
Mr. Edmund Potter, M.P., rose to move the appointment of
the officers, Council, and Executive Committee. He said : I must at
once frankly admit that though I have joined the League, I do not,
like some of our friends who have spoken before me, agree with every
�proposition that it has laid down. Yet, as I say, I have joined the
League, and having joined it faithfully and loyally, I mean to do
what I can to assist it upon its hroad and general principles, hut
still holding myself free to go even farther than the League itself.
I, like my friend Mr. Dawson, am an extreme man; hut perhaps
I view the question from a different point from that of any other
speaker. I am hound to view it more as a representative of
the people than as a philanthropist, and I look upon the
question as one of great political and social moment. It is a
political question of great urgency and great danger; and my
feeling in joining the League was that by meetings and con
ferences like the present public opinion may be fully and clearly
expressed, and that by it we may be able to force the Govern
ment to give a sound and comprehensive measure of education.
And I say frankly, that to my mind no measure would be
sound or comprehensive or satisfactory which did not at least
go as far as the principles of your League. Upon the political
point of the question, let me say that I look upon the present
state of the country with very great dread. I am not going to
trouble you with statistics, but just to say this : that it is well
known—and it is admitted by men competent to form an
accurate opinion—that of the twenty millions of population in
England and Wales no less than four millions are in a state
of crime, ignorance, misery, vice, and pauperism. Now, what
is the cause of this ? In my opinion it is simply this—that
hitherto education has never touched, or has scarcely touched, the
classes comprised in those four millions. True, there are some few
charitable institutions which have gone below a certain line; but
still there is a hard and fast line below which denominationalism
has never gone—cannot go. And for what reason? Simply
because it is denominational. Denominational institutions are
all supported by the subscriptions of the different sects and by
Government grants, but below that dark black line to which I have
referred there are no subscriptions at all. Denominationalism
cannot permeate to that depth where there is scarcely any religion,
if any at all. Yet I won’t say that there is no religion at all;
for I am convinced that every man has a religion of some sort, if
�39
it is only a strong faith, in another world where, perhaps, there
might he a better chance for him, and where he might change places
with us who are better off. Now, in regard to the line below
which denominationalism does not go, let me say that religious
bodies have never, or at least in very few instances, been able
to get deeper than that line. In Bethnal Green, where there is
a population of 180,000 people, there are only 2,000 people who
are known ever to go to a place of worship. That 2,000 is
just the class which denominationalism can touch, and it
can touch no more. What is the remedy for this ? I believe
it is a purely secular system of education. With a secular
system you may, I believe, carry out education amongst the
classes below the line, and having educated these three or four
millions, surely religious teachers might easily follow. Indeed,
there would be opened up to them an opportunity which they never
had before. But we must have a wide-spread education amongst
these classes to which I refer. Is it not remarkable as a
social question, that in a commercial community like this, with
perfect free trade, strong competition, and the greater part of our
wealth springing from trade—that in such a community four
millions of people should have been so long allowed to remain
in a state of ignorance ? All the results of our labour in that
respect have been lost—completely lost ! Now, how can we cure
this evil? You can only cure it by education. The greater
part of the vice and misery amongst the lower classes arises
simply from ignorance; and it is only by teaching those classes
to help themselves that you will get a cure for the evil. Now, I
am perfectly well aware that a Bill will be brought into the House
of Commons next session, but I am afraid that that Bill—judging
by those who are to frame it—will fall very far short of our expec
tations. I hope, therefore, that those Members of Parliament who
have joined this League will be prepared—for this is not a party
question, and ought not to be made one—to bring in a Bill of their
own, and to force the question to the greatest possible extent. If
we do not accomplish the whole of our object, which is to obtain
a complete system of compulsory, secular, and free education,
we shall at least have made a step towards its attainment.
�40
Concede compulsion, and a free and secular education must
inevitably follow. We have seen how little progress has
been made up till now. In point of fact, as I said before, the
present system has stopped at a certain line. Its results have
increased only five per cent, during the last five years. Look
ing to the increase in population and wealth during that period,
it is a really astounding result. And I am perfectly satisfied
that there the results of the system must rest. When the
different points of the question of compulsory secular education
come to be discussed, I shall be glad to offer opinions; but I may
just say that I myself have worked under compulsion for the last
thirty or forty years. The working of the Factory Acts in
some respects has been very good, but in the matter of education
they have failed most lamentably. And why is that ? Because
we have no free schools to which to send our children. It is a per
fect farce to say to parents “ Educate your children,” when the only
possible way of getting education is by a charge of 2d. per week
upon them. The Factory Acts have completely failed in sending
large numbers of children to school, except in those cases in which
masters have taken a Christian interest in their workpeople and
have provided education for the children. I am perfectly satisfied
that if we determine to bring in a Bill we shall not find the plan of
organization or the settlement of the details to be at all difficult
To my mind, this question comes only second in importance to the
Irish question; and it behoves us therefore to set earnestly and at
once to work. I don’t myself see why we should wait a single
session for the Bill; and if members of Parhament will only work
for it as hard and as zealously as they did over the Bankruptcy Bill
and one or two other measures of last session, the whole thing may
be carried next session. I now beg to move the following formal
resolution :
That the following gentlemen be the officers of the League for
the ensuing year :—
George Dixon, Esq., M.P., Chairman.
Jesse Collings, Esq, Hon. Secretary.
John Jaffray, Esq., Treasurer.
�41
That the Council of the League consist of—
(1)—All Members of the League who are Members of Parliament,
comprising at present: —
The Right Hon. the Earl of Portsmouth
Anstruther, Sir Robert, Bart., M. P. for Fifeshire
Armitstead, G., M.P. for Dundee
Bass, M. Arthur, M.P. for Stafford
Beaumont, Somerset, M.P. for Wakefield
Bright, Jacob, M.P. for Manchester
Brocklehurst, W. C., M.P. for Macclesfield
Brogden, Alexander, M.P. for Wednesbury
Campbell, H., M.P. for Stirling
Carter, R. M., M.P. for Leeds
Clement, W. J., M.P. for Shrewsbury
Dalrymple. Donald, M.P. for Bath
Dilke, Sir Charles Wentworth, Bart., M.P. for Chelsea
Dixon, George, M.P. for Birmingham
Fawcett, H., M.P. for Brighton
Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund, M.P. for Caine
Gower, Lord Rowland Leveson, M. P. for Sutherland
Grieve, J. 0., M.P. for Greenock
Grosvenor, Captain The Hon. R. W., M.P. for Westminster
Hoare, Sir Henry A., Bart., M.P. for Chelsea
Howard, James, M.P. for Bedford
Hughes, T., M.P. for Frome
Lome, The Marquis of, M. P. for Argyleshire
Melly, G., M.P. for Stoke-on-Trent
Miall, Edward, M.P. for Bradford
Mitchell, S. A., M.P. for Bridport
Morgan, George Osborn, Q.C., M.P. for Denbeighshire
Morrison, W., M. P. for Plymouth
Mundella, A. J., M.P. for Sheffield
Muntz, P. H., M.P. for Birmingham
Parry, T. L. D. J., M.P. for Carnarvonshire
Platt, J., M.P. for Oldham
Playfair, Dr. Lyon, C. B., M.P. for Edinburgh, &c. Universities.
Potter, Edmund, F.R.S., M.P. for Carlisle.
Price, W. E., M.P. for Tewkesbury.
Price, W. P., M.P. for Gloucester.
Rylands, Peter, M.P. for Warrington.
Samuelson, Bernhard, M.P. for Banbury.
Seely, Charles, M.P. for Nottingham.
Simon, John, Serjeant-at-Law, M.P. for Dewsbury.
�42
Sykes, Col.W.H., F.R.S., F.G.S., F.R.G.S., M.P. for Aberdeen.
Taylor, P.A., M.P. for Leicester.
Wedderburn, Sir David, Bart., M.P. for South Ayrshire.
Williams, Watkin, M.P. for Denbigh.
Winterbotham, H. S. P., M.P. for Stroud.
(2) —AR Donors to the funds of the League of £590. and upwards,
comprising at present: —
Bolton, F. S., Birmingham.
Brogden, A., M.P., Ulverstone.
Chamberlain, J., Moor Green Hall.
Chamberlain, Jos., Birmingham.
Chance, R. L., Birmingham.
Dixon, Geo., M.P., Birmingham.
Field, A., Birmingham.
Jaffray, John, J.P., Birmingham.
Kenrick, A., Birmingham.
Kenrick, J. A., J.P., Birmingham.
Kenrick, T., Birmingham.
Kenrick, Wm., Birmingham.
Lloyd, G. B., Birmingham.
Middlemore, W., Birmingham.
Osler, Clarkson, Birmingham.
Osler, Follett, F.R.S., Birmingham.
Phillips, Aiderman, Birmingham.
Potter, Edmund, M.P., Carlisle.
(3) —One Representative from each Branch of the League ;
And the following ladies and gentlemen, namely:—
Abbott, E. A., M.A., St. John’s Wood, London.
Ackworth, Rev. James, L.L.D., Scarborough.
Albright, Arthur, Edgbaston.
Allman, Professor George J., F.R.S., University of Edinburgh.
Ambler, Councillor John, Walmer Villas, Bradford.
Angus, Rev. Joseph, D.D., Regent’s Park College, London.
Anstey, T. Chisholm, Temple, London.
Applegarth, Robert, Stamford Street, London.
Aveling, Thomas, Mayor of Rochester.
Baines, John, Mayor of Leicester.
Bain, Alexander, Professor of Logic, University of Aberdeen.
Barlow, James Mayor of Bolton.
Barmby, Rev. Goodwyn, Wakefield.
Bazley, Charles H., J.P., Manchester.
�43
Beal, Councillor Michael, Sheffield.
Beales, Edmond, M.A., Lincoln’s Inn, London.
Beard, Bev. Charles, B.A., Liverpool.
Becker, Miss Lydia E., Manchester.
Belsey, F. H., Rochester.
Bennett, J. N., Plymouth.
Bessemer, Henry, Denmark Hill, London.
Best, Hon. and Rev. Samuel, M.A., Andover, Hampshire.
Binns, Rev. William, Devonport.
Birks, Rev. John, Kingswood Parsonage, near Alvechurch.
Bond, Francis T., M.D., Southampton.
Booth, Charles, Liverpool.
Bowring, Sir John, LL.D., Exeter.
Brodie, Dr., Edinburgh.
Brown, John, J.P., Merionethshire.
Brodie, E. H., Inspector of Schools, London.
Brodie, Rev. P. B., Rowington, near Warwick.
Brodrick, the Hon. George, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford.
Brock, G. B., J.P., Swansea.
Brown, Aiderman E. R., Plymouth.
Brown, Potto, Houghton.
Bunce, J. Thackray, F.S.S., Birmingham.
Burch, A. E., J.P., Bedford.
Butcher, William, Bristol.
Butler, Mrs., Liverpool.
Caldicott, Rev. J. W., M.A., Grammar School, Bristol.
Campbell, Rev. Dr., Bradford.
Carpenter, Rev. J. Estlin, M.A., Leeds.
Carson, W. H., Warminster.
Chadwick, Edwin, C.B., Mortlake, Surrey.
Chamberlain, J. H., F.R.I.B.A., Birmingham.
Churchill, Lord A. S., 16, Rutland Gate, London.
Clark, John F., Tarland, Aberdeenshire.
Clarke, Rev. Charles, F.L.S., Birmingham.
Clarke, E. G., Bristol.
Clarke, Joseph, J.P., Southampton.
Collier, W. F., Plymouth.
Cockburn, Mr. Councillor John T., Carlisle.
Cowen, Councillor Joseph, jun., Newcastle-on-Tyne.
Collins, Councillor Henry, M.D., Wolverhampton.
Conway, M. D., Notting Hill Square, London.
Courtauld, Samuel, Essex.
Courtauld, George, near Halstead, Essex.
«
�Coxe, Sir James, M.D., F.R.S., Murrayfield, Edinburgh.
Cremer, W. R., George Street, Euston Road.
Creighton, Mandell, Fellow and Tutor of Merton College, Oxford.
Crosskey, Rev. H. W., F.G.S., Birmingham.
Darnton, Rev. P. W., B.A., Newport, Monmouthshire.
Darwin, C. E., Southampton.
Davies, Jesse Conway, M.D., F.A.S., Holywell, Flintshire.
Davis, Rev. John, Tonmawr, Neath, Glamorganshire.
Dawson, G., M.A., F.G.S., Birmingham.
Deykin, W. H., Edgbaston.
Dick, A. H., M.A., L.L.B., Normal College, Glasgow.
Dixon, Joshua, Winslade, Exeter.
Dowson, Rev. H. E., B.A., Gee Cross, Manchester.
Drake, W., M.A., Hon. Canon of Worcester.
Dyster, Frederic D., M.D., F.L.S., J.P., Tenby.
Eadie, Robert, C.E., LL.D., F.R.G.S., London.
Emanuel, Rev. G. J., B.A., Edgbaston.
Emerson, George R., Editor of Weekly Dispatch.
Esson, Wm., F.R.S., Fellow and Tutor of Merton College,Oxford.
Evans, William H., M.A., J.P., Forde Abbey, Dorsetshire.
Everett, J. D., M.A., D.C.L., Queen’s College, Belfast.
Falconer, Thomas, F.G.S., County Court Judge, Usk.
Fallows, W., J.P., Middlesbro’.
Faunthorpe, J. P., M.A., St. John’s College, Battersea.
Fawcett, Mrs., The Close, Salisbury.
Ferguson, Robert M., Carlisle.
Fleming, A., M.D., Birmingham.
Foster, Michael, F.R.C.S., Huntingdon.
Foster, Dr. Michael, London University.
Foster, G. C., B.A,, F.R.S., University College.
Fowle, Rev. T. W., M.A., Cambridge Place, London.
Fry, Herbert, Editor of “ Our Schools,” &c., London.
Fuller, W. M., Wolverhampton.
Fuller, Rev. A. G., Wolverhampton.
Gairdner, W. 8., M.D., Glasgow.
George, Rev. H. B., Fellow of New College, Oxford.
Goodeve, H. H., M.D., Bristol.
Gotch, F. W., L.L.D., Baptist College, Bristol.
Grant, David, Ecclesall College, Sheffield.
Grayson, Charles, Liverpool.
Greenbank, Professor, L.L.D., Manchester.
Grenfell, J. G., B.A., Birmingham.
Grinrod, R. B., M.D., L.L.D., Malvern.
�45
Groome, William, B.A., F.G.S., Bedford.
Guise, Sir William Vernon, Bart., F.G.S., F.L.S., Gloucester.
Hall, Rev. Edward, M.A., Eton College.
Hammond, James L., M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Camb.
Hanham, Captain, J., R.N., near Blandford, Dorsetshire.
Hankin, C. W., M.A., Grammar School, Southampton.
Hansard, Rev. S., M.A., Bethnal Green, London.
Harris, William, Birmingham.
Hatton, Thomas S., Wednesbury.
Haycroft, Rev. Nathaniel, M.A., D.D., Leicester.
Heathcote, Rev. H. J., Erdington.
Herbert, the Hon. A., London.
Hicks, Wm., Salisbury.
Hildick, John, Mayor of Walsall.
Hill, Rev. Micaiah, Braithwaite Road, Edgbaston.
Hill, Sir Rowland, London.
Hinks, John, Edgbaston.
Hodges, J. T., M.D., F.C.S., Queen’s College, Belfast.
Hodgson, W. B., L.L.D., Grove End Road, London.
Holden, Angus, Bradford.
Holland, Henry, Mayor of Birmingham.
Holland, Samuel, J.P., Glanwilliam, Tan-y-Bwlch.
Holyoake, G. J., Waterloo Chambers, London.
Hoppus, Rev. John, L.L.D., F.R.S., Camden Street, London.
Horton, Rev. H. H., M.A., Gerrard Street, Birmingham.
Howard, Hon. George, Haworth Castle, Brampton, Cumberland.
Howard, Rev. W. W., H.M. Inspector of Schools, Exeter.
Huth, Edward, Huddersfield.
Hutton, Charles W. C., ex-Slieriff of London.
Howell, George, Buckingham Street, Strand, London.
Huxley, Professor, St. John’s Wood, London.
Jackson, Rev. Edward, M.A., St. James’s, Leeds.
James, Rev. A., Bewdley.
James, Rev. William, Clifton.
Jeaffreson, C. H., Giggleswick Grammar School.
Jevons, Professor W. S., Withington, Manchester.
Jones, Rev. Griffith, Bridgend, Glamorganshire.
Jones, Rev. Hugh, Llangollen.
Jones, Rev. James, Barmouth.
Jones, Rev. T. S., Trewen, Cardiganshire.
Jackson, T. W., Fellow Worcester College, Oxford.
Kane, Sir Robert, L.L.D., F.R.S., Queen’s College, Cork.
Kedwards, Rev. J., Lye Waste, Cradley.
�46
King, William, Queen’s College, Galway.
Kingsley, Rev. Canon, M.A., F.L.S., F.G.S., Eversley Rectory,
Winchfield.
Kirk, John S., Ph. D., M.A., Carnarvon.
Lambert, Rev. Brooke, Whitechapel.
Lampard, Joseph, St. Mark Street, Birmingham.
Langley, J. B., M.R.C.S., F.L.S., Lincoln’s Inn Fields.
Larkin, Rev. E. R., M.A., Burton, near Lincoln.
Leckenby, John, J.P., F.G.S., Scarborough.
Lee, Rev. F. F., D.D., Lancaster.
Lees, Harold, Woodheys, Sale, Manchester.
Leppoc, H. J., Manchester.
Lestrange, Thomas, Belfast.
Levi, Professor Leone, F.S.A., F.S.S., King’s College, London.
Liveing, G. D., M.A., St. John’s College, Cambridge.
Lloyd, Sampson, Wednesbury.
Lloyd, Thomas, J.P., Priory, Warwick.
Locket, Joseph, J.P., Dunoon, Argyleshire.
Lowe, T. C., B.A., Handsworth.
Lubbock, Sir John, Bart., London.
Lupton, Darnton, J.P., Leeds.
Lushington, G. Westminster.
Lushington, Vernon, Q.C., Temple.
Lyell, Sir Charles, Bart., L.L.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., London.
M‘Cance, Finlay, J.P., Suffolk, Antrim, Ireland.
MacCarthy, Rev. F. E. M., M.A., Second Master of King
Edward’s School, Birmingham.
Mander, C. B., J.P., Wolverhampton.
Martineau, Robert, J.P., Edgbaston.
Martineau, Russell, M.A., British Museum, London.
Maginnis, Rev. D., Stourbridge.
Manton, Aiderman, Birmingham.
Mason, Hugh, Ashton-under-Lyne
Mason, Josiah, Birmingham.
Maxfield, M., Leicester.
Maxse, Captain R.N., Southampton.
McLaren, Rev. Alexander, Manchester.
McMichael, Rev. N., D.D., Edinburgh.
Miles, Rev. C. P., M.A., F.L.S., Monkwearmouth, Durham.
Millard, J. H., B.A., Huntingdon.
Mills, John, Manchester.
Milner, Edward, Warrington.
Molyneux, William, F.G.S., Burton-on-Trent.
�47
Mottram, Rev. W., Warminster.
Moses, Rev. R. G., B.A., Falmouth.
Muller, Professor Max, University, Oxford.
Murcli, 0. J., Recorder of Barnstaple and Bideford.
Murch, Jerom, Bath.
New, Herbert, Evesham.
Nicholls, John, Mayor of Launceston, Cornwall.
Norrington, Councillor Henry, Exeter.
Odger, George, Bloomsbury, London.
Oram, Richard, Stonehouse, Devonshire.
Osborne, Aiderman E. C., Birmingham.
Osborne, Captain Sherard, Hyde Park.
Page, David, L.L.D., F.R.S.E., 38, Gilmore Place, Edinburgh.
Paget, Charles, J.P., Nottingham.
Parker, Rev. J. W., Banbury.
Paul, Rev. C. Regan, Sturminster Marshall, Dorsetshire.
Pease, Thomas, F.G.S., Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol.
Prange, F. G., Liverpool.
Pemberton, Oliver, Birmingham.
Pentecost, J., Stourbridge.
Pinnock, Henry, Newport, Isle of Wight.
Pulsford, Rev. William, D.D., Glasgow.
Purdy, Frederick, F.S.S., Poor Law Board, London.
Prichard, Thomas, M.D., Abington Abbey, Northamptonshire.
■Quain, Dr. Richard, F.R.S., University College, London.
Radford, Wm., Birmingham.
Raffles, J., Birmingham.
Ransome, Robert C., Ipswich.
Rathbone, P. H., Liverpool.
Rawlinson, Robert, C'.B., West Brompton.
Rawlinson, Sir Christopher, C.B., Upton-on-Severn.
Reed, E. J., Chief Constructor of the Navy, Whitehall.
Richards, R. C., J.P., Clifton Lodge, near Preston.
Rigby, Samuel, J.P., Warrington.
Ritchie, Rev. W., Liskeard, Cornwall.
Roberts, Rev. J. B., Alnwick, Northumberland.
Rothera, G. B., Nottingham.
Rogers, Professor J. E. Thorold, Oxford.
Roper, Richard, F.G.S., F.C.S., Cwmbraen, near Newport, Mon.
Roscoe, Professor, Owen’s College, Manchester. •
Rowlands, Rev. David, B.A., Welchpool.
Ryland, Aiderman Arthur, Birmingham.
Rumney, Aiderman, Manchester.
�48
Sales, Henry H., Leeds.
Salt, Councillor Titus, jun., Bradford.
Sandford, Archdeacon, Alvechurch.
Sandwith, Humphrey, C.B., Denbigh.
Schmitz, L., L. L.D., Ph. D., International College, London.
Scott, Thomas, Ramsgate.
Seeley, Harry G., F.G.S., St. John’s College, Cambridge.
Shaen, W., M.A., Bedford Row, London.
Short, Rev. J. L., Kenwood Road, Sheffield.
Sieveking, Edward IL, M.D., Manchester Square, London.
Simons, W., Merthyr Tydvil.
Smith, Joseph, M.D., J.P., 'Warrington.
Stansfeld, James, Halifax.
Stanley, the Hon. E. L., Aderley Park, Congleton.
Steinthal, Rev. S. A., Manchester.
Stock, Rev. John, LL.D., Devonport.
Strut, Rev, J. C., Newcastle-on-Tyne.
Style, Rev. George, Giggleswick Grammar School.
Sully, G. B., Mayor of Bridgwater.
Symonds, Rev. W. S., Tewkesbury.
Symonds, Dr., Clifton, Bristol.
Tait, Lawson, F.R.C.S., Wakefield.
Teschemaker, Major T. R., Sydenham, Kent.
Thomas, Rev. John, B.A., Huddersfield.
Thomas, Christopher J., J.P., Bristol.
Thomas, Rev. IT. R., Bristol.
Thomas, Rev. W., Llandyssul, Cardiganshire.
Thursfield, James R., Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford.
Tichbourne, C. R. C., F.C.S., Dublin.
Tonks, Edmund, B.C.L., Knowle.
Trevelyan, Arthur, J.P., Teynholm, East Lothian.
Trimble, Robert, Liverpool.
Turner, J. P., Handsworth.
Vince, Rev. Charles, Birmingham.
Voysey, Rev. Charles, B.A., Healaugh Vicarage.
Webb, C. Locock, Lincoln’s Inn.
Wilson, Rev. H. B., St. Neots.
Williams, Rev. Rowland, LL.D., Broadclialke Vicarage.
Williams, Evan, M.A., Merthyr Tydvil.
Wolstenholme, Miss E. C., Moody Hall, Congleton.
Wright, J. S., Birmingham.
Zincke, Rev. F. Barham, M.A., Ipswich.
�49
And that the Executive Committee consist of the Officers and
forty members of the League, namely, the following thirty gentle
men, and ten others to be chosen by them and the officers :—
Booth, Charles, Liverpool.
Bunce, J. Thaekray, F.S.S., Birmingham.
Caldicott, Rev. J. W., M.A., Bristol.
Chamberlain, J. H., F.R.I.B.A., Birmingham.
Chamberlain, Joseph, Birmingham.
Clarke, Rev. Charles, F.L.S., Birmingham.
Crosskey, Rev. H. W., F.G.S., Birmingham.
Dawson, George, M.A., F.G.S., Birmingham.
Ferguson, Major, Carlisle.
Field, Alfred, Birmingham.
Fry, Herbert, London.
Harris, William, Birmingham.
Herbert, the Hon. Auberon, London.
Hodgson, W.B., LL.D., London.
Holden, Angus, Bradford.
Holland, Henry, Mayor of Birmingham.
Howell, George, London.
Huth, Edward, Huddersfield.
Kenrick, William, Birmingham.
Kingsley, Rev. Canon, Eversley.
Maxfield, M., Leicester.
Maxse, Captain, R.N., Southampton.
Middlemore, William, Birmingham.
Osborne, E. C., Birmingham.
Osler, Follett, F.R.S., Birmingham.
Ryland, Arthur, Birmingham.
Simons, William, Merthyr Tydvil.
Steinthal, Rev. S. A., Manchester.
Vince, Rev. Charles, Birmingham.
Wright, J. S., Birmingham.
Zincke, Rev. F. B., M.A., Ipswich.
The Chairman : Dr. Hodgson, of London—one of the five or
six gentlemen who started the Manchester National Association for
Secular Eate-paid Education in 1847—will second the resolution.
Dr. Hodgson : My friend Mr. Potter, who preceded me, has
described the motion as one of form • but still I am sure that it will
be received with that feeling of interest and enthusiasm which .it
properly deserves, both on account of the character of the persons
D
�50
to be appointed and the greatness of the object which they will have
in hand to promote. The list of the Executive Committee contains
a large number of members of Parliament who have distinguished
themselves in various ways ; but this may be said of the body col
lectively, that it is composed almost wholly of gentlemen who have
brought this union to its present position, and what they have
already done is a guarantee of what they may be expected to do.
The best way to prove our gratitude to them for services already
rendered is to call upon them to continue those services, and to come
before us next year with a large account of work done. The
President’s reference to the Manchester Association leads me to say
that although death has thinned the ranks of those who composed
that association for obtaining secular rate-paid education, there still
remains a large number who, instead of looking upon the labours of
this League with jealousy, will hail its co-operation with the greatest
earnestness and enthusiasm, not even desiring to meet it in friendly
rivalry. I beg to second the resolution.
In reply to a gentleman who spoke from the body of the hall,
The President said : In the selection of the names mentioned
in the resolution, the principle of having all parts of the country
represented has been carried out.
Mr. Albright : I should like to know if the name of Mr. G. B.
Lloyd is on the Council.
The President : His name is on it.
Dr. Bligh : The suggestion I would make is that in the place of
the words “ ten gentlemen,” &c., the words “ with power to add to
their number” should be inserted. And I do so for this reason, that
whilst I do not in any way doubt the discretion of the Executive
in nominating these gentlemen to the Council, I consider that as the
movement extends all over the country there is room for the taking
in of a large number of representative men not now on the Council.
I beg to move that suggestion.
The President : The objection to that suggestion is that the
executive body ought to be small. It might under your suggestion
become unwieldy ; but still if it is the wish of the meeting that the
alteration should be made, the Committee, of course, will be very
glad to adopt it.
•
�51
A Gentleman : Perhaps the matter might be got over by making
vice-presidents.
The President : We have no vice-presidents. Vice-presidents
are only ornamental people, and we require no ornamental people
here.
The Rev. H. Solly, of London: I do not see the name of any
Congregational minister on the list. I do not belong to that body
myself; but I know that they are very zealous in the cause of
education, and I think it is only fair that they should be repre
sented.
The President : When we have some Congregational minister
willing to join and work upon the Executive Committee, we shall
be very willing to receive his name and to appoint him. We were
very willing to appoint the Rev. R. W. Dale; but some scruple
upon a minor point has prevented him from joining hitherto. If
Mr. Solly will undertake the duty of inducing that gentleman to
join we shall be very glad. These minor points wiU soon settle
themselves.
The resolution, as altered in accordance with the suggestion of
Dr. Bligh, was put to the meeting and agreed to.
NATIONAL EDUCATION BILL.
Professor Eawcett, M.P. for Brighton, rose to move that a
Bill embodying the principles of the League be introduced into
Parliament. He said: The resolution I have the honour and
pleasure to move will give a pledge to the whole nation that this
League, representing a great and an increasing force of public
opinion, is resolved to adopt practical and decisive action. The
subject of national education has now happily advanced a stage
beyond that of doubt and inquiry; it has reached the stage when it
is ripe for action. The reproach is too often with truth made
against Leagues and Congresses that they begin with talk, they go
on with talk, they end in talk, and that is their only result. But
if from this meeting a Btll shall emanate, the whole country will
then see placed in a practical form, in a definite shape—so definite
that they will be able to express their opinions upon it—what are
the views we hold upon this great question, and how we think
�52
these views may be practically carried out. It may be said, of
course, that Government intends to introduce an Education Bill
next session, and that we who repose confidence in the Govern
ment should wait until we see what its measure is. In reply to
that possible objection to this resolution, it is only necessary to
remark that if the Government measure—I am afraid it is too
bright an anticipation—comes up to what we require, if it
embodies the principles of this League, then all that we shall have
to do will be at once to withdraw the Bill which we introduce into
Parliament, and use the whole strength of this organisation in
support of the Government and its measure. But if, on the
other hand, the Government measure should have in it any
shortcomings which we conceive are antagonistic to the great
principles of this League—we cannot, of course, expect that any
measure will meet our programme in all its detail—but if, for
instance, the Government measure should infringe any of our
great fundamental principles—if it should be too denominational
in its character—if it should commit what, to my mind, is the fatal
mistake of having compulsory rating without compulsory
attendance—then our bill will be before the country, and the
nation will be able to decide—and I think I can anticipate their
decision with confidence—to which measure they will give their
support. Now, it would be idle to deny that it is impossible for
the great body of men who compose this League to be entirely
agreed upon details ; but so long as we can get our great aim and
ends secured, we should, I venture to say, sacrifice our individual
preferences upon minor points; and I for one am prepared on all
questions of detail to give up my own opinions and bow cheerfully
to the sentiments of the majority. Thus I may have my own
opinions as to which would be the best title to adopt—undenomi
national, secular, or unsectarian; but I am perfectly prepared to
accept any one of these three words which the majority of the
League think should be the word in our programme. Then again,
I have a preference for parents paying for the education of their
children, instead of sending them to free schools ; but here again
I am perfectly willing to give up my own individual opinions, and
if the majority of the Conference is in favour of free schools, I,
�53
for one, will not shrink for a moment. What I conceive to he the
fundamental principle of this organisation, what I look upon as
the essential point upon which every one of us must be agreed,
which is the bond of our union, the basis of our existence, is this :
that we are absolutely determined that elementary education shall
be guaranteed to every boy and girl in this country, and that if
there is a deficiency of educational appliances, then schools shall
be built and maintained out of the rates. Upon this fundamental
principle I conceive that there can be no difference whatever
amongst us. Now comes the question, if we are to have a Bill,
what are to be the main principles of this Bill, in order to carry
out compulsory attendance and compulsory rating? As far as I
understand the programme of the League, they contemplate that
the schools—at any rate, in the first instance, the rate-supported
schools—shall be unsectarian, and not secular. For a long time, I
must confess, I found it somewhat difficult to discover the differ
ence between these phrases. I think the best explanation that can
be given of the difference is this: that in the rate-supported
schools no catechism shall be used, no dogmas of religion shall be
taught, but it shall be perfectly optional with the managers of a
school whether, in that school, the Bible shall be read, without
any such comment as persons would object to from sectarian
feeling. Therefore, if we adopt this plan of having unsectarian
schools, I think we at once meet the argument of those who say
that the education we propose will be irreligious. No one, I
think, can pretend to say that the British and Foreign schools in
this country are irreligious schools ; and, to put our meaning about
unsectarian schools in a definite and intelligible form, it seems to
me that what we contemplate is this : there will be nothing
whatever in our programme to prevent the managers of ratesupported schools from making their schools exactly analogous in
their religious character to the schools which at present belong to
the British and Foreign School organisation. These schools are
not irreligious ; they are supported by Nonconformists, who have
shown the greatest enthusiasm, for religion. The second point is
this: Do we propose to deal with existing schools ? We
contemplate, I conceive, leaving existing schools untouched. If
�54
a district or a locality prefer voluntaryism to compulsion—if they
choose by their own efforts to provide themselves with schools
according to the present system, they should have the power to do
so. We only contemplate that the educational rate should be
imposed in those districts in which the Government inspector
reports that the educational appliances are not adequate for the
education of all the children in the locality. Now, the next point
is this : is it better that these schools should he supported by
rates, or from the national exchequer ? I believe some gentlemen
who are entirely in favour of the great principle of compulsory
education have not joined our League because they think that
schools should be supported from the Consolidated Fund, and not
from the rates. In reply to these gentlemen I would only say
thus much—that I believe that if you take money from the
Consolidated Fund there is a chance of its being extravagantly
administered, and that if we made a proposal to take
it from the Consolidated Fund we should at once declare
open war against existing schools, for it would be idle to
pretend that any existing schools could continue if the public
could draw for the support of schools from the Consolidated Fund.
In reply to those gentlemen who are in favour of existing schools,
and wish to see them maintained, we can truly say that there is
nothing whatever in our programme that is in the least degree
antagonistic to those schools. If events should show that ratesupported schools are better, then of course the existing schools
would gradually cease. But it is quite possible to conceive that the
power to levy an educational rate may give a great stimulus to the
existing schools, for it is quite possible that many clergymen and
ministers of religion, who now find it difficult or almost impossible
to support their schools, in consequence of the shabbiness and
stinginess of the landed proprietors, may be able to induce them to
come forward if they can use this practical argument, that, unless
they subscribe, rates will be levied upon them and their tenants.
Therefore it is quite possible in some cases that compulsory rating,
instead of touching the present system, may give it a greater
stimulus and render it far more efficient. The last point, upon
which I should like to say a few words—and I speak upon it chiefly
�55
to show you that I am anxious, as far as possible, to be conciliatory
—is upon the question of free schools. I know there is a very
strong feeling in this League in favour of making education free,
but what I object to in this may be briefly stated in one sentence :
I fear the principle of free education may weaken that sentiment of
responsibility which parents should feel towards their children. I
think we should lay down the doctrine that it is as much the duty
■of the parent to provide his child with education as it is to provide
him with food and clothing. I know it may be said, in reply to my
objections, that in certain extreme cases you support the child upon
the rates—that you will not let children starve, but as a last
resource you maintain them upon the rates. Yes ; but if the parent
refuses to support his child when he has the means to do so, you
say that he shall be punished—he commits a criminal act. Simi
larly I should hold that rather than let a child’s mind be starved, as
a last resource he should be provided with a free education ; but I
should like to see the principle never sacrificed, that if a parent who
has the means to give his child education refuses to do so, he too
should be regarded as being guilty of a criminal act. I know it
may be said every parent will contribute indirectly through the
■rates. There is no doubt some force in that argument; but it
would be equally, just to say it was the duty of the State to feed
and clothe children, and not the duty of parents, because the money
devoted to the purpose would be taken from the taxes, and there
fore parents would in the aggregate contribute. But this after all
is only a detail of the great measure we have in view; and I am per
fectly willing to sacrifice my own individual views. If we introduce
a Bill next session, let me give you one word of advice—let it be
introduced almost the very first day of the session. Anyone who
knows the House of Commons will know the importance of that.
And let it be forced on through all its stages. My short experience
in the House of Commons has taught me that persistence is a most
valuable quality. "When we have prepared this Bill, let us never
abandon it until the Government is prepared to carry a measure
similar to it, or until that day will arrive—and I believe it will
never arrive—when the nation shall unmistakeably express its
'desire that the great problem of national education should be settled
�56
upon principles different from those which form the basis of our
organization. I beg to move, “ That the Executive Council be
instructed to prepare a Bill embodying the principles of this League,
and that that Bill be introduced in the early part of next session.”
Professor Thorold Rogers, seconded the resolution, He said :
When I entered again into your town of Birmingham, the first little
phenomenon that came before my attention was the conclusion of
an article in a local paper, that article being, I make no doubt,
exceedingly intelligent and instructive. It was to the effect that,
if we who compose together the body of this Education League
should succeed in proving our point, should show that we had not
hitherto been the decided enemies of education, but that we
intend—I am only paraphrasing the language of the article—a
vast public good, then the editor of this paper, and I suppose
those who read it, will quite abandon for ever the opposition which
they feel towards us, and come over to our side. Now, I am not in
a position to determine the exact numerical value of this possible
conversion. I dare say it will be very considerable. But even if
it be small, ladies and gentlemen, I think we may have reason to
congratulate ourselves ; because our main object—or at least, one
of our main objects—is the reformation of the dangerous classes.
Now, gentlemen, the central point of our Bill, of the movement which
We propose, is the object with which the whole statement of the pur
poses of this National League commences : the establishment of a
system which shall secure the education of every child in the
country. That, I repeat, is the central point, the great object,
the true meaning that we have in all that we say and undertake.
For my part, I think that if we can only achieve the general accep
tance of this principle, all the other points—points of detail—
which have been adverted to in the report readjust now, and which
may hereafter come up for consideration, will follow as a matter of
logical necessity. I entirely agree with my friend Mr. Potter, and
the previous speaker, that if we establish a compulsory system of
education, it is a matter of necessity that that compulsory
education should be supplied, in some form or other, from
public funds. I also agree entirely with Mr. Potter, that if you do
establish a system of compulsory education, the machinery of which
�57
is supplied from the public funds, it must inevitably be what people
call secular, unsectarian, undenominational. I feel, ladies and
gentlemen, that to dispute or doubt about the position laid down by
those gentlemen, is to be ignorant of the facts of the society in
which we live; and that whether we like it or not, for the very welldefined reasons glanced at, I was glad to see, by Mr. Dawson, we
must thoroughly accept their necessary and proper conclusion. I
shall not indeed, for I think it is out of question now, enter into
the reasons why I hold these views, differing as I do upon theological
topics at least—as I understand—from Mr. Dawson. Well, that is
the only allusion I shall make to the subject. But anything like a
Permissive Bill would be wholly and hopelessly out of place.
I will here allude to a distinguished individual in the Church to
which I belong—Archdeacon Denison; with whom, by the way,
I do not agree in almost any point whatever. He avowed one
of the finest sentiments I ever heard in my life the other
day, to the effect that all permissive legislation was a hoax,
a sham, and a delusion. All education, I think, must be
universal and compulsory ■ and it must, I also think, be sup
plied from some public fund. What that fund shall be I do not
intend to discuss now, because I have prepared a paper to read on
that subject this afternoon. How then, having cleared the way
in this fashion, let us, endeavouring to reply to the objections
urged against us, say why we should carry out the platform which
is before us to-day. I was at some trouble to investigate, with
Dr. Barr, of the Registrar General’s office, what might be the
number of children in this country above five and under thirteen
years of age—a period of life during which, I imagine, this
education would be generally bestowed—and we concluded that
there were very nearly four millions and a half of such children in
England and Wales. Now, we know from the little book pub
lished annually by the Board of Trade that the number of children
educated in schools under inspection is about twelve hundred
thousand. I confess that I think it will be a very liberal estimate
to say that a million and a half more are being educated by their
parents, in schools that will not accept Government grants, and
by those various other methods of voluntary teaching which, to
�58
a large degree, supplement public education in this country. Thus
I am left with the horrid conclusion that nearly two millions of
children between the ages of five and thirteen are not getting any
education at all! I sincerely agree with my friend Archdeacon
Sandford, in confessing that I think that that Christianity is a very
queer sort of fabric that will suffer men to be willing that some
thing like two millions of children should grow, up in ignorance
and sin a scandal to the whole civilised world—because they
cannot make up their minds whether or not these children should
be taught something which is no necessary part of school education
at all. I should like the gentleman who edits that local newspaper
to ask himself the question—if he is content, under existing
circumstances, to grapple with the problem, and supposing he will
not accept general and compulsory education—how he proposes to
provide against the growing and terrible fact that you have so
many thousands and tens of thousands of children in this country
who are getting no proper education and culture at all. It is all
very well to talk about our institutions, and to laud the state of
things that exists, but underneath what we see there is a great deal
that is not seen, or that, being seen, is not seen with sufficiently
careful and scrutinising eyes; and amongst those facts nothing is
to me more terrible than that whole hosts of children should
be living and growing up without the smallest prospect of having
their minds or morals trained—and I quite believe that no man
can have his mind trained without his morals being trained
likewise, and that the training of the mind should be antece
dent to the training of the morals. I confess that the difficulty
raised by Professor Fawcett appears to me to be superfluous,
and I will tell you why. If I argue on abstract grounds, he may
object to my commenting on what he said, and may say he has a
right to his belief. But my proofs are derived from existing facts.
What is the country, among the people of our own race, where
there is the most education given by the Government'? It is the
United States. I will not say that there they have compulsory
education, but they have so extended a system that compulsion is
not needed. The education is provided by the State; but does
anyone tell us that American fathers and mothers do not care for it ?
�59
There are no people under the canopy of heaven who are more
willing to make sacrifices, and none amongst whom the results of
education are more satisfactory. We are told—and it is true, at
any rate, of the Northern States—that there is hardly a child to he
found, born of American parents, who does not derive benefits from
the law of education. What reason is there to suppose that if we
get a system like it—or, considering the ignorance of our people, a
more stringent system—our people will not also be desirous of
giving the benefits of education to their children ? I should like to
put this before the editor of your local paper. He says there does
not seem to be any profound anxiety for the progress we intend. I
can only say that I made many speeches about the country to
working men last year, and I constantly alluded to the absolute
necessity of having this system of compulsory education, and I have
no hesitation in saying that whenever I mentioned it there was,
without any exception, a unanimous shout of applause. They
always tell you in their conversation that, surrounded as they are by
people who will not educate their children, and on account of the
freedom they have necessarily to give their children, and of the
circumstances under which they have to be so much away from
them, they are driven to demand that there should be that compul
sion put on the whole mass of their numbers which may or may
not be necessary for the education of those who are in a better
condition of life—to whom the advantages of a good education are
not more obvious, but to whom the machinery of a good education
is at present more accessible. Now we shall be told, I dare say,
that we are a number of unimportant persons ; we shall be informed
by some of the organs of the gentlemanly press that very few
members of Parliament were present, that the parties collected
together were local obscurities, and that the movement, as it has
been started, is one which any respectable people may very well
pooh-pooh. I should like to ask those who are familiar with
political agitation whether it was ever begun by influential persons 1
You may depend on it that if you wait for a national education
till you get, I will not say the whole Liberal party in the House of
Commons, but the influential people in this country, to support it,
■ you will wait till Doomsday before you get it. I challenge denial
�60
of the fact that almost all social, political, and economical reforms
have commenced with the labours of persons whom the gentlemanly
press calls obscurities. Professor Fawcett, as a member of Par] is ment, gives you advice. Let me, as sincerely wishing the success
of this movement, give you this advice : Be content with nothing
but your Bill. You lay down a principle which is theoretically
unassailable, and that principle involves means logically necessary;
let no attempt divert you from these ends. If your principle is
admitted, if the Bill introduced by Government during the next
session involves your principle, you may safely leave the details to
be worked out afterwards; but if the principle is not taken up you
had better go without the Bill than have your principle broken up.
Gentlemen here can remember the progress of the agitation for the
repeal of the Corn Laws, which I need not say was one of the
greatest triumphs the country ever, achieved. That was almost
wrecked at the commencement by the proposal for an 8s. duty.
The advocates of the Anti Com Law League—a League greater in
its historic importance, but not greater in its object than our own—
resolved that no such compromise should be accepted, and held to
the doctrine of total and unconditional repeal. And so I venture
to say it will be your wisdom, and I am certain it will be your
success, if you hold to the total and unconditional concession of the
principle which stands at the head of these statements that are
made in italics. Stick to that, and you will win; abandon it for
anything that falls short of it, and you are pretty certain to lose.
The enemies of national education, and they are many, count on
disunion in your ranks, or timidity on the part of some who sup
port you. They expect you will put up with something less than
you demand, and they know that if you do, you will not get what
you ought to have. I second the resolution.
Mr. Lloyd Jones, in the absence of Mr. George Odger, supported
the resolution : He came to the meeting, he said, certainly of his
ewn desire, but also as the representative of a body of men sitting
in London, composed for the most part of secretaries of the largest
trades’ unions in the kingdom. Those men had organized them
selves for the purpose of securing, if possible, the return of working
men to the British House of Parliament. That was their special
�61
object; but when they heard that the League had been organized,
that its agitation was about to commence, they at once took up the
question as one the most deeply interesting that could be brought
before them, affecting as it did the particular business of their lives.
There was a large number of members present at the meeting which
was called to consider the matter, and not one word of objection was
uttered to the platform of the League. On the contrary, they passed
a resolution declaring that the principles of the League were worthy
of hearty support, and promising to assist the object in view by
every means in their power. That resolution was signed by a large
number of secretaries, one of whom represented between 30,000 and
40,000 engineers. Now, in entering that resolution, he could not
pledge himself that the League would have the moral and practical
support of the men of all trades in London; but he thought he
might pledge himself that it would at least have the support of all
those men represented in the names subscribed to the resolution,
and in saying that he really gave in the adhesion of the working
classes of the country. He was an old working man himself, and
his sympathies, therefore, were with the working men. "Whenever
he could labour with them for the furtherance of any great object, he
invariably did so. His own professional pursuits now compelled him
to go through a deal of reading which was by no means so dry as many
people were disposed to think : he referred to the blue books issued
by the Government. Now, if they referred to the reports of those
gentlemen who were sent by Government to report upon the pro
ducts of industry in the various countries of the world, they would
find that whilst they in England were disputing and debating
about creeds and differences in theology—subjects, no doubt, very
interesting and important in, their way—other nations were
giving a practical education to their people, who were rising
up, not to discuss and fight about theology, but to carry
off the industry of this country in cotton and wool and
iron. If they did not give to the artizans of this country
the same educational advantages as those enjoyed by the
artizans of other nations, they shut them out from competition •
for the markets were open to foreigners as well as to English
men. Why, then, permit other countries to beat their own in
�62
the educational and technical stimulus required for the perfection of
industry ? They might depend upon it, that if this question of
education was not speedily and satisfactorily settled, England would
go back as a nation, not theologically, but in the skill and power
of her industry—she would lose her manufacturing supremacy,
and when she had lost that he was afraid their theological disputes
would be of very little use or interest. Mr. Murray, one of the
Commissioners who reported upon the cotton fabrics at the
Exposition at Paris in 1867, describing the Swiss goods, said that
if in all countries there existed such a good system of education
as in Switzerland, the commercial position of England would be
menaced in various ways. Again, Mr. Massey, who reported upon
the woollen goods, said that there was no doubt the French were
greatly indebted for their progress in manufactures to the very
superior technical education which was obtained by the artizans
through schools instituted for special instruction. Mr. Massey
argued that if in England they wanted to have skilled working
men, special regard must be given to general education. Now, they
stood there to-day in the presence of as great an educational
failure as had ever taken place on the face of the earth. The
denominational system had promised to do everything, yet they
were told from the platform that day, that there were above two
•million children in the country receiving no education at all ! That
was a state of things utterly discreditable to them as a nation, and
did they not adjust their differences and throw overboard their
prejudices, England would sink as a nation in position and influence,
theology not being able to save them from the fall.
The Rev. H. E. Dowson, addressing the Chairman, said : I
understood that we came here to support secular education, but I
find that we are now asked to support the British School system,
and against that I utterly protest. I say it is a compromise, and
every compromise deserves to fail.
The Chairman : Mr. Dowson has entirely misunderstood what
has taken place. We do not use the word “ secular”; but we
exclude all theological parts of religion, and I am sure that what
is left is what even Mr. Dowson himself would call “ secular.”
But at any rate, however that may be, Mr. Dowson must remember
�63
that we have placed, or we wish to place, the decision of the
question in the hands of the people themselves in each district, in
the hands of the fathers of children who are to be educated, or,
what is the same thing, their representatives on the school
committees. Before I put the resolution, I wish to make one
remark in reference to an observation which fell from Professor
Bogers. He said that, in the estimation of some people, some
members of the League were “ obscurities.” Now, I do not wish
to point to the gentlemen who have addressed you to-day from this
platform, nor to the 40 members of Parliament heading our list,
nor yet to the 300 or 400 ministers of all denominations who
have joined, nor to the most eminent men of science whose names
appear upon the list ; but I would just say that we have been told
upon the highest authority that we have upon our list of members
certain persons of very great influence—indeed, of much greater
weight and influence than we in Birmingham are at all conscious
of. Therefore, although Professor Rogers is perfectly right in
saying that we depend mainly upon the righteousness and goodness
of our cause; that we intend to go not to celebrities, not to leaders,
but to the people themselves (to whom we look for that strength
and for that power which will ultimately most certainly carry
the measure) ; yet still it will be seen that we are not altogether
“ political obscurities. ”
The resolution was then put and carried, and the meeting
• adjourned.
THE CHAIRMAN’S PAPER ON NATIONAL
SCHOOLS.
On the reassembling of the meeting in the afternoon, the
Chairman read the following paper :—
The paper I am about to read on “ The Best System for National
Schools, based upon Local Rates and Government Grants,” must
not be supposed to emanate from the Provisional Committee, nor to
have any more authority as an exposition of the views of the
National Education League than a paper by any other member
present would have. The central idea in the scheme of the National
�Education League is that the education of the people should no
longer continue to be based exclusively upon the isolated, and often
fitful, efforts of individuals, however noble and valuable those
efforts might be ; but that the State should become responsible for
the education of the whole of its children. This responsibility
need not involve taking immediate charge of all existing schools.
Where education is being satisfactorily carried on there, it may be
that no further action by the State will be required. It will suffice
if provision be made for the transfer to the School Boards of those
schools whose managers may desire it. It appears to me that no
measure for a national system would be complete unless it contained
the following enactments :—The entire cost of erecting or main
taining national-rate schools, to be defrayed out of the rates and
taxes of the country, in the proportion of one-third from the former
and two-thirds from the latter. The principle of payment on results
to be continued. Power to be given for the compulsory purchase
of school sites. In every county and in every large municipality a
School Board to be elected of the ratepayers or their representatives.
These Boards shall ascertain where schools are wanted, and see that
they are provided; shall negociate the transfer of existing schools
to the local authorities, whenever such transfer is desired by the
managers, and will be advantageous to the district; shall appoint
committees to manage schools or groups of schools ; shall levy the
necessary rates, claim the Government grants, and pay all the
expenses of the schools; shall keep registers of all the children of
school age within their districts, placing opposite to each child’s
name that of the school which may be fixed upon by the parents,
guardians, or school officers, and shall send a list of the names and
addresses of the children assigned to each school to the respective
school committees; shall appoint school officers to make out and
periodically revise the above registers, and undertake the duty of
enforcing attendance, under the direction of the school committees.
(The duties of these school officers might be performed by the school
master in thinly-populated districts, and where the schools are
small.) Shall fix the number of, and the period for, the attendances
to be required of children in the course of the year, within the
limits prescribed by the Committee of Privy Council on Education ;
�65
and shall take care that all other provisions of the Act of Parliament
under which they are appointed be carried out. The School Com
mittees shall appoint the masters and mistresses, subject to the
approval of the School Boards ; shall see that the school buildings
are kept in repair, and supervise and sanction the expenditure of the
school; shall report to the School Boards all irregularities and
infractions of rules ; shall cause registers to be kept of the attend
ances of all the children belonging to their schools, see that the
school officers call on the parents or guardians of those children who
attend irregularly, or do not attend at all, and acquaint them with
their duties, with the meaning and object of the school laws, and
the penalties following a disregard of them, and shall summon
before them absentee children, or their parents or guardians, and
admonish them; and in the event of their injunctions being dis
obeyed, shall cause them to be summoned before a magistrate, with
whom shall rest the infliction of a fine. All national-rate schools
shall be free, and no catechisms, creeds, or tenets peculiar to any
particular sect shall be taught in them during the recognised
school hours. But the school committee shall have power to
permit the use of the Bible without note or comment, and to grant
the use of the class rooms for religious instruction out of school
hours, on condition that one sect is not favoured more than
another. Whenever a parent or guardian can substantiate a plea
of poverty as a reason for not sending a child to school, and
there is no free school within reach, the committee shall have
power to pay the school fees of such child ; and it shall be
obligatory on the managers of the school selected by the parent, if
such school be receiving Government aid, to admit the child, and
to refrain from teaching it any catechism, creed, or tenet peculiar
to any particular sect. The managers of any non-national rate
school may negotiate with the School Board for its transfer to the
local authorities, and the Board shall, if the transfer be otherwise
desirable, and the managers wish it, agree to appoint the said
managers to be the School Committee, until their resignation or
death, on the condition that all the provisions of the School Act
are observed by them. Her Majesty’s Inspectors shall cease to
examine on religious subjects, and in each district there shall
E
�66
consequently be only one inspector. The number of inspectors
shall be augmented, and the following additional duties shall be
imposed upon them :—They shall report to the Committee of
Privy Council on Education, and to the School Boards—whether,
in their opinion, a sufficient number of efficient schools exists for
the wants of the district; in what schools the education is
defective, and the manner in which the defects can best be
remedied; whether the attendance of the children has been
satisfactory, and if not, whether the proper steps have been taken
to enforce it. In the event of the School Boards failing to obtain
such results as may be deemed satisfactory by the Committee of
Privy Council on Education, it shall be the duty of the Committee
of Privy Council to direct what additional measures are to be
taken, and Her Majesty’s Inspectors shall see that those measures
are adopted. If the scheme above described were carried out, I
am of opinion that we should achieve the following results. We
should avoid the evils of centralisation on the one hand, and of
local inefficiency on the other. Whilst retaining all the advan
tages of local self-government, and of the immediate and direct
action of public opinion based on local knowledge, we should
be guarded by an enlightened inspection and strong Government
control against the danger of our standard of efficiency
being lowered in some districts by the ignorance and niggardliness
of the ratepayers. The new schools provided by the local
authorities would be of a class equal, if not superior, to the best
denominational schools. The heavy responsibilities and large
expenditure involved would prevent the ratepayers from providing
more schools than were absolutely necessary. The new schools
would be mainly, if not entirely, erected in those districts which
are now destitute of them—that is, in those districts where, by
reason of the poverty of the inhabitants, free schools are most
needed. Existing well-managed schools would be able to maintain
their ground, if it be true, as is alleged, that the religious
teaching given in them is valued by the subscribers and by
the parents of the pupils. I would recommend that the
Government grants to all existing denominational schools which
accept a conscience clause should be the same as those to the
�67
national-rate schools—that is, that they should be increased from
the present amount of one-third of the total cost to two-thirds,
thus relieving the managers of one-half of their present responsi
bilities. The remaining half would not be too much to pay for
the assured advantages of religious instruction and the supposed
superiority of voluntary management. It is also probable that
some of these denominational schools would be preferred by
parents as being more select; and as this would in part be owing
to the fees required, those fees would on that account be more
willingly paid. The result of the rivalry that would take place
between the denominational and the national-rate schools might be
that the upper portion of the working classes would prefer the
former for the reasons mentioned above ; but, in my opinion, the
instruction given in the national-rate schools would be found to be
generally so superior as to cause them, in the course of time, to
supersede the others. But the process would be gradual, and no
inconvenience would be felt by the transfer of schools that would
he continually taking place. , Should my anticipations be realised,
I am further of opinion that the knowledge and influence of
religion would become far more widely spread than is now the
case; because the groundwork for it would be universally laid, and
the clergy would be able to devote themselves more exclusively
to the giving of religious instruction. I do not believe that the
spirit of voluntaryism would languish under the new system.
Those persons who now take an interest in primary schools would
he placed on the school committees, and as there would be more
schools, their services would be in greater request. The necessity
for voluntary contributions of money would also be quite as
paramount as ever; but instead of these contributions being
devoted to the building and maintenance of schools for the
higher classes of working men, some, if not all, of whom are well
able to pay the entire cost of the education of their children, they
would be devoted to the providing of clothing and perhaps even of
food, for those destitute children who are now unable to attend
schools of any sort, because they are starving and in rags. The
greatest difficulty in the way of compulsory school attendance is
the sacrifice of the child’s earnings; but this difficulty may be.
�68
considered to have been already grappled with by the Factory
Acts, the extension of which to all parts of the country is called
for by public opinion. In some cases, however, a modification of
the half-time system will be necessary, especially in the agri
cultural districts, where a cessation of school attendance might be
advantageously allowed during the period of harvest. As some
time will elapse before compulsory attendance powers will be
granted to the local authorities, and as they will even then be
inoperative until sufficient schools have been provided, the public
mind will have become prepared for the law before its operation
commences. And inasmuch as its enforcement will be in the
hands of local committees—that is, of gentlemen well known and
esteemed in their respective districts, whose sympathies with the
poor have been already called into active exercise—it is not likely
that the law will be harshly enforced. For a long time the
operations of the committee will be necessarily restricted to the
instruction of the parents in their duties to the children, and it is
probable that one or two cases only of refractory parents being
summoned before a magistrate will suffice to bring into school
nine-tenths of those children who are now idling about the streets.
One important result of the adoption of this system of national
education would be that parents would feel an interest in the
schools unknown, and indeed impossible, before. Hitherto they
have had no voice whatever in the management of that which was
of more importance to them than anything else in the State, and
it is not surprising that the apathy has followed which usually
results from absence of responsibility. It is a common remark of
earnest clergymen that when they are labouring to induce the
attendance of children at school, the attitude of parents is that of
persons who think they are asked to confer a favour, and who
believe that the managers of a school, like the owners of a shop,
have some personal end to serve. But when these parents find
that the schools belong to themselves, that they are paid for
and managed by the people, and that they would save nothing, but
lose much, by not using them, then their attitude towards them
will be entirely changed, and one great obstacle to school
attendance will be removed. Some may shrink from the cost of
�69
so complete a system, but this is one of those cases where a wellregulated expenditure is economy, where the niggardliness of
inefficiency is extravagance. If every child in the United
Kingdom were brought into school the total increased charge
upon the taxpayers of the country would probably not reach onethird of the money expended upon our paupers and our criminals.
The cost per scholar would not be greater if the charge of educa
ting the people were thrown upon the State. The total amount
spent upon education would be augmented only in proportion to
the increase of scholars. The choice before us is expenditure on
education, or expenditure on paupers and criminals.
PROFESSOR THOROLD ROGERS OK SECULAR
EDUCATION.
The Rev. J. E. Thorold Rogers read the following paper :—
I assume that this Congress accepts the position that primary
education should be universal, should be compulsory, should be
as a necessary consequence gratuitous, and that, since the State does
not enforce or constrain any particular form of religious belief, should
be secular. In order to obviate any unfriendly interpretation of
this word, I may state that I do not use it in any sense which
implies resistance to religion, indifference to religion, or substitution
for religion. I take for granted that the functions of a religious
teacher and a schoolmaster in purely intellectual culture can be
separated, and that the State is bound to find the latter, but that
it cannot and ought not to provide the former, still less
to import such an element into a compulsory system. The
question as to the source from which the funds necessary to
provide for the machinery of secular learning should come ought to
be settled, and can be settled, on purely economical considerations.
Should the class immediately benefited by a system of primary
education contribute the requisite funds ? Is society at large so
considerably benefited by the change which the Congress seeks to
effect that the necessary charge should be raised from the general
resources of society ? Is it in accordance with the principles of
political justice, as now interpreted, that the fund supplied for
the purpose should be levied by the whole community on the
�70
resources of a part of the community 2 If it be determined that it
should be levied on the whole community, what is the most
equitable way in which the fund should be raised, and what is the
way in which it should be distributed so as to secure that
maximum of efficiency which is supposed to be obtained by the
instituted supervision of those who are intrusted with its manage
ment ? I will attempt as simply as possible to answer these
questions. No one, I imagine, will contest the position that the
immediate benefit of a system of primary education falls to the
labourer. Every one agrees that such an education renders his
work more intelligible, and therefore easier.
If, therefore,
an educated body of labourers do not derive an increased rate
of remuneration from the education which they obtain, they earn
the rate which they do get on lighter terms and with less toil.
Besides, the effect of education in sharpening the intelligence of the
labourer is or may be extended to supplying him with the
knowledge of the best market for his labour. If he becomes handy
because he is intelligent, the same mental power will direct him
to the best means for bettering his condition, and so afford him a
positive as well as a relative increase in his resources. Nor must
it be forgotten that the remuneration of labour is, on the whole,
determined by the cost of supplying it, and that if the
age at which productive labour is employed is delayed or
postponed, the wages earned are, cceteris paribus, invariably
higher. This rule might be illustrated abundantly from every-day
experience, and holds good even if the labourer does not contribute a
single penny towards the cost of his own education. He must
be kept while he learns, and this charge will produce the effect
referred to. If it could be shown, then, that all the benefits of a
system of primary education accrue to the material advantage of theclass for which we seek to provide such an education, and produce
no effect, near or remote, on the general well-being of society, the
cost of supplying this education ought to be entirely defrayed by the
parties who desire the benefit, in just the same way as the outlay
on a field, or the stocking of a shop, should be supplied at the
charges of the persons who gain a profit on either. Nor would it
be impossible to obtain such funds from the direct contribution of
�71
the class for whose purposes such a tax would he expended.
The State might levy a poll or income tax on all parties who
might need this instruction, rateably to the claims which they make
on the machinery. Such a poll tax is levied in many of the states
composing the American Union. If a half-time system were
adopted, the requisite quota might he even collected from the
child’s earnings, and a very small sum per week would be sufficient
to meet the cost of supplying this necessary of life in the case
of children too young to work at all. Ill paid as the agricultural
labourer is, he is seldom so straitened as to be incapable of finding a
few pence per week for the cost of instructing his children, just as
he is generally able to find much more for their clothing. It is
said that the Wesleyans are able to maintain their organization
by a penny a week from each member of their body. Everybody
knows, too, that the voluntary expenditure of the poor on taxable
commodities is enormously in excess of any possible amount which
might be demanded for public education. In the case, of course, of
those who are utterly destitute, a machinery like that of the Poor
Law would supply instruction, as it now does, with food, clothing,
and lodging. My hearers are aware, that with many persons the
contribution of children’s pence is, apart from its amount, con
ceived to be necessary as an acknowledgment of the benefit
which education is, and of the moral obligation which rests on
parents to supply that which is only immediately less important
than wbat are called the necessaries of life. But the fact is, the
benefit of education to the mass of labourers is only more obvious
than the benefit of the process to society at large. The employer
of labour gets his advantage from education. Many of us know
the fact, for instance, that an educated recruit learns his drill in
half the time, and at less than half the expense, incurred in
training another who is wholly unlettered. Over and over again
employers find that labour may be more highly paid, and be cheaper
after all, because more effective. And here I may observe, that the
faults of a low system of education are not to be charged on education
itself. One of the worst kinds of education which is given in
England—and it is very costly into the bargain—is, as I know
from my experience as a Poor Law Guardian, that which is given
�72
in industrial schools for pauper children. But I must not enter
on this topic. I only refer to it in order to obviate an objection.
But if a sound system of education is of advantage to the person
who receives it, and also to the person who lines the services of
those who have enjoyed it, it is of no less advantage to the public at
large. A good education is the best preventive of crime. Men are
quite as much degraded by ignorance as by vice. Harrow men’s
faculties, and you strengthen the temptation to the grosser forms
of indulgence. Enlarge them wisely, give men an insight into the
moral and material interests—never really separable—of the
society in which they live, and which claims their allegiance,
because it bestows on them the highest services, and gives them
the fairest field for their labour, and you will ultimately need no
police except for those who are utterly and hopelessly depraved.
It is, I am persuaded, possible to cultivate a public opinion
which shall do more to correct vicious tendencies than all the
repressive forces of the most rigorous police. And what is
a sound public opinion but the outcome of public education?
But if the advantages of a really national education, the course and
details of which are wisely determined, are so generally diffused
over society, it is the duty of society at large to bear the charge of
this, which is, after all, the cheapest as well as the most effective
police. I have tried to answer two of the questions which I put
at the outset of this paper. But supposing the tax is to be levied,
not on one class but on all, how should the rate be laid ? We have
got in this country a rough-and-ready way of levying taxes for local
purposes, by putting a rate on the occupier of property. Such a
form of taxation is very often grossly unfair. For example, a poor
rate is practically an indirect means of paying wages, or at least ofsupplying the means by which certain liabilities affecting the con
dition of the labourer are met from other than his own resources.
Now, if the occupier who does not employ labour with a view to
profit, is called upon to contribute to the fund by which the man
who does employ labour with a view to profit, ekes out wages, I see
that the former is wronged. I might, if time permitted, illustrate
my position by a variety of examples, indicating the incidence of
local taxation, and confirming my statement that the present process
�of assessment is radically unequal. But a wrong which I protest
against I should strive not to commit; and hence, assuming that
the benefits of a national education are national, I think it
would be a crying injustice to provide the funds by taxing the
occupiers of one kind of property only, and a still greater injustice
if the tax were levied directly on the owners of real estate; though
perhaps I need hardly say, that the theory which assumes that the
landowner pays the tenant’s rates in a diminished rent, is sheer
pedantry, which everybody’s experience refutes. If you could get
a just income-tax-—and as yet I see no prospect of so desirable a
consummation, though it is perfectly easy to show the basis of a
just income-tax—such a tax would be theoretically the fund from
which an education rate should be levied. I am of opinion that it
is wise policy to appropriate not only the proceeds of taxation
strictly, which no one disputes, but to import into a system of
finance a rule that special taxes should have special objects ; and I
am sure that economies of taxation could be far more easily achieved
if people understood the object to which an impost was directed.
Not a little of the extravagance of administration arises from the
practice (originally adopted by desperate financiers) of consolidating
taxes into a fund, and then charging all kinds of expenditure on
that common fund. If I were in the position of a financial reformer,
the first basis of my reform would be, special taxes to special objects.
As it is, I am driven to recommend that the tax for education should
be derived from that financial abomination, the Consolidated Fund.
I know that there is a strong indifference to economy in dealing
with funds granted from the State; and my hearers, if they agree
with me in my dislike of taxation being agglomerated into one or
a few units, will see why people are ready to play fast and loose
with great quantities, the vastness of which renders them unintelli
gible. There is a famous question on record, answered, I believe, very
facetiously in this town : What is a pound ? In the administration
of public funds, and in due economy in their administration, the
question “ What is a million pounds ?” is, I fancy, a matter which
tasks the understanding more stringently. I have alluded to my
experience as a Poor Law guardian. I have constantly found that
while my colleagues will waste a whole afternoon in debating
�74
whether they should spend £5, they look with a sort of puzzled
curiosity, as though they do not know whether I am a fool or an
astute impostor with ulterior views, when I have pointed out that
such and such a change in their arrangements will save the Govern
ment £500. If, then, we get the necessary funds from Government,
and appropriate them, under the equitable administration of a
Minister of Education, by local boards—an argument on the consti
tution of which does not fall within the scope of this paper—we
shall perhaps be able to do the best that can be done during the
interval between our use of the existing financial system and its
probable improvement in the future. I may perhaps be personally
excused for referring, in conclusion, to the incidental topic with
which I commenced. Objections are raised against our purpose in
this agitation, on the ground that we are unfriendly to religion, by
which I hope is meant Christianity. No sensible man, I presume,
would condescend to answer the calumnies of polemical or political
partisans. But how strong would Christianity be if it repudiated
its professional advocates, and trusted for its victories to those
who believe and live for the patient practice which it invariably
enjoins1
REV. A. STEINTHAL ON LOCAL EDUCATIONAL
RATING.
The Rev. S. A. Steinthal, of Manchester, read the follow
ing paper :—In the few remarks which I propose to address to the
Congress, I shall take for granted, that we are all of us agreed upon
the importance of the leading features of the scheme, put forward
by the National Education League, and have no doubt as to the
need which exists of largely extending the means of giving education
to the people. I shall not stay to discuss whether there is any
serious error in the statistics published by the Manchester and
Birmingham Education Aid Societies. Even if the numbers with
which they have appalled the country should, on further examina
tion, be shown to have overdrawn the sad picture of the condition
of the towns in which their useful labours have been exerted, there
is so undeniable an amount of unreached ignorance around us, that
it would be sinful to waste time in discussing the accuracy or in
�75
accuracy of mere figures while human souls are perishing for lack
of knowledge. I shall nor enter upon the topic reserved for other
papers as to the undenominational character which all schools sup
ported by public money ought in justice to bear ; or try to prove—
what I believe would not he difficult to prove—-that it is wiser, under
all circumstances, to confine the ordinary instruction of the dayschool to so-called secular subjects, instead of pretending to intro
duce theological matters, to which justice cannot be done in common
schools, while teaching the elements of ordinary knowledge. It is
not my intention to discuss the important subject, of whether
attendance at school is to be made compulsory, or the production of
satisfactory evidence of education being received elsewhere, insisted
upon. I would simply state in passing, that unless school attend
ance, or its equivalent, is made compulsory, I should not advocate,
as I intend doing in this paper, the need of levying a local rate to
be applied, in addition to the Government grant for school purposes.
It is the fact that the common weal demands the universal education
of all citizens, which justifies the community in insisting upon the
attendance of all children at school; and it is the right of. every
individual member of the community to find the means within his
reach of fully developing not only his physical, but mental and
moral capacities. The community has the right to insist upon every
child being educated, and the child has the right to demand that
school accommodation and proper means of teaching should be pro
vided for it. It seems to me that what is thus needful for all, and
for all alike, should not be left to the unreliable and spasmodic
exertions of voluntary benevolence. Experience has proved to us
that voluntary benevolence will not effect the object required. It
is useless to go over the old, well-trodden ground to show how, in
the first place, parents have neglected their duties, how Christian
charity has been unable to supply the void of parental negligence,
or how even State aid to voluntaryism has failed to overcome the
amount of ignorance we have permitted to exist among us. There
are many districts in which there are no persons sufficiently inter
ested in promoting education, to devote any portion of their means
to the establishment and maintenance of schools • and, under our
present system, to those places no share of Government aid is allowed
�76
to go; and while the children in such localities are left either in
entire ignorance, or are exposed to the inefficient training of the
dame school, there are other places where benevolence, stimulated
by sectarian zeal, multiplies unnecessary accommodation, and wastes
large sums in erecting buildings and in supporting a staff of teachers
far in excess of the real wants of the neighbourhood. This is no
new complaint, but it is not less true now because it is old. More
than eighteen years ago Dr. Hodgson gave a typical illustration of
the wasteful character of leaving the support of schools to volun
tary effort. “ At New Mills, near Manchester, an active clergyman
of the Church of England came into competition with the Wesleyan
school, but did not succeed till he established a day school. The
Wesleyan school was capable of accommodating -150 scholars, but
the clergyman succeeded so well that only 17 scholars were left in
it. The Wesleyans determined not to be annihilated. They got
up a day school, and obtained a teacher whom nothing could dis
hearten. The result, according to the Methodist minister, had not
been well for both schools. He expressed his sorrow that they had
nearly put an extinguisher upon the Church schools : two pews could
contain all its scholars, while their Sunday schools numbered from
5 to 600 scholars.” Is it not sad that while the evil waste of such
rivalry was recognised twenty years ago, we should be suffering
under similar evils this day, and still obliged to discuss the need of
obviating such sectarian jealousies ? Nor does it seem to me to be
just to throw the burden of education upon voluntary givers, even
were it prudent to do so. Are not all of us who are in any way
connected with the multiform methods of charitable exertion well
aware how small is the number of those who are the supporters of
all benevolent efforts ? The same names, not always the wealthiest
in a district, are time after time compelled to contribute, and though
the most generous givers are generally the last to complain of having
to do so much, are they not prevented from devoting their means to
objects in which they take special interest, because they cannot
conscientiously allow the absolutely essential work of education to
be left undone, on account of the niggardliness of those who will not
give until forced by law ? But even the benevolent cannot ensure
their children being alike generous with themselves, nor has any
�11
district the certainty of the wealthy remaining amongst them. A
manufacturing town is not always the most agreeable residence, and
many who have made their money in overcrowded places, retire to
enjoy their well-earned prosperity far from the scene of their earlier
life; and new claims prevent their still contributing to schools,which
languish in consequence. Every now and then, it is true, the sad
neglect of the education of the poor strikes the attention of some
philanthropist like the late Mr. Edward Brotherton, of Manchester,
and a new attempt is made to stimulate the activity of benevolence
—only to prove, as experience had done before, and is doing again,
how vain it is to rely upon benevolent voluntary effort alone. This
unreliability and spasmodic character, is all the more fatal to educa
tional progress, as the conditions under which Government aid is
granted claim a certain amount from local effort or endowment
before any money can he given under the Minutes of Council. So
important a matter as the education of the people can no longer be
left to efforts nearly twenty years ago justly characterised as “ im
pulsive, irregular, uncertain, unequal, and capricious in their opera
tion.” (West. Rev., July, 1851.) Our choice, then, in seeking for
the means of establishing and supporting schools must lie between
grants from the central government, local rating, or a combination
of these two methods. The advocates of a school system supported
altogether from funds derived from the national government, have no
weak argument in their behalf when they point out, how very heavy
the burden of local taxation is at present, and how limit 3(1 the area
is upon which rates are levied : how the wealthy fundholder will
escape almost untaxed for schools under a rating system, while the
burden would be less felt by the poor and struggling if the cost cf
education be defrayed from national taxation. The income from
which national taxation is paid is estimated atleast at.£500,000,000,
while the assessment of the whole country is only £150,000,000.
Twopence in the pound on the former sum would raise more than
the £4,000,000 which it is estimated would suffice to provide
primary education for all our children, while a rate of nearly seven
pence in the pound would be required for the same purpose. It is
further true that under any rating scheme some part of the popu
lation would escape from payment, even as in the case of our present
�78
rates, under which we know that the most destitute classes are
uniformly excused from paying the rate imposed ; while everyone
does contribute something to the general taxation, and will do so as
long as tea and coffee and sugar, to say nothing of intoxicating
drinks and tobacco, are made to add so much to the national
revenue. But, on the other hand, there can be no doubt that,
if the whole amount of the educational expenses of the
country is paid from national funds, its expenditure must be
entirely entrusted to the central authority; and I am quite
prepared to declare my own strong objection to giving more
influence to the Government than I am obliged to do, even though
I do not altogether hold the opinion that, nothing beyond
securing life and property should fall within the purview of the
State. I believe that local management is absolutely necessary for
the efficient management of the schools, and therefore I believe
that the greater portion of the funds should be raised as well as
expended in the localities to be themselves benefited. It is very
customary at the present day to sneer at everything connected
with local self-government. No joke is more readily welcomed
than one pointed at the narrowness and stupidity of a Board of
Guardians, or a Town Council. But does not this arise from the fact
that the objects which such boards have before them are often
regarded as too low to claim the attention of educated men ? When a
Board of Guardians undertakes to make its hospital a model hos
pital, and its treatment of pauperism, a means of lessening the
evils of pauperism, do we not find educated men devoting
themselves assiduously, as I have known them do in Chorlton,
Manchester, and Liverpool, and as no doubt they frequently do
elsewhere ? Do we not see in corporations where there are free
libraries, that men are willing to enter the Council that they may
sit upon the Library Committee ? I have even lately had proof
that the Public-house Closing Act, which enables Town Councils
to close those prolific sources of misery, immorality, and crime for a
few hours, has induced men to enter them, that they might support
such measures of improving the social condition of the people.
May we not, therefore, anticipate that if a municipal Board of
Education be constituted the best men amongst us would be
�willing to serve upon it? And as it is proposed that all
rate-supported schools should be free, the increased burden
imposed by the rate would be lightened, on the other hand, by the
exemption of all who desired it from the payment of school-pence,
and voluntary subscriptions towards the maintenance of
schools. The fact that a special educational rate was levied
would tend to interest every ratepayer in the school. He would
be anxious to see it prosper, would take a pride in its efficiency.
That this is no theoretical advantage is seen by the experience of
■our Australian colonies, where each district strives to rival its
neighbours in the excellence of its educational institutions. If, as
I trust, there should be a system adopted whereby the best
children in the schools could obtain scholarships to enable
them to pursue their studies in higher schools; and to assist them,
if need be, to the highest scholarships; this healthful emulation
would be increased still more, as a successful student would throw
back some reflected fame upon his school, and upon the district
which had enabled him to attain success. I am well aware that
ratepaying is not the most pleasing of duties ; but as soon as men
perceived, as they soon would do, that an educational rate would
lessen the poor rate, the police rate, the expenses of the criminal
courts, and the like, the economy of giving a good education would
be recognised, and the payments would he made cheerfully and
without complaint. It should, however, be always insisted upon,
in my opinion, that the school rate should be kept separate from all
other rates, and should not be merged with that long list which is
.attached to the present poor-rate paper. I urge this, as I wish that
every parent should be distinctly impressed with the fact that he
does not receive an altogether gratuitous education for his children.
I am not afraid that the children attending a free school would feel
themselves pauperised, for education always raises the nobler
feelings of the taught, and never degrades them. Nor am I
anxious lest parents should feel themselves robbed of their inde
pendence by their children being able to attend school without pay
ment of the weekly pence. They would know that they are paying
their quota, and as has often been said, we none of us feel ourselves
■degraded by the fact that our streets are lighted by gas, that ouj
�80
security is preserved by policemen, and that the many comforts we
enjoy owing to municipal government arc not paid for directly, but
are supported by rates to which we all contribute according to our
means. There are very few, comparatively speaking, in this
country who do pay directly the cost of their children’s education.
The working classes make use of schools sustained by voluntary
subscriptions, endowments, and Government grants. The middle
and higher classes find in grammar schools and colleges that their
ancestors’ benevolence has freed them from this burden. We none
of us are pauperised under these influences. Why the change from
school pence and voluntary subscriptions should suddenly make
such a change I cannot understand. Schools under such a system
would indeed be even less charity schools than they are now.
I have, however, not proposed in the above argument to pay the
whole expenses of the school from local sources ; nor do I intend
to do so. The cost of a child’s training in a school is, I believe,
estimated in the Revised Code at 30s. a year, of which sum I think
the Committee of Council generally pay about a third. I would not
alter this, but would simply raise the sum needed to make up the
total by rates instead of by the present means. I am quite ready
to acknowledge that local authorities are not unfrequently actuated
by an economical spirit which approaches to niggardliness; and as a
corrective to this tendency being applied to schools, I would insist
upon Government inspectors visiting the school, upon whose
favourable report alone should any Government help be given. It
does not fall within the scope of my paper to discuss the nature
of the examination which should be insisted upon; but I would
incidentally remark that I hope the meagre standard of the
Revised Code will not be long maintained. Nor have I to consider
the character of the authority which should appoint the inspectors,
although I hope a responsible Minister of Education may soon take
the place of the Committee of Council, in whose constitution I
have very little confidence. But I believe that by no means can
the wants of the community be better met than by such a method
as I have sketched. I hardly know whether I am expected while
speaking of rate-supported schools which offer free instruction to
all comers, to speak of the conditions under which existing schools
�81
should be admitted to the benefits such a plan offers. I should
avoid as much as possible building new school buildings ; but I
would do so by freely offering to all existing schools the privilege of
becoming rate-supported schools on complying with the two require
ments, that the education given in them should be unsectarian, and
should be free. Unsectarian, because to allow denominational
schools to be aided by the rate would be to revive with increased
difficulty the old Church-rate contest; free, because, supported by
public money, the public should justly be entitled to receive the
benefits they offered. A truly national system could thus be
established with no infringement of any existing rights, with a
perfect preservation of local self-government, and yet, through the
system of Government inspection, always maintaining a high
standard of efficient training for all who are to be the future
citizens of our native land.
MR. PENTECOST ON COMPULSION.
Mr. Pentecost, of Stourbridge, read the following paper on
Compulsory Attendance. He said : If any one part of the scheme
of national education is of greater importance than another, it
is, I think, that relating to “ compulsory attendance.” Educa
tion may be free and schools may be multiplied, but without
compulsory attendance there would be still a large proportion of
children preferring the street to the school. The work would be
only partially done, since the very class it is most desirable to
reach would be left untouched.’ The opponents of a compulsory
measure perceive that it involves the establishment of free non
sectarian schools; hence their opposition. The public is assured by
them that the English nation, especially the working classes, will not
submit to compulsion. The working classes are farther advanced
upon this question than seems to be supposed. Moral, social, and
political progress will not be rejected for mere sentiment.
Moreover, the working and other classes do submit to compulsion,
for we have it in our sanitary laws, and Workshops Acts; only
here it is restricted in its operation to the industrious portion
of the community, and only indolence is allowed the privilege
of free ignorance. But compulsory attendance would necessitate
F
�82
tlie establishment of free non-sectarian schools, at least in large
towns, and ultimately, perhaps, throughout the kingdom ; and the
cry is raised that an education in such schools would be a “godless
education.” A knowledge of the constitution of the human
body, to elucidate the laws of health, especially with reference to
cleanliness, ventilation, recreation, and diet, is godless—the
ordinary subjects of primary education are godless—unless issued
from the mint bearing the imprint of some denomination or sect.
With the bane the antidote should be supplied. An elementary
knowledge of natural history or physical science, should carry its
corrective in a catechism, and a knowledge of Scripture names and
dates should serve as a counterpoise to the dangers attendant on
reading, writing, and arithmetic. In a leading article on the
debate on education in the House of Commons last March, the
Times took much trouble to enforce the statement, that the good
expected from any new system of education would be nullified
by the dangerous lessons of home example, and that parents
must be educated. That is what the advocates of a new national
system desire—they wish to educate the parents of future
generations. Then again, it has been said that the League
proposes to educate children out of their religion. The advocates
of a free non-sectarian education are not actuated by hostility
to religion, but by hostility to ignorance and its results.
Religious instruction can still be given'—no one can hinder it;
but as there appears no prospect of an agreement as to what
should be considered religious teaching, the advocates of a
new free system of education wish to enable children to
become acquainted with the laws of God, regulating the material
world, and thus be guided to live in temperance, soberness, and
chastity; to learn and labour truly to get their own living in any
state of life to which they may be called. Deficient, however, as
the present voluntary system is acknowledged to be, even by its
own advocates, we would gladly admit that the clergy and
ministers of various denominations have performed a great work
in building up and supporting the present system of educa
tion. That it is now inefficient is to be ascribed not to
any neglect or shortcoming on their part, but to the inevitable
�83
march of events. Recognising the value of the present
system, the question arises : is there any possibility of co
operation ? Is it not possible to combine a new national free and
non-sectarian system with the existing denominational voluntary
system, and thus preserve the present system, or at least a large
part of it ? The new system would then gradually win its way in
public favour. With a desire to preserve the present system, I
jotted down the following rough notes, which I will submit to
your consideration :—1. That parents or guardians of children, of a
certain specified age, shall be required to send them to school
regularly and constantly, for a certain number of weeks in each year
■—Sunday-school attendance not to be counted; and those who
neglect the performance of this duty, shall be liable to a recurring
penalty, to be recovered by the inspector or sub-inspector of
schools for the district. The production of a school certificate of
attendance to be the only complete answer to the charge; the
exemptions from this rule of attendance being those children, who
are mentally or corporeally incapacitated from attendance, or from
receiving instruction, and also children who are receiving instruc
tion at home or elsewhere, from tutors, governesses, or parents.
Proper evidence of such instruction to be rendered to the inspector
of schools for the district, whenever required by him. 2. That
parents or guardians, who are unable to pay the ordinary school
fees shall be furnished with a pass, entitling their children to free
admission to any assisted, inspected school in the parish or district
in which they reside, and to assistance in procuring books, &c.
When there is room for choice, the parents to be allowed to select
a school. The fees for such pupils (by whatever name they may ‘
be known, or by whatever means they may be raised) to be paid to
the schools according to a certain fixed scale. That public and
private schools, and grammar schools, shall be registered upon pay
ment of a small registration fee, and shall then he allowed to grant
certificates of attendance ; due provision, of course, being made for
preventing any kind of traffic in certificates, and allowing the
Government Department superintending education the power of
refusing to register notoriously inefficient schools. 3. That all
national schools, British schools, and denominational schools, shall
�84
be entitled to be registered, and to receive free scholars, to be paid
for by rates or Government grants; provided the managers of such
schools submit to Government inspection, and accept a conscience
clause, specifying that they shall not allow religious instruc
tion of any kind to interfere with the ordinary secular instruc
tion, but that it shall be imparted at such times and in such
a manner as not to break or interrupt the routine of secular
studies. 4. In parishes or districts where there is no school
accommodation of this kind, for the reception of non-sectarian free
scholars, or where there is only insufficient accommodation of the
kind, the Government Department superintending education shall,
upon satisfactory representations of such deficiency, cause notice to
be given to the guardians of the poor, or other authorities, that
school buildings and teachers must be provided by the parish or
district, the cost to be defrayed by a rate levied on the district;
and where the proper authorities neglect to provide the necessary
school accommodation, then the Government shall intervene, and
provide a school or schools, educational appliances, and teachers,
and recover from the district the amount expended. Existing
schools, the managers of which refuse to adopt the conscience
clause, shall not be registered; and a district containing such
schools only, shall be considered as destitute of educational
facilities, and shall be required to provide free non-sectarian schools,
under local management and Government inspection.
RESOLUTION OE LONDON TRADES’
COUNCIL.
The President announced that Mr. George Odger was unable
to speak, as he had promised to do; but that he had sent the follow
ing resolution of the London Trades’ Council:—“This Council is of
opinion that the National Education League, whose object is the
education of the people, upon national and unsectarian principles,
is in every sense worthy of our support; therefore we appoint
our secretary, Mr. George Odger, to attend the congress to be held
in Birmingham ; and we pledge ourselves to use our best endeavours
in aid of so laudable a movement.”
�85
DISCUSSION.
Mr. Simons, of Merthyr Tydvil, opened the discussion by reading
the prospectus of an education society with which he was connected
in his own town; and he then said: Although an ardent sup
porter of the League, I venture to say that the march onward will
never cease, until every one of the principles of that programme is
adopted. I am willing to go with the League as far as we agree,
and whilst we are together I should like to endeavour to induce
you to march on with me, to the beacon which this programme offers
to you. Now, I want to make one observation upon what I call
a delusion and a snare—the conscience clause. Test the conscience
clause by this : is there any ardent thorough Protestant in this room
who, if he lived in the centre of a Roman Catholic community, with
the means of education entirely in the hands of the Roman Catholic
priest, would send his child to school there, with the protection
only of the conscience clause ? I have asked the question often
before, and have never had an answer in the affirmative. The
conscience clause, I repeat, is a delusion and a snare. It affords
no protection whatever, and it makes more necessary for the
youth of the country the prayer—“ Lead us not into temptation.”
I ask you all to consider the question of the conscience clause. The
grant of State aid to Remap Catholic schools, would virtually be
a grant for the purpose of teaching the Roman Catholic religion.
Believe me that I do not intend, that one word which escapes my
lips shall give pain; for the day has passed, happily, when differ
ences of opinion lead to hostility, or discord among fellow Christians.
My references to Catholics are made entirely upon principle ; I have
no objection to them as a body. Well, we know that if a grant
were given them for school purposes, it would substantially
be a grant for teaching the Roman Catholic religion in this
country. Bear in mind that they are about a quarter of the
entire population, and if four millions were given in grants
they would be entitled to one-fourth—one million given for
teaching the Roman Catholic religion. The logic of Roman
Catholics is irresistible, that so long as you maintain sectarian
�86
schools in this country, so long will they be entitled to teach in
them their religion, and to receive their proportion of Government
aid. That is a question which I have not heard put on any plat
form except when I have given utterance to it. Next, I would ask
how long in this country are the middle classes going to contribute
towards schools for the working classes ? I am here as a middle
class man, to say that no system of education will satisfy me, unless
the two classes are put upon exactly the same footing. We speak
of compulsion as a thing applicable only to one order of the
people. I am an advocate for the application of compulsion to
every class. I don’t know why the middle-class man should have
the opportunity of bringing up his child in ignorance, any more than
the working-class man. I am also an advocate for the institution
of imperial universities, and for this reason : after we get com
pulsory education, how long will it be before the people ask for a
further opportunity of advancing and brightening the intellects of
their children, and of fitting them to occupy any position in the
world, even up to that of the Lord Chancellor ?
Mr. Applegarth, secretary to the Amalgamated Society of
Carpenters and Joiners, followed : So much has been said in the
name of working men, that it is almost presumption on the part of
a working man to speak for his class; but as I conceive that much
has been said in their name, which is not exactly true, perhaps it
will not be out of place for me to say a few words. My claim to
speak is simply that I have lived and associated with working men
all the days of my life; and I am here, as the delegate of one of
the largest trade societies in the kingdom, to demand that education
shall be placed within the reach of every child, however poor,
however degraded. The first meeting of my fellow working men
that I addressed was about twelve years ago, the last one last
night. On every occasion I have tested the men in regard to
education, and I never yet found an exception to my own
opinion—that what we want is a national compulsory, unsectarian
system: Now, I have a little score to settle both with Mr. Edmund
Potter, M.P., and with the Archbishop of York, and I give notice
that I shall hit them very hard. The other day, the Archbishop of’
York ventured to say that, if an attempt were made to introduce
�87
a compulsory system of education, such a system would meet
with a hard reception from a large proportion of the working
classes. Well, then, Mr. Potter, in his place in the House of
Commons, said, too, that the working classes were opposed to
compulsion in connection with education.
Mr. Potter : No, no.
Mr. Applegarth : The Times is responsible for my statement;
and I am glad to hear Mr. Potter say “ No, no.” It is not the first
mistake the Times has made. To go back, then, to the Archbishop
of York. Wherever he gets his information from I can’t tell. For
a number of years I worked in different parts of the country, and
in every place I tested the working man upon this question of
education. For instance, at one meeting, at which Mr. Geo. Dawson
was in the chair, he distinctly asked, “ Do you agree with me that
we want a national compulsory, unsectarian system of education ?”
and not a dissenting voice did I hear. The working classes would
never feel compulsion, and they would be only too glad of the
opportunity to send their children to schools, where they would get
a good education. But no one knows better than the men them
selves, that there are amongst the working people two classes.
There is the sot, the careless and indifferent man, who has been so
long neglected, and degraded that he does not understand the value
of education; and him the other class, the better class of working
men, have to carry upon their backs. But those men who do not
understand the value of education, must be made to understand it.
The Archbishop of York said the voluntary system had done a
noble work, and that it was competent to meet all the requirements
of the future. I am not one to disparage the efforts of the clergy
in the voluntary system; but I will say this—that that portion of
the clergy which has done the real work in the education of the
people consists of underpaid curates, who would only be too glad to
get rid of this extra work, and get a little extra pay for the reli
gious services which they have to conduct. What has voluntaryism
done ? Why, it has provided school accommodation for two million
children; but for the want of that great principle, compulsion, there
are 700,000 vacant seats. We are told that this voluntary system
has provided 16,000 schools ; but so unequally are they distributed
�88
that in the diocese of Norfolk there are 120 parishes without one
day school. From the report of the Select Committee issued in
1866 we find that out of 14,895 parishes, there are 11,000 of them,
embracing a population of over six millions, that receive no direct
assistance from the State ; out of 755,000 children of the working
classes, from 10 to 12 years of age, only 250,000 are at school. Again
I ask what has the voluntary system done? According to 18th and
19th Victoria, chap. 34, the guardians of the poor have the power
to educate out-door pauper children from 4 to 16 years of age.
Now, we find that in nine counties of England, where there were
no less than 38,451 of these out-door pauper children, the guardians
educated the enormous number of 11, at an annual cost of £2. 4s. 8d.
That is what we have done under the voluntary system. Now,
next, if we have a compulsory system we must have, too, a free
system. The object of the League, I take it, is to work in contra
distinction to the present system, which helps those who are best
able to help themselves, leaving to starve and rot in ignorance those
who have not the power to help themselves, even if they had the
disposition. The object of the League is to help those who are least
able to help themselves. Some people have said that they fear that
if we have a free system of education the working classes would
not know how to appreciate it. Well, if they do not know how to
appreciate it we must make them know. I have seen the school
systems both of America and Switzerland, and I never came across
a man in either of those countries, who felt that he was not doing
his duty because he allowed his children to go to a free school. And
what can be said of the people of America, and Switzerland, would
no doubt be said of the people of England, if our educational system
were made compulsory. It is no use trying to mix up a national
education with any portion of religion, however small the dose.
We are not prepared to have gospel and geography mixed together.
The working classes want education. They know that the classes
above them have been tinkering with this question, whilst vice and
misery and prostitution, have piled up a colossal mountain of iniquity.
If the League knows its duty, it will go in for a compulsory, un
sectarian, and free system—for a measure which will put high and
low upon the same level in an educational sense. And now, sir, I
�89
am here to give my adhesion to the National Education League, not
that I think that its principles reach exactly and altogether the
wants of the working classes, hut because it goes a step in the right
direction; and I shall be only too glad if the Legislature see their
course to a thoroughly radical measure.
Mr. Edmund Potter, M.P., speaking in explanation, said : I am
sorry Mr. Applegarth has not watched my course more closely,
because I believe that if one Member of Parliament more than
another has expressed himself definitely, forcibly, and frequently
upon this subject, it is myself. Speaking in the House, in reply to
Mr. Forster on the question of Trades’ Unions, I said that no Bill
would be of any use unless it was accompanied by compulsory
education. Before then, I spoke upon the educational question
itself, and no such opinion ever escaped my lips as that which
is attributed to me. I should not, too, have been charged with
opposition to compulsion, for I was one of the strongest advocates
of the Factory Acts, the great benefit of which was, as I said
in the House, that they gave compulsory, unsectarian education.
Mr. Applegarth : I.am delighted to hear from Mr. Potter that
he did not say that which he was reported in the Times to have
said. I have placed the report in his hands.
Mr. Green, Chairman of the Birmingham Trades’ Council,
continued the discussion. He said : I take it that what the League
especially wants to know from me, is whether the working men of
this town are in favour of its scheme, and whether they think that
the system of education to be adopted should be compulsory,
unsectarian, and free. Now, Mr. Applegarth, speaking for the
working men he represents, said they- were; and I, too, have to
report that in this locality, as throughout the length and breadth of
the land, a very large section of the working men are in favour of
the scheme. The society which sends me here is composed of men
of all politics, and of all religions—from the Bed Republican to the
milk-and-water Liberal-Conservative, from the Roman Catholic to
the latest discovered sect, the Hallelujah Band; yet when we dis
cussed this question of to-day, and of sending a delegate here, there
was not a dissentient voice. A few weeks ago a paper upon the
subject of compulsory and unsectarian education was read by Mr.
�90
Hibbs, a working man, before a national conference of Trades’
Unions in this town. Everyone voted for the principle, and one of
the strongest supporters was Mr. Wood, of Manchester, a strong
Tory. This matter, therefore, cannot be considered, and ought
not to be considered, a party question; but it seems to me that
clergymen seem determined to go against the working man on this,
as on some past occasions. A little while ago we heard the question,
why does not the working man go to Church? I don’t know
whether the interrogators drew a list of reasons; but if they did,
and they have not inserted this, they may add, opposition to the
scheme of unsectarian education as one of them. A local paper
says that we wish lo eliminate religious teaching from education.
Well, if that religious teaching is founded upon dogmas or creeds,
we do wish to do so. To teach a child truth is to teach it religion,
and by teaching it that, you advance it in the path in which you
wish it to tread. The clergy object to this system of the League
because under it they will not teach their creed; but I can tell
them this—that if they want to get the good-will of the people, if
they want to diminish pauperism and crime, and to raise the people
to an appreciation of what is noble and good, they should support,
not oppose, the scheme. Under it I believe the nation would pro
gress in all that is good, and those who now ask the question, why
do not working men attend a place of worship 1 would then have
to set about building more places of worship for them to attend. It
is the duty of everyone who wishes to see the children of the
country grow up, in the way they should go, and kept out of vice
and poverty, to support this scheme of the League. The working
men do not make a great deal of noise about it, but I can assure
you that they feel upon the subject very acutely indeed; for they
do not like to see the class immediately above them taking advan
tage of all the endowed educational means of the country, whilst
they are left without anything at all. They desire a better state
of things. There is no need of discussion as to compulsion—that
is settled ; and the working men of Birmingham, I am authorised
to say, will do all they can to help on a system of national com
pulsory, unsectarian education, although they would prefer that that
education should be secular.
�91
Sir C. Rawlinson gave his support to the programme of the
League. He conceived that the new educational system must be sup
ported by local rates, supplemented by Government aid. He held that
opinion upon two clear grounds. He protested against the education
of the country being handed over entirely to Government, because in
the 'first place the administration would in that case turn to rank
jobbery and gross expenditure; and, secondly, he did nor want to see
education ’ conducted without reference to the principle of local selfgovernment, the vigour and success of which was the best guarantee
for the liberties of England. It was all very well to laugh at
corporations, but they had been the safeguards of liberty. In
how many evil days had the Corporation of the City of London
stood forth in defence of the people ? For these reasons he was
extremely sorry to hear anybody say that the education grant
ought to come exclusively from Government. On the other hand,
he objected to the schools being supported wholly from local rates,
because, for a variety of reasons, it was desirable and even necessary
to have Government inspection. He need not pursue this matter. It
was obvious that for the sake of some degree of uniformity, and for
the purpose of ensuring efficiency in places where the local authori
ties might possibly not be disposed to do their duty, and for other
reasons, it was desirable that the whole system should be under the
control of a central power. Then with regard to the religious
difficulty, surely the country had had sufficient experience to
have found out by this time that it was impossible to base
education upon religion. He appealed to the whole people, then,
to aid the active spirits of the League to base religion upon
education. That was the natural course. It was a miscon
ception, which in practice led to disastrous failure, to suppose
that religion could be made the basis of education. Religion
was the flower of life, and no greater fallacy had ever beguiled
the people of this or any other country than to suppose
that it was possible to begin with religion. How could it ever
have entered anybody’s mind, that a child of seven or eight years
of age was made better, or was benefited in any conceivable way,
by repeating unchangeably the words of a catechism which it did
not understand 1 He saw, the other day, a child who had returned
�92
from a high-class school with a prize for divinity. How did he
win it? “I went,” he said, “through the whole of the kings of
Israel, and I said two Psalms by heart.” It was a farce. He
would not have joined the League if he supposed that the educa
tion it proposed was to be godless. If he were in power, he
would propose that the American Common Schools should be
the foundation of our schools. The instructions given to the
teachers and others connected with those schools, as to the
manner in which they were to endeavour to discharge their
functions, were well worth considering. They were read in
Birmingham a short time ago by Lord Lyttelton, but, unfortunately,
very little attention was paid to them. The directions were:—
“ All instructors of youth are to exert their best endeavours to
impress upon the minds of the children and youth committed to
their care, principles of piety and justice, a strict regard to truth,
love of their country, humanity, and universal benevolence,
sobriety, industry, and frugality, chastity, and moderation, and
those other virtues which are the ornaments of human society.”
That was the foundation of the Common School in America. It was
unsectarian ; and in an excellent pamphlet, which everybody ought
to read, in reply to those who said this was a godless education
(how anybody could, after full consideration, say so was inconceiv
able), Mr. Frazer answered : “ If the cultivation of some of the
choicest intellectual gifts bestowed by God—the perception,
memory, taste, judgment, and reason; if the creation of habits
of punctuality, attention, and industry, the reading of a daily
portion of God’s Word, and the daily saying of Christ’s universal
prayer—if all this is said to be the cultivation of clever devils,
it would be vain, I think, to argue with such prejudice.” He
believed that the cultivation of any one of God’s good gifts, or the
attempt to develop any one right principle or worthy habit, so far
as they went, were steps, not only in the direction of morality,
but of piety and real religion. Was it possible that a clergyman
would rather have in his Sunday school, or in his church, to
hear the truths of religion, or the dogmas of theology, a number
of densely ignorant children or other persons, than a corresponding
number of bright, intelligent, well-taught persons, such as the
�93
national schools would produce? Which could be most rapidly
and thoroughly influenced by the teaching of the Sunday school
or the pulpit ? He was sorry to hear that in Birmingham a party
was got up, to oppose and denounce those who felt themselves hound,
by the necessities of the case, to endeavour to educate the masses
of the nation. He did not believe that if any of those men could
get into their minds the real state of things—if they would
endeavour to form a conception of the appalling magnitude of the
facts—they would take the course they seemed determined upon ;
but he trusted that the League would disseminate facts upon facts,
as to the number of utterly destitute children in this country, in
order to rouse the attention of persons who at present seemed to be
satisfied to sit with folded hands, doing nothing to avert the evil
which, it was scarcely any exaggeration to say, threatened to over
whelm the country. What with ignorance, poverty, and crime, in
which so large a portion of the population was steeped, it was
impossible to look to the future without gloomy apprehensions.
If England was to maintain her present position among the nations
—if she was to maintain her high character for order and civiliza
tion—if she was to maintain her pre-eminence for commerce, it
would not be owing to her army, and certainly not to her poor
houses or her gaols, but to her having a great, intelligent, and
well-educated labouring class—that class upon whose intelligence,
honesty, and sobriety the whole strength and existence of the
kingdom depended.
Sir W. Guise : After those who have gone before me, I feel
that my position is doubtful, for I have no pretensions to represent
anybody but myself. We have been favoured of late with long
reports of Social Science meetings, Church Congresses, Episcopal
Conferences, and so on, and at all of them the question of education
has been a prominent item of discussion ; but after reading these
reports with considerable care I have come to the conclusion
that there was no result arrived at whatever. The fact is that in
those assemblies the matter is taken up in so perfunctory
a manner that it is not likely that anything of value could come of
it. Everything charitable, kind, and good is talked of but nothing
of the smallest value in a practical fashion is the result. I come
�94
now among practical men, and I embrace most heartily and
enthusiastically the programme of this platform-—compulsory,
unsectarian, national education. The denominational system has
been tried and it has failed. It has failed to reach a very large,
a very important, and, I may add, a growing and a dangerous class
of the community; and it is evident that that class never will
be reached by the means provided by the denominational system,
the fact being that the teachers under that system cannot shake
themselves free from creeds and catechismsj and I have long
felt myself that these creeds and catechisms, as taught by differ
ent sects, are becoming more and more an impediment to free
Christian intercourse amongst us. I am afraid we shall never
get rid of them—certainly not without a national unsectarian
system of education. I quite agree with the gentleman who has
gone before me, that you cannot have religion until you have
•education. Nobody who has ever been engaged in education can
help feeling that in teaching great moral truths—our duty to
God and man-—we are teaching religion. Education, as has
just been shown, must precede religion. Catechisms are utterly
unintelligible to children in general, and even to a great many
grown-up people. With regard to making money grants to
denominational schools, it should be remembered that if you make
grants to such schools in this country, you cannot refuse them to
the Catholics in Ireland. We have seen their object. The
hierarchy in that country have put forward a programme, desiring to
grasp the whole of the education of the youth of that country. It
is perfectly natural. Every faith that has faith in itself proselytises,
but England and Scotland will not consent to hand over Ireland
to the exclusive control of the priesthood. But you cannot
consistently insist upon that for yourselves, which you are not
prepared to concede to others. I used the same argument the
other day to our bishop, when I declined to attend an episcopal
conference on the subject. I feel that the system of denominational
education, subsidised by the State, has failed and must be given up.
We have then in front of us this fact—that education has become
an absolute necessity, not merely because of the danger of having
an uneducated class amongst us, but because it is impossible to
�95
look abroad upon this dark mass of uneducated humanity without
feeling that they were made for better things—that their powers
were given them for other purposes, than to allow them to waste
in ignorance, vice, and crime ; and it is our business, as a brother
hood, to stretch out our hands to those who cannot help themselves,
and help them to raise themselves in the scale of humanity. I am
not one for pulling down those who are above, to the level of
those who are below. I appreciate far too highly the value of
intellect, civilization, and refinement, to wish to see any portion
taken away ; but I wish to see the day come when those who are
below me may be be able to partake of some of the benefits of the
civilization which I enjoy. For these reasons, I have very great
pleasure in joining the association with all my heart.
The Hon. Auberon Herbert said it was clear that the voluntary
system could not cover the whole work. The word itself, without
any other facts, showed that. In a district which wished to do its
duty, and with parents who would send their children to school, the
voluntary system was all that was necessary ; but what was to be
done in a district which had no wish to do its duty and where
parents would not send their children to school'? Therefore it was
quite clear that by the side of the voluntary system another must
be placed. They were also, he thought, agreed that the system
they were going to introduce must be complete in itself. To use
Mr. Dawson’s excellent words, it must be a system of “ lucid sim
plicity,” and therefore he ventured to hope that before the Congress
broke up they would define the word “unsectarian” somewhat more
precisely than had yet been done. He took that opportunity of
expressing his entire subordination to those with whom he was
acting, in the same manner as Mr. Fawcett had done ; but it would
save them much difficulty hereafter if they construed that word
“ unsectarian” severely and precisely. He believed that if there
was religious teaching at all in the schools, it would be a constant
difficulty, for this reason—that if it was real in its nature, there
would be constant intrigue as to the appointment of a teacher ; and
other difficulties of the same nature would arise. If, on the con
trary, the religious teaching was not to be real—if they were using
a word in order to satisfy a few persons—it was unworthy of them
�96
to put out a sham. It would be to the advantage of all of them
that the State should be manly enough to take upon itself openly
its own duty, leaving the Church to take upon itself its duties. He
scarcely.need add a word as to the fact that unsectarian or secular
education was not godless education. The feeling of the meeting
had been expressed very strongly in favour of the old truth, that the
gates of heaven were upon earth, and that to make good citizens for
the heavenly kingdom, good citizens must be made for the earthly
kingdom. What had to be done was to see how the two systems
-—the new and the old—could be interwoven. That which they
had to ask seemed to him to be this : to be allowed to introduce
their unsectarian system in two instances. One should be whore the
district failed in its duty and did not provide sufficient school
ac’cbmmodation.
In that case the Government or the District
Board should have power to say to the district: You must provide
schools, you must rate yourselves for them, and they must be unsec
tarian. The second case in which there should be power to intro
duce the unsectarian system should be where the district itself
desired it. They had all realized that where there was a rate there
must be an unsectarian system, and where there was an unsectarian
system there must be a fate. As regards the old schools, he did not
see why they should not for a long time maintain their place by the
side of the new system, if only (and this was absolutely necessary)
they made certain concessions. A system of compulsion could not
be carried out unless the schools accepted a thoroughly satisfactory
conscience clause, unless they put themselves under Government
inspection, and unless they kept a register of attendance. The
present system need not be deranged further than by the acceptance
of these three things. They had heard and would hear a greatmany appeals against the proposed system, in the name of religion.
He would warn those who made such appeals that it was very pos
sible, if this controversy lasted a very long time—-should the over
whelming necessity for the education of two millions of children be
not speedily satisfied (he did not state the numbers on his own
authority, but took them as they had been given)—should those
two millions of children be left to perish in ignorance, whilst the
“ religious difficulty” was debated, it was very possible that the
�97
words “religion” and “ irreligion” might change places, and it would
be thought that there could he no act more irreligious than that of
those, who would be responsible for the delay. When he saw a
large part of the working classes, as a pledge of their earnestness,
willing to submit themselves to a law of compulsion, not for their
advantage, but for that of their children, he felt that that act on
their part, was far more religious than the words of the Archbishop
of York,when he appealed to the working men, to allow their selfish
fears and jealousies, to stand between them and this act of self
sacrifice.
The meeting then adjourned.
SOIREE IK THE TOWN HALL.
The members of the League were entertained by the Mayor in
the Town Hall, in the evening, at a Soiree. There were upwards of
800 ladies and gentlemen present.
G
�SECOND DAY.
On the reassembling of the meeting on Wednesday morning,
the Chairman (Mr. Dixon, M.P.), announced that Aiderman
Thomas Phillips had given £1,000 to the funds of the League.
COMPULSION.
The Rev. Dr. Rowland Williams, Vicar of Broadchalke, Wilts,
read a paper on “ The Legislative Enforcement of Attendance, par
ticularly in Rural Districts.” He said :—I find myself in this paper
arguing some things which do not, it seems, need arguing in Bir
mingham at all, and therefore I shall not read all that I have
written. For instance, I find myself saying a good word for the
Conscience Clause, which a gentleman from Merthyr Tydvil
yesterday said was a delusion and a snare. That arises from the
fact that in Wiltshire, in a meeting of the clergy, I have been the
only clergyman in the room who did not sign a petition against the
Conscience Clause, as being too liberal and sacrificing too much.
And just before I left South Wales to go into Wiltshire, the same
thing happened. There, also, I was the only one who would not
sign a petition against the Conscience Clause, because it gave up too
much of the rights of the Church. Hence you see how it arises
that a person of average sanity otherwise, comes here to say a good
word for that, which you once offered, but will not offer again. I
shall pass over some matters in my paper which are of an antedeluvian character, and touch on some others lightly which are
subjects for reasonable argument. I shall leave out some remarks
on the agricultural labourer, intended to show that he is not so
ignorant as is sometimes said, and that he is not tyrannised
over by the farmers. Then I go on as follows :—The range
of human thought is so complex and diversified by ramifica
�99
tions, that hardly any question is so simple (e. g. the idiom of
a particle) as not to entail upon persons treating it, the risk of
being occasionally pushed forward into the discussion of difficult
problems. A similar remark would hold good almost equally, of tha
field of human action. Only, as the mass of mankind are compelled
to act in some way, common sense has taught them the necessity
of habitually setting aside, with a view to joint action, questions
however important, not relevant to the matter in hand. The most
ardent politicians on different sides, are not necessarily prevented
from transacting commercial business together. Institutions, such
as hospitals or asylums, in which human suffering appeals to bene
volence, present a still more obvious field in which the propriety
of setting aside the jealousies incidental to divided opinion meets
with general acknowledgment. It may be true, that the strongest
moral inducements to the benevolent action in which men agree,
are derived from the religious sentiment in which they differ. But
such a circumstance is not found fatal to co-operation ; nor would
it, I apprehend, be a just conclusion, that joint action for a definite
purpose implies an absence of proper zeal in respect of other duties
or aspirations, upon which unanimity has not yet been attained.
On this principle, although my personal feeling, no less than any
clerical prepossession, might induce me to prefer the lively presence
of the religious element in any system of teaching ; yet, if either
the intellectual differences which we have been taught to associate
with the religious sentiment, or the social organisations which have
arisen as their embodiments, impede the introduction into our
schools of theological standards, I still desire the school to be
preserved, and those objects of school teaching on which we can
agree promoted, even at the price of setting aside whatever becomes
an entanglement. I refrain from pursuing this topic, because in
those districts with which I am best acquainted, the conscience
clause, when enforced as a reality, sufficiently meets the difficulty,
and the treatment of the more complex cases of large towns will
fall into abler hands. Turning to the special subject of this paper,
the desirableness of enforcing attendance in schools, especially in
rural districts, I find myself still met by that complexity of con
siderations which belongs to action of a public kind. It would be
�100
foolish, to recommend a legislative policy on this subject, without
considering the objections to such a policy which arise from the
social circumstances of the country. Hence I must ask so much of
your attention, as may show that this aspect of things has not been
forgotten, to the condition of the labourer in the south-west of
England. We do not, in Wiltshire, admit the accuracy of the highlycoloured pictures, which benevolent writers have sometimes drawn
of a dead level of ignorance among our labourers. We find many
varieties in the race ; some very good, and, in proportion to their
rank in life, intelligent; others of various degrees of badness. We
see no great wit in classing together men so unlike each other,
under the generic name Hodge, anymore than in classifying
literary artists as Dodge. Again, we do not admit that farmers
are, as a general rule, tyrannical, or forgetful of the claim of the
labouring class to humane consideration. The price of labour is
what it will fetch ; and farmers can, as little as any other class in the
community, permit themselves to be dragged down into pauperism,
by undertaking payments on a large scale, beyond the value of
that which they receive. One of the primary requisites for their
business, amidst the vicissitudes of the seasons and the growing
magnitude of their transactions, is nerve ; and one object upon which
nerve has to employ itself is the maintenance of discipline. Even
on the strong supposition, that the maintenance of a due supply of
labourers in adequate comfort should be naturally regarded as a
preliminary charge on the land, the class upon which the benevo
lent portion of such a requirement would justly fall, are not the
immediate employers, whose rents have been fixed according to the
common rules of demand and supply. Again, observing, how much
is deducted by unfavourable weather, and by short days, from the
value of the services of labourers (about three-fourths of whom the
farmer maintains through the year), I must demur to the
criticisms often lavished upon the heads of agricultural employers,
as part of the wrong habitually done to silent men. But after
all qualifications, the life of our rural labourer is hard. Suppos
ing his weekly nine shillings, virtually stretched by piece-work,
harvest-time, and allowances, to thirteen (which is an extremely,
favourable estimate), it barely covers the first necessaries of
�101
life • and, if the family are numerous, hardly gives them bread.
Fire, clothing, rent, the distant approach to luxury involved in tea,
sugar, bacon, are still to he met. When one first observes these
people one exclaims, “ How do they ever live?” We gradually dis
cover that they live in part, by the aid of their children’s labour.
From six or seven years old to sixteen or seventeen, the young
rustic goes through a rising scale of crow-scaring, and horse keeping,
for which he receives wages rising from eighteen-pence, to six or
seven shillings. Hence the boys in a family are a treasure. The
girls are, in our account, not so useful. Now the question to
which I must ask the attention of the members of our League,
and for the sake of which these details have been introduced,
is this :—Are we justified in asking the Legislature to interpose,
not only between parent and child, but between the children
and their bread; or in desiring to remove, in our scholastic
zeal, into a sphere of book-work, these poor children of the
poor, who are at present more usefully employed? Would
there not be some cruelty in such removal? Nay, even some
danger of so narrowing the possibilities of subsistence, as to
bring the parental and self-preserving instincts into collision ?
Again, this question comes clogged with an allegation. It is
alleged, that unless children go young into the fields they will not
be worth their salt; that they are not improved by schooling in
books, for the work which will be the business of their life.
Hence we are invited to let well alone, or to fall back upon the
voluntary system, which suits the genius of Englishmen, and has
made them what they are; and if there be any point at which
the influence of agricultural employers is injuriously exercised, it
is in the form of pressure, to secure the services of children at an
age tender in the judgment of the parents, who profit by it; more
so, in that of physiological observers. Agriculture is not the
only employment on which discussions of this kind have been
known. Our answer to the question raised will be found most
easily by a reference to the existence of the Factory Acts, but
more convincingly by a consideration of the principle on which
these Acts are founded, while it may be fortified by moral reflections.
We may ascribe in part to Christianity, in part to the growing
�102
humanity of the age, and, not least, to the democratic element in
our constitution, the wide acceptance of this principle—that the
human being is not to be altogether sacrificed to mechanical excel
lence in his particular calling. Man is to be made man before he
is labourer or artisan. Suppose we could develope some useful
animal instincts more strongly by surrendering what is human, we
ought not to do so. Thus, if it were true (which is a large con
cession for argument’s sake) that a little early book-work dis
inclined men for plodding field-work, we are still bound to awaken
in them a nature more than merely animal. Indeed, the possi
bility of such a collateral issue being raised, tends to throw light
on our main question ; for it indicates the existence on the part of
the parents, of so low a degree of interest on the subject as may
almost be called indifference, and it fastens our attention on the
prevalence among employers of views such as our League may
fairly counteract. Against the element of passive indifference, and
against such a low estimate of education as amounts to dis
couragement, the Legislature of the country may be called upon to
set its higher intelligence in operation. The province of an
enlightened Legislature comprehends care for the physical develop
ment of the young, and (as I have contended) for the possibilities
of their moral or mental training. Say, that in its action towards
these ends the Legislature, should indirectly suggest to our peasantry
something of that foresight which their social superiors are com
pelled to exercise in marrying, or something of that effort, on
behalf of their children’s minds which they acknowledge a duty
on behalf of their bodies—and say even that it opens to charitable
persons a new object, or fresh direction, for the aid which they often
lavish upon the poor—none of these collateral results would be so
injurious as to destroy the argument for the enforcement of primary
education. My proposal to the League is this : Let the Legislature
be asked, in pursuance of its own inquiries, to fix an age (my own
tentative suggestion would be ten) within which field-labour and
stable-labour should be restricted in kind, or forbidden altogether.
Let there be a second limit of age (I would tentatively suggest
twelve), within which employment of boys should only be per
mitted upon the production of satisfactory proof, that schooling for
�103
three or four years has secured fair results. There would be no
difficulty in either creating an officer for each union, hundred, or
larger district, or in selecting from our overseers, surveyors,
inspectors, tax-gatherers, some one who should be charged with
the duty of verifying a certificate from the Government Inspector
of Schools. Only I would deprecate the selection for this purpose
of the clergyman, whose province, lying properly in persuasion,
ought not to be encumbered with compulsory requirements.
Suppose such a system were enforced, it would reach in the first
place all the outlying squatters on the borders of parochial civilisa
tion, whose children are too often a reproach to us. Secondly, it
would stimulate opinion among the average peasantry; and,
thirdly, it would throw the shield of its powerful protection over
the mother, who too often sees her child taken from school sooner
than she likes to think of, and sooner than necessity requires.
Fourthly, it would enable us to bring to bear upon a riper age those
instructive agencies which, in the absence of preliminary training,
are almost thrown away. The night-school, of which I speak from
experience, cannot possibly be a substitute for a proper amount of
early day schooling; as anyone who observes how many of the
higher classes, after a day of hard business or hard pleasure, sit
down in the evening to the study of a Greek author, will easily
conceive. Rain and darkness, with a mile or two to walk, wet
clothes and weary eyes, hardly suit the first initiation in the
mysteries of book-work. But where the taste for reading, writing,
and calculating has been early awakened, the night-school affords a
chance of such a recurrence to such things as may be a refresh
ment. A like remark would hold good of penny readings,
lectures, newspapers. (Local journals, with local news, and an
element of religious gossip, are welcome ; but we are a long way in
Wiltshire from the bewildering topics of London journalism). I
do not speak without having tried these things. My experience
convinces me that all such agencies, and I will venture to add that
(supposing the Christianity of England to be something different
from that of Abyssinia), the instructions of the pulpit, would have a
more wholesome or energetic operation, if preceded in early life by
some three years of compulsory education for the labourer’s
�104
child. The suggestion which others have made of half-time, or of
requiring school attendance for a portion of the day, or of the year,
is one which I could only admit as valuable, upon the same con
dition as the agencies already glanced at—namely, upon the con
dition that some three years of continuous education had been its
preliminary. Nor ought mere infancy to count, if included in these
three years ? The ultimate result aimed at would be the production
of a more intelligent—therefore, we must trust, a happier—order of
men, in our rural parishes. The fear that such men would be found
less devoted to their work, or less skilful in it, less virtuous, or
harder to govern, seems to me the most chimerical fear that ever
was entertained. Men are far more easily governed than brutes;
only they require to have the fitness of things shown to them. A
public school, recruited from our higher classes, is far more amenable
to discipline than would be the same number of young rustics,
with their alternations of blind credulity and obstinate incredulity,
both guided, not by knowledge, but by invincible self-will.
Schools do wisely not to pretend to anticipate the experience of
life. But intelligence counts for something, even in handling a
spade, certainly in managing a steam-engine. That intelligence
should apply itself to the improvement of its own condition, does
not involve unfaithfulness to the interests of its employer. One
of the most direct, and in my judgment one of the happiest,
results of education, would be to increase the facilities for com
paring the value of labour in different parts of the world. It
is not important that our labourers should attend the meet
ings of the British Association; but it is very desirable that
they should be able to inform themselves how to place their con
dition on a level with their fellows at home or abroad. Nor does
it appear to me that there would be any injustice to employers, if
such a peaceful and voluntary redistribution of labour as I con
template, were to leave the natural laws of demand and supply free
to operate in the assessment of wages, instead of permitting these
to be governed by a calculation (perhaps humane) of the pos
sibilities of subsistence. At present, a certain percentage of the
labourers in each parish is unattached, or employed only out of
charity during the slack season of the year. If such men tend to
�105
keep down the price of labour, they are also a perpetual threat to
the rates. Hence a voluntary sifting of our rural population
would be a gain to the remaining peasantry; but also to the
ratepayer. Probably, in time, rates might be much diminished,
though hardly swept away. Suppose, as another result, that our
political economists and our legislators should find themselves
called upon to exercise their joint sciences in rendering the con
dition of the labourer, by means of house and pasture-land,
so attractive as to prevent the depopulation of districts already
sparsely populated, I should consider the result not unworthy
of means so peaceful and so innocent as simple education.
It would not grieve me if, by a natural process, meat and milk
were earned, and enjoyed more largely as earnings, by the poor
and by their children. This plan of enabling our poor to place
themselves by intelligence, on a level with their fellows else
where, has nothing in common with schemes for the artificial
depression of the higher, in order to bring them down to
the lower. Again, we should not grudge the labourer whatever
acquired habit of intelligent locomotion may be requisite, to
prevent a plentiful harvest, which gladdens so many classes in the
community, from bringing to him only a lowering of his wages. I
am not blaming a process due to natural causes; but I desire the
equally natural means of adjustment. Again, if the waste of life
in our large towns requires constantly to be repaired by an influx
from the rural population, such a process would become more
salutary as the raw material was improved. "We are apt m rural
districts ‘ to conceive of society in general, as a Providential
scheme, in which protection is the duty of one part, and submis
sion of the other. While I readily acknowledge the just mutual
interdependence of all ranks, and no word ever escapes me
in my ministrations calculated to set class against class, I see
reason sometimes to regret a taint of surviving feudalism, and to
dread the spread of ingrained mendicancy. It is not wholesome
that any class of men should be unable to help themselves. The
truest, the most permanent, of all forms of charity, would be that
which should restore this almost forgotten power. Because educa
tion is the most effective instrument to that holy end, it deserves
�106
promotion ; and because it cannot be adequately promoted without
aid from the strong arm of the law, I applaud this National Educa
tion League for inscribing on its banners the unpopular word com
pulsion. I hat word ought not in our age to have the same alarm
ing sound, as it had under the dynasty of the Stuarts or the Tudors.
For in proportion as our Constitution receives its full popular de
velopment, it ought to be discerned that the State is only a name
for the People, giving itself on a large scale the benefit of self-conscious
organisation. Here the jealousies, too natural in times of repression,
with which the smaller social bodies once regarded the central
authority, ought to be softened until they ultimately pass away,
and the great commonwealth of our country, expressing its mind
deliberately in the Senate, should be regarded (in the Apostle’s
words) as the nurse and mother of us all. If I have not
wearied the meeting, I will venture to add a few illustrative
remarks on some collateral points. It may be assumed that
this League will not have for its object the establishment of
new schools, to the detriment of those which exist in satisfactory
working order. Again, it is by no means a necessity that the sup
port of a school by rates, or other form of public money, should
interfere with the exaction of such payments on the part of the
children as may be easily obtained, or of such as may be found
useful in giving the education a value in the eyes of the parents.
Again, it does not follow, because we deliberately set aside such
sectarian forms of religion as include proselytism as an essential
element, that we are therefore bound to surrender the contribu
tions to man’s intellectual growth which may be derived from
literature of a sacred kind. What is called the denominational
difficulty, may seem in some cases to be only merging itself in the
form of the Scriptural difficulty; and this may happen the more in
cases where religious bodies are not agreed as to the relations of the
co-ordinate authority of the Bible, the Church, and the personal
Conscience, or Reason. But I am persuaded no such difficulty need
be found insuperable in practice. Most religious persons are
agreed that, on the ground of reverence, the Bible should not be
degraded into a mechanical lesson-book for reading, as a primer or
a horn-book. Most men of the world (like Mr. Roebuck, at Salis
�107
bury) are eager in proclaiming that many useful lessons are to be
learnt from modern history and from secular literature. Again, all
persons who have accepted frankly the principle of the Con
science Clause (though I fear its operation still needs extension and
enforcement) will concede, and even contend, that denominational
inferences from Scripture lessons are not to be pressed upon children
against the wish of their parents. It is a matter of experience, that
very energetic Dissenters will let their children attend the schools of
a clergyman, whose doctrines they disapprove, provided they are sure
of his good faith in the matter of abstinence from proselytism.
So when once it is understood that in schools supported by public
money, rates or taxes, the Bible is to have but an indirectly
religious influence, and is not to be employed for any denominational
purpose whatsoever, the difficulty will vanish. There will still
remain a treasury of sacred poetry, history, precepts, religious
instances and examples, which may subserve the noblest ends of the
teacher’s office, without prejudice to the conscience of the parent.
But if influential persons, or important bodies of men, remain
amongst us, who are not contented with such a practical application
of the principle of the conscience clause, but contend for the
enforcement upon children of points in which large classes of the
community are not agreed, the survival of such persons, or bodies,
amongs' us, is one of the strongest reasons which could be devised
for calling into existence this national League for securing the
education of every child in England and Wales. Let me end
with a story, and a reflection. A man in my parish could not
read, and his wife could not read; but they possessed a book
the library of their household. He said, with touching gen
erosity, “ Best give him (i.e., the book), to some one else; he is
no use to any of we.” Now, it is often imagined that such sayings
belong to the generation whose childhood was in days long by
gone ; when “ there was not the talk of schools there is now.”
My own observation convinces me that the tares grow as fast as
the wheat grows ; that the cultivation of human life is a constant
struggle against enemies, whose activity equals, if not exceeds any
which is exercised against them. Hence I conclude that we
require stronger remedies than anything short of legislative action
�108
can supply. If we continue in our present course, sending infancy
to school, childhood into the stable and the field, manhood to the
beerhouse, old age to the workhouse, the second generation
hence will, in fifty years more, still find men whose library
is a solitary book, and who may be ignorant enough, if not
generous enough, to exclaim, “ Best give him to some one else; he
is no use to any of we.”
ALDERMAN RUMNEY ON COMPULSION.
Aiderman Rumney, of Manchester, read a paper on “ Compul
sory Education.” He said :—The present educational system has
been in operation a sufficient time to test its value. The controversy
with the voluntaries, commencing with the introduction of the
Minutes of Council, ceased long ago, and there has been no hin
drance to the efficient working of the system. The Government
has rather been in advance of the people, in its willingness to con
tribute funds for educational purposes. The voluntaries, although
withdrawing from the controversy, have not withdrawn from their
share of their work, and the results are—the educational condition
of England at the present moment. What might have been the
state of things if the voluntary principle, pure and simple, had
been adopted, cannot now be determined. Its advocates may say
with some truth, “ It has never had a fair trial;” but it is certain
that the schools aided by public funds, and the schools supported
by voluntary contributions, have not together succeeded in educat
ing more than a small _portion of the children of the working
classes, and that both in country districts and in populous places
there is a mass of ignorance truly appalling. The Duke of Marl
borough may express his satisfaction with things as they are, but
most men who have given attention to the subject are generally
dissatisfied, while scarcely a meeting is held in town or country
at which the ignorance of the people is not deplored, and methods
of instruction urged upon them. Without troubling the Conference
with voluminous statistics, I would only refer to two or three state
ments as illustrative and typical. In a return called the “ Parishes
Return,” made to the House of Lords, it appears there are 14,877
parishes in England and Wales. Of these only 7,40G are reported
�109
by the Committee of Council as having schools fulfilling the required
conditions of approved schools ; 2,779 as inspection schools, but
not entitled to capitation fees ; and 4,692 parishes respecting which
there is no evidence of any good schools at all, although of course
in many such, doubtless, good schools not inspected may exist. The
character of these 7,406 approved schools may be learned from the
fact, that of all the children registered in 1868, only 60 per cent,
were sufficiently advanced to be presented for examination to Her
Majesty’s Inspectors; while of these only 67 per cent, passed in
reading, writing, and arithmetic ; and only a fourth were prepared
for an examination in the higher standards. Canon Morris, at one
time Inspector of Schools in Staffordshire, wrote thus :—“ Con
sidering how many schools are still inefficient, and how in the best
schools the majority of the children leave before reaching the
first class, I fear I should be rather over than under the mark
if I said that one-fifth or one-sixth part of the children of the
country are being reached by our improved system of educa
tion.” Inspector the Rev. W. W. Howard, speaking of his district
jn Devonshire, says :—“ Looking to the small number of schools
in the district in which efficient teaching is given, and
the small result of such teachings from irregularity of attendance
and other causes, I am convinced that some legislative measure is
needed, which shall secure better means of education, and shall
compel the attendance of children, that they may benefit by the
education offered.” Of Birmingham, Mr. Jesse Collings says :—
“Out of 45,000 children there were 21,696 wandering about the
streets, neither at school nor at work; and 26,000 that could
neither read nor write.” About the same may be said of Man
chester—the lowest estimate given of children who ought to be at
school and are not, is from 10,000 to 20,000, the highest from
40,000 to 50,000. The Rev. H. W. Bellairs, another inspector,
writes thus : “ The present condition of education in Great Britain
may be thus stated:—one half of the children of the working
classes between three and thirteen years of age, are under no schoolastic education at all • and of the other half it cannot be truly
said that, under our present system, they will ever be half
educated.” One country place may be taken as illustrating the
�110
educational condition of the agricultural districts; the national
schoolmaster of Evesham writes :—“ I have been in charge of this
school for five years, and from my observation and experience
during that time, I am of opinion that there is a deplorable amount
of ignorance amongst the children of the labouring class in this
neighbourhood ; I have become very strongly impressed with the
conviction, that our present educational appliances are quite in
adequate to cope with the appalling ignorance, and moral destitu
tion so prevalent in this locality.” Such, then, is the condition of
England after a lengthened trial of the system now in operation.
Doubtless there are exceptions. The northern counties are in this
respect superior to the southern, while in many towns a larger pro
portion of children will be found attending school, than in Bir
mingham and Manchester, but in no place, whether in town or
country, is the educational condition of the people satisfactory, nor
is there any hope of improvement with the present system. It is
not progressive, has no tendency to propagate itself; it helps those
who help themselves which is well enough, but the children of
those who have neither the means nor the will, it leaves to mental
and moral starvation; the rich schools are supplied adundantly,
the poor are sent empty away. “ To him that hath shall be given ;
from him that hath not, shall be taken away ”—not that which he
hath, but that which he might have, if he had only the means where
with to obtain it. The system has failed in enlisting the support
and sympathy of any but those actually interested in its manage
ment. In country districts, the clergyman is almost the only person
outside the school who takes any interest in the work within ;
there is no active and equal co-operation. He may ask, and some
times obtain the help of his neighbours, but they soon leave him to
his duties and responsibilities—they say, it is a part of the parson’s
work,* and does not concern them. In towns there are committees
and more equality between clergymen and laymen ; and there is
oversight and vigour for a time, but in the absence of anything
stimulating and requiring thought and effort, a committee soon
becomes a soulless form, only roused to periodic action for the
purpose of securing as much money from the State as possible, at
the least cost of time and labour. There is no competition among
�Ill
schools, nothing to stimulate teachers and managers; and that
which ought to interest a whole neighbourhood—the education of
the children—fails to secure more sympathy and support, than a
few annual subscriptions paid grudgingly towards the school funds.
Then, they are avowedly religious schools, established on tho
assumption that the State is bound to see to the religious instruc
tion of the young; and so all religious creeds and opinions are,
by authority of the State, taught in the day schools. Roman
Catholic doctrine and history, Protestant doctrine and history,
each declaring the other erroneous; Jewish creeds, declaring both
wrong; and, if the Mormons are numerous enough to establish
schools of their own, (for the Mormon religion is permitted by law),
then the State would pay for teaching that the Mormon Bible is
the only revealed word, and all else obsolete and erroneous. What
is truth ? is replied to by “ Whatever you please. It is of no
consequence; only let something be taught which you call religion,
and that will be sufficient.” So the Government, while compelling,
declines to interfere with the religious teaching; it merely asks
whether the managers are satisfied, with the religious condition of
the school, and if an affirmative answer be given, the capitation
grant is allowed without further question. Thus, under the shelter
of a piece of ill-concealed hypocrisy, if the managers of a
purely secular school will enforce the reading of a single verse in
the Bible daily—no matter what it may be—and declare themselves
satisfied, State aid would be afforded; while, if they are honest
enough to declare it is not a religious school, and there is no
religious teaching, it will be withheld. A singular illustration of
this anomaly was recently brought before the President of the
Council, in order, if possible, to obtain a remedy. In connection
with a large number of Mechanics’ Institutions, which are for
purely secular teaching, there are day schools as well as night
classes taught by certified teachers. These being secular are
denied the capitation grant, but if the same evening class pupils
taught by the same masters are removed to a building—a National
School for instance—where the day school is an inspected religious
school, then the night pupils are included in the returns, and the
capitation fee is paid for them. The religious influence of another
�112
class of pupils, taught in the same building in the day
extending to them as evening pupils, is as curious an illustration
of religion by proxy, or imputed righteousness, as will be found
in Church or State, in this or any civilized or uncivilized country.
Surely it is time these absurdities were committed to the Paradise
of Fools, and we adopted a course manly and intelligent in our
dealing with this question. We exhort men to cease their religious
strife, to live in harmony, to form Christian unions and alliances,
and at the same time commence with the propagation of all these
differences with the children in the day school—tell them on the one
hand how very naughty it is for men to differ so much about religion,
and on the other that it is necessary all these differences should be
perpetuated at the expense of the State, and as a part of their
education. The remedy generally proposed for meeting our educa
tional difficulties is an extension of the Factory Half-time Act.
This Act provides that no children shall be employed in factories
under a certain age, without at the same time attending school a
certain number of hours per week. Regarded as a whole, and
compared with what it might have accomplished, it has been a con
spicuous failure. Doubtless, in cases where the employer takes a
personal interest in the education of his workpeople, the Act has
worked advantageously; but such cases are the exception, not the
rule, and there is not a large town in the Factory districts, where
hundreds of young persons who have attended school at half-times
may not be found unable to read or write, and in fact almost as
ignorant, as if they had never attended school at all. Mr. Redgrave,
Inspector of -Factories, in his Report just presented, declares that
“ the present half-time system cannot be allowed to remain as it is.
It is a state of things which the Legislature did not intend, and
which cannot continue unredressed
and he then offers some sug
gestions for its improvement. The provisions of the Factory Act
have been extended to other trades and occupations where young
children are employed, but there has not been time yet to
determine with what results. Mr. Redgrave writes that he has no
doubt, “ when the Act of 1867 has become more familiar to the
manufacturers, we shall find fewer objections to the employ
ment of half-time children. But,” he adds, “ it is well to
�113
consider what the Act of 1867 has done in this respect,
as a guide to us in connection with that great subject which
in effect it has left untouched—the education o£ the people."
Charges of indifference have been brought against employers, but
the reply is obvious—it is not their business to attend to the
education of their workpeople ; if tjiey find them employment it
may bo required that it shall be in healthy rooms, and employ
ment which shall not in itself be unhealthy, and that they pay
them adequate wages : they are responsible for employing children
without a certificate and suffer the consequences ; they ought not
to be made responsible for determining the value of the certificate
presented. The cardinal defect of the Half-time Act is that it assumes
the child learns at school, but does not require it to be proved. The
certificate is given simply for school attendance, not school attain
ments ; and so, with indifferent parents and children, and too often
not efficient teachers, the children pass out of the period of bondage
to that of freedom without reaping the advantages intended by the
Act. The mind is set upon the termination of the school period, not
on learning; earning wages is a luxury, attending school a sacrifice.
This defect suggests the remedy. If there are nearly one or two
millions of children who ought to be at school but are not—if all
attempts have failed in converting ignorant parents to the conviction
that it is their duty and interest to secure the education of their
children, somehow or other, then nothing short of compulsory school
attendance, or rather compulsory school attainments, will effect the
object; an Act simple in its main features, and modified in its details,
as might be found expedient, would be needed. Regarding attend
ance at school as secondary, it would make it a criminal offence,
punishable by fine or imprisonment, for a parent or guardian to
allow a child to grow up without instruction; and a like offence for
an employer to engage and pay wages to a child without the pro
duction of a certificate of attainments. In this way the strongest
possible inducement would be held out both to parent and child—
not simply to attend school, but to obtain the instruction by which
alone he could earn wages. Self interest would quicken the
apathetic ; no knowledge no wages, would soon fill the schools, and
a generation would not pass away before the laws of compulsory
H
�114
school attendance would be unnecessary. There would be no
great difficulty in fixing the standard of attainments, or securing a
proper examination ; these things are done at present by the
Oxford and Cambridge Universities, by the Society of Arts, the
Government in the Science Class examination, and other bodies.
It is assumed the examinations would be confined to what are
called secular subjects. A complete education is not contemplated;
but rather that elementary training of the faculties of hand, eye, and
mind, by which the educational process may be carried forward—
the culture and use of the implements rather than the work they
are destined to perform. Primarily, reading, writing, and arithmetic
—possibly geography, history, grammar, drawing, &c.—would form
the subjects upon which examinations would be held, the particular
standard being adjusted to meet the requirements of the case, as in
the examinations already referred to ; it would be determined by
competent and independent authority, and modified from time to
time as might be found necessary. It is satisfactory on this point
to be fortified by the opinion of Mr. Redgrave, Inspector of Factories,
already referred to, who recommends, in suggesting improvements
in the Factory and Employment of Children Acts, “ that no young
person under the age of 16 should be employed for full time unless
a certificate be produced, given in a prescribed form by a certified
schoolmaster, minister, inspector of schools, or justice of the peace,
certifying that the young person can read and write well, and work
sums in the four first rules of arithmetic.” It may be further
remarked, that no country has in modern times secured an educated
people in the absence of compulsory school attendance. In Prus
sia, Switzerland, partly in Holland—the best educated European
States—school attendance is compulsory. In Canada it is the
same, and in the United States it is now, or has been; in some
States the law has ceased to be operative, superseded by the stronger
law of public opinion ; in others, where school attendance is not
satisfactory, a renewal of the compulsory law is suggested as the
only remedy. The principal objections to compulsory school attend
ance are that it is un-English, an interference with the liberty of
the subject, and would not be submitted to by the people. With
a large number of people everything new is un-English. “ That
�115
which has been shall be” is with them a maxim incapable of refu
tation ; they look back on the past, not for lessons to guide, but for
precedents to follow. Through predilections and prejudices every
question is viewed, seldom directly and abstractedly, and hence
almost all accepted truths have had to fight their way through
contempt, obloquy, misrepresentation, and argument, to victoiy.
There is this encouragement—many things formerly regarded as
un-English are now established. All legislation on social questions,
Sanitary Acts, Health and Nuisances Removal Acts, are of this
description. A man cannot build his house as he pleases, so far
has law invaded the domain of social and private life; and yet the
people are not in rebellion-—nay, rather, the demand is for more,
not less of legislation in this direction. Doubtless, it would be
better if people could be induced to do without so much legal
enactment. Whatever people can do for themselves they ought to
do it better than the State, in its organized capacity, can do it for
them ; but, unfortunately, they do not attend to their own well-being,
even when the duty is obvious ; and although experience is valuable
as a teacher, her school fees are so heavy, that of late years there
has grown up a disposition to devolve many duties upon the State,
which were formerly regarded as beyond its legitimate province.
That compulsory school attendance interferes with the liberty of
the parent is unquestionable, but only so far as the parent violates
the primitive and inherent rights of the child. The child has the
same right to have the mind fed as the body, and if the neglect to
afford proper nourishment for the body exposes the parent to
punishment, there is no reason why the same or even greater
punishment should not be inflicted when he neglects to supply the
necessary food required by the mind. In one sense all law inter
feres with personal liberty, but only when the exercise of liberty
interferes with the rights of others. To punish the burglar is to
interfere with his liberty to plunder; to punish the parents for
withholding from their children the right to be instructed is to do
the same thing. The State takes upon itself the guardianship of
the rights of the weak and helpless, as against the strong, but the
law in each case is founded upon man’s moral nature, is not afbitary, and would be respected. Compulsory school attendance • need
�116
not necessarily interfere with, the liberty of instruction. The child
may be taught at home or at school; the only obligation is that he
shall. not grow up in ignorance. In bringing children into the
world, parents have contracted certain obligations towards them—
they are bound to bring them up and fit them for citizenship ; but
these children are helpless, and unable to secure the fulfilment of
the-obligation, and hence the State interferes as their guardian, to
obtain from the parent, if he is able—and by some other means if
he is not—the completion of the contract into which he had
entered. That there would be cases of hardship where children
are employed and earning wages is likely enough—all social
laws press heavily on some—but regard for the child’s permanent
welfare should over-ride all considerations of temporary advantage
to the parent; and surely it is a less evil to restrain a parent from
Eving upon the earnings of a child, than that the child should be
deprived of the instruction by which he can earn his own bread in
after life, and discharge properly the duties of a citizen. The evil
would not be serious—it would be a displacement of labour to some
extent. There is a certain quantity of juvenile work to be done in
the country, and if children of six to eight years are prevented
doing it, older children and more efficient will be employed for the
purpose. On this subject Monsieur Cousan says : £k A law which
compels parents and guardians under penalties to secure the in
struction of children, is based on the principle that the degree of
education necessary to the knowledge and practice of our duties is
of itself the first of all duties; and,” he adds, “ I do not know a
single country where this law is absent, where popular education
flourishes.” Would a law so inoperative be observed? It is said
such an. amount of hostility would be created as to render the law
inoperative. It may be so, but is it not more likely the influence
would be altogether in the other direction ? The Act would be the
corporate seal of the nation set to the declaration that the children
shall be educated ; it would have the support of the majority, of all
who are really favourable to the nation’s advancement. On parents
disposed to have their children instructed it would exert no
pressure, would not be felt oppressive; they are doing exactly
what the Legislature declares they ought to do. On the vicious only
�117
would it press heavily. In the middle class, and a large section of
the working men, the feeling in favour of education is strong and
general; and this feeling, supported hy public law, would create an
opinion and influence upon the class below tending to secure
respect and observance, and calculated to render criminal proceed
ings infrequent, and in time unnecessary. Again, it may be
questioned whether there is much force in the opinion so
frequently urged, that abolishing school fees, and supporting the
schools out of the taxation of the country, would tend to lower the
value of instruction in the estimation of the people. It can hardly
be conceived that parents, having a due regard for the welfare of
their children, will neglect to send them to school because they
have no occasion to send at the same time 4d. or 6d. per week as pay
ment for the instruction; and it is still less conceivable that those who
have no such regard for their offspring will make this an excuse for
their negligence, and urge that if the sacrifice involved in the per
formance of their duty were greater, they would be more disposed to
undertake it. Be it as it may, there is the fact that a large number
of the children of the working class are without instruction—a
sufficient number to suggest the question, “What will they do with
us ? ” if we cannot do something more with them, than has been
done. Parents do not send them to school, and will not', and no
other remedy is suggested but compulsion. But if compulsion
is applied to one it must be to all ; the law must be equal in its
dealings. Ignorance and criminality, as a matter of fact, are insepar
ably connected. One of the functions of Government is- the
repression of crime, and, in the interests of society and the welfare
of the helpless child, it surely may interfere to prevent the abuse of
parental authority. At present a parent may do whatever he pleases
with his child, short of actual bodily cruelty ; he may educate it or he
may not, and the law does not interfere. Substitute the imperative
for the conditional—you shall for you may—and there will be a
prospect that in a few years our educational condition will no longer
be a bye-word and reproach to all intelligent foreigners. In carrying
out this law of compulsory school attendance, it is clear schools must
be provided; it does not necessarily follow they should be free,
except to the children of parents who cannot afford to pay. Whether
�118
they should be free to all is fairly open to discussion, bnt all certi
fied schools, whether without school fees or with them, on the part
of those able to pay, should be open without restriction or limita
tion in so far as they are aided and inspected by public authorityThey should neither be denominational nor sectarian schools, nor, in
the ordinary sense in which the term is used, should they be religious
schools. It is not now regarded as the paramount duty of the State
to attend to the religious interests of the people. The world is
ultimately ruled by thought, and it cannot be questioned that the
thought of England and Europe is strongly in favour of leaving
religion to individual conscience, withdrawing it from the sphere
of law, and, in spite of popes and prelates, leaving every man to
settle for himself what form of religion he shall adopt, and what
mode of worship he shall observe. But it does not follow that all
existing schools cannot be utilized and used, and only if and when
found inadequate need new schools be erected : the simple provision
would be that during ordinary school hours the instruction should
be confined to the subjects in which examinations are conducted,
and dogmatic religious teaching be excluded. Instead of a con
science clause, which is but a clumsy contrivance for protecting the
Dissenter from outward violations of conscience, while it exposes
the child to social degradation, the religious instruction, as such,
should be limited to certain hours, open to all who choose to accept
it, but not forced -on any. There is one objection to the use of
existing schools pointed out by Mathew Arnold. It is this : “ That
the moment the working class of this country have this question of
instruction really brought home to them, their self-respect will make
them demand, like the working classes on the Continent, public
schools, and not schools which the clergyman, or the squire, or the
millowner calls 1 my school.’ ” There is another objection still more
formidable, viz., that the interest of the nation will never be fully
enlisted in the work of popular education so long as instruction is
confined to denominational schools. The continuance of these
schools is urged solely on religious grounds; they are supposed to
secure, by their connection with a place of worship, the religious
culture of the children, and this is regarded as all-important. It is
singular the unanimity there is among a certain class of speakers
�119
and writers in favour of combining religion with elementary instruc
tion in schools for the poor. They look with horror on what they
term the divorce of religion from the learning of the alphabet in the
national schools ; yet respecting the schools for their own children,
the middle and upper class schools, there is no anxiety. The last
thing people send their children to be taught in the grammar or
private schools is religion, and as a matter of fact it is not taught;
and yet when it is proposed to omit this teaching from schools for
working men, an outcry is raised, the scheme denounced as godless,
and the supporters of it no better than infidels. Lurking under this
loose talk is the idea that religion is a good thing for the poor man,
and it must be supplied to him whether he likes it or not; but for
other people—why, they can please themselves. Ask, however, the
working men themselves respecting the education of their own
children, and they would pronounce unhesitatingly in favour of
non-denominational and secular schools. In this respect also the
present system must be regarded as a failure : it is based on the
idea of making men Christians that they may be good citizens. If
it had succeeded, its continuance might be justified; but has it ?
Notoriously, a vast majority of the working classes are outside the
pale of direct religious influences, and yet these have been trained
to a large extent in our existing schools. Not a Congress of Bishops
and Clergy can be held—not a Conference of Dissenting ministers
of any denomination—where the question respecting the alienation
of the working classes from religion is not earnestly discussed, and
sundry plans devised for their recovery. The “ heathenism of our
large towns ” is always a favourite subject, and how to adapt church
services to suit their tastes, and so bring them into the religious
edifices, occupies a conspicuous place in all their deliberations. Let
anyone examine the Reports of the Inspectors of the National
Schools on Gospel History, or any subject embraced in religious
teaching, and, with some exceptions, it is about the saddest exhi
bition of ignorance to be found in connection with school teaching.
Committing to memory religious dogmas they cannot understand,
or which, if they do, they find daily the subject of controversy, is
not the way to make children religious, or to form the basis of a
true Christian character. In fact, religion cannot be taught, it must
�120
grow by all the holy influences with which a child can be sur
rounded ; but these influences may be entirely absent where there
is most of professedly religious teaching. Between “teaching
religion ” and “ religious teaching ” we have failed to recognize any
distinction, and this confounding of two things essentially different
is a mistake which pervades our entire system of education. An
improved national System must have for its object the making
of good citizens. The real learning of a man is of more public
importance than any particular religious opinions he may entertain,
and we must learn to separate the teaching of religious doctrine
from the ordinary instruction of primary schools, before we can
expect to train up good citizens or intelligent Christians. It may
be admitted that there can be no complete education if religion is
altogether excluded; but elementary and technical instruction can
be given alone, and religious instruction may be safely left to
private individuals or the public bodies which may choose to under
take it. Aworthy prelate at a recent Church Congress again hoisted
the American flag, to frighten us from the adoption of this godless
scheme of secular education. Whether rhe distinguished prelate is
acquainted with the American system or not does not appear, but
the results will challenge comparison with anything he can produce
in this country. The system is based upon the idea of citizenship.
The teaching of religion is prohibited; religious teaching is not.
The Bible is not degraded by being made a school book, and ex
plained by an incompetent teacher; but the school is opened by a
portion read without note or comment, the Lord’s Prayer is recited
or chanted, a hymn or piece of sacred music is sung; and, when
conducted by an intelligent and religious teacher, it is difficult to
imagine a service more beautiful or impressive than may be wit
nessed daily at the opening of an American primary school. And
what are the results ? The American youths are more intelligent
than the English. The American people are as loyal to their
Government, and, as a whole, as law-abiding as any under the old
monarchies of Europe, and, judged by any of the ordinary tests, they
are more religious than the people of this country Sunday is better
observed than here, a larger number of people attend church; the
religious, educational, and philanthropic institutions supported by
�121
voluntary contributions are equal in extent to those in this country.
A religious tone enters into and affects the whole of society, which
has no counterpart in this country, while in the more purely
American States, where the foreign element has less influence, there
is a higher general and religious culture than could be found either
in this country or in any of the old countries of Europe. And yet
reverend men at Church Congresses talk about this secular education
as leading to irreligion and infidelity. The leading features of a
measure may be briefly summarised. A Minister of Education, and
a Council, and Examining Board would be essential; provision for
training and certifying competent teachers ; in every district a com
mittee to superintend all school arrangements, and disburse the funds
levied for school purposes. The funds should be partly national,
partly local—national as contributed by the whole people, and
local in order to secure personal local interest, and a provident dis
bursement. The area of local taxation should be so wide as to
avoid severe and unequal pressure, and not so large as to destroy
individual supervision. In corporate towns, and towns with Local
Boards, these bodies would be intrusted with the work and manage
ment ; in country districts, the Poor Law Unions would afford
the basis of organization. In all cases the duty of superintending
school instruction should be regarded as the proper business of
the governing body, and not of the clergy. Their work is the
religious teaching; but only as citizens have they need to meddle
with general instruction. The scramble hitherto to induce children
to attend school, that they might be got to church and figure in
ecclesiastical statistics, has hindered rather than helped the progress
of education. If the responsibility of looking after the instruction
of children be taken from the clergy, and placed upon the rate
payers in each locality, self-interest and preservation would act as
powerful incentives to vigorous action against a too parsimonious
provision. A minimum salary could be fixed where a given mrmber of scholars are taught, so that a school would in no case be
starved by an economical committee. Another important feature
would be thorough inspection and frequent examinations, and the
results of the examinations circulated as soon as possible. At
present the reports of the Inspectors are almost useless. They are
�122
sent in by a department of the Government, printed among the
blue books, and ready for use if anybody cares to apply for them ;
but, supposing the reports of a district were printed and circulated
quickly, the peculiarities—excellences or deficiencies—of each
school pointed out, what an interest would be excited! Com
mittees and managers would read and consider them. Conferences
of teachers would be held, they would be discussed, a healthy
stimulus would be applied, and then would happen, what it is
utterly in vain to expect under the present system : the people,
regarding the work as their own, would do it with all the judgment
and energy of which they are capable, and which characterises
their proceedings in other matters of local and personal interest.
DISCUSSION.
Mr. E. Potter, M.P. : Mr. Chairman, ladies, and gentlemen—
In the first place, let me express my strong feelings of admiration for
the address which we have just heard from Mr. Alderman Eumney,
than whom no man is more competent to give an opinion on the
working of the educational system in the district from which he
comes. I heard him a year or two ago, before a Parliamentary com
mittee, say that he considered the factory education little less than a
sham. I agree with him, and the causes are, to my mind, very patent.
In the first place, the factory system only embraced a single section
of the trade of the country. It was forced on the cotton trade, and
the country felt that it was unjust to compel one trade only to
submit to it. Among millowners there was a strong and a natural
feeling, and even the best masters, who had had educational estab
lishments of their own previous to the time, said, “ If it comes to a
question of force, the people may educate themselves.” They
would not be forced, as a single class, to do it, and their feeling
upon the matter was strong. Now, factory education has been
very good under certain circumstances, and bad under other circum
stances. Where a master has taken an interest in education, it has
been successful, but it has been a very difficult thing to carry out.
It is a difficult thing to exercise a moral compulsion. Those of us
who are large employers may be able to persuade many, but un
fortunately others would take a different course. They would pre
�123
fer sending their children to where they could work full time. The
inefficiency of the factory system is that it does not embrace the
whole country. The great benefit of the compulsory principle is
that it would reach all classes. Now, it must be carried out mainly
by the extension of the factory and half-time system. That is the
great object of the bill I advocate. It would compel the education
of every child, labouring or not. I see no difficulty in doing this ;
the organisation would be very easy—-no more difficult for a district
than it is now for a single factory. There are large factories,
employing five or six thousand hands, and I do not see that it
would be more difficult to educate the children in a small
town, say, of 8,000 inhabitants, than it is to educate the
children in a large mill. There is one point I am anxious about
in connection with the League, and that is, that this education
should be kept perfectly distinct from the present denominational
system. If it is given on something like the factory system, I
believe it will not interfere with, but tend to support, the present
system. I say this advisedly. There is a large class of workmen
who, when forced to educate their children, will, as a matter of
pride, send them to the denominational rather than to the free
schools, and pay for them rather than accept State aid. In a few
years it would have that effect. At all events, the two systems
must be kept perfectly distinct. There is nothing worse in a
denominational school than the education of half-timers. School
masters do not like to have them, because they interfere with the
working of the school. I had some knowledge of a school ten
years before the Factory Act came into existence. It was pretty
successful, and well supported, and the proprietor had some
influence over a certain number of hands. I believe it was a
higher class school then than it was when transformed into a
school of half-time. The master could not give attendance to the
half-timers, and the school rather fell off, and the ultimate con
clusion of the proprietor was, to make it altogether into a half
time school. The privilege was extended to the master of taking
any number of children from the neighbouring district to educate,
and of having the fees himself j but he has never succeeded in
this respect, and he said to me in conversation, that there was a
�124
feeling among the better class workmen against sending their
children into the half-time school. I think that feeling exists, hut
if the free and compulsory system is worked on the half-time
principle only, the Factory Act will be carried out very efficiently.
I am an advocate for the half-time system, but it must be kept
distinct from the other. We have been working half a century
under the Factory Act, and it has been compulsory, as far as it
went, and secular. There has been no compulsion to teach religion
the employer not teaching his own creed-"—or to have the school
purely secular. I think many of the best schools have been
purely secular. I think, then, that the new schools which will be
established, if I may say so, below the line, should be classed as
distinct working-class schools entirely. I am very anxious that
every encouragement should be given to keeping them separate.
I should not like any injury to be inflicted on the higher class
denominational schools. My great interest in joining this society
is to keep the schools distinct. I think we shall do a fatal damage
if we injure the denominational schools at all, because there is
il ample room and verge enough” for us below them. I am per
fectly satisfied we can supply education in the schools below them
to another million children. Why should they not be perfectly
distinct ? The one class of schools will be compulsory, and that
very compulsion should make them free and secular. We might
as well meet the thing at once, openly and honestly. In
denominational schools you can enforce denominational teaching;
but with us, under a compulsory system, it must be secular. I
wish the two questions to be worked harmoniously, side by side,
but to be separate from each other.
The Rev. C. Clarke : I am to speak a few words on the subject
of compulsion, and on the supposition that in the course of a few
years we shall have our bill passed through the Houses of Parlia
ment, and that local authorities will have the power to found and
establish free secular schools, is it likely in such case that the
poor, the ignorant, the thoughtless, those of our fellow countrymen
who are unacquainted with the blessings and advantages of educa
tion, will be able to oppose the national will and the intentions of
the Legislature by refusing to send their children to school ? Are
�125
they likely to succeed in any attempt of that sort ? Now, with
regard to the schools which we desire to establish, I wish to notice
a remark which proceeded yesterday from the lips of Professor
Fawcett. I understood him to say—and in fact he is reported this
morning in the papers as having said—that it was the intention, or
it would be the work, of the League, to establish such schools as
the British schools.
Professor Fawcett : Should I be in order if I rise to explain ?
There is some misunderstanding. I made the remark in conse
quence of a letter last week in the Spectator, signed “ Jesse
Collings.” I stated distinctly yesterday that it was my duty simply
to explain the programme of the League—I did not express my own
individual opinion. What Mr. Collings stated, writing in the name
of the League, was this : that it was not the intention, or desire’ or
object of the League that free British schools should be established.
What he did state distinctly was this : that it was their intention
to give the local managers of these rate-supported schools the
authority, if they desired it, to establish schools analogous to the
British schools. If he misinterpreted the intentions of the League,
it is his fault, and not mine.
Mr. Jesse Collings : I think this renders a further explana
tion necessary. It will be seen from my letter to the Spectator
that it is not the intention of this League to found schools like the
British schools. My letter was written in answer to a rather
unfair article in the Spectator, and to numerous inquiries whether
the Bible should be read or not. The answer is : The League has
nothing to say about the Bible ; the reading of the Bible, like any
other book, or any other question affecting the discipline or instruction
of the school, will be left in the hands of the local authorities. There
fore in our bill, to be founded on this principle, we shall have nothing
at all to say about the Bible. The words about British schools
were brought in incidentally, and they were these—“In this respect
(in being unsectarian) the League goes no further than the British
and Foreign School Society.” I was not speaking of the practice Of
that society ; but their theory, which is that there shall be no theo
logical instruction given in the schools. That is what we mean—that
there shall be no religious creed or catechism of any kind taught in
�126
the schools we are about to found. If the British and Foreign
Society do allow these things to be taught, then I was in error.
We do not intend that they shall be taught in our schools.
The Rev. C. Clarke : Some of us in Birmingham have to do
with schools in which daily the Scriptures are read, but in which
no express theological or religious instruction of any kind is given.
Now, originally, the British schools had this foundation, and no
other, but I thought it was notorious that during the last twenty
years the authorities of those schools, the head-quarters of which
are in the Borough Road, have (in the judgment of many persons)
utterly perverted their trust. They have taught a sectarianism, and
when called to account, or when an explanation was demanded,
they still persisted in doing it; and persons who had for many
years supported their institutions on the ground of their supposed
unsectarian character, were obliged to leave the British schools
altogether. Now I wish to say that some of us, in promoting the
objects of the League, wish to take every precaution against an
abuse such as that. The Scriptures will not be read, except in
such schools as are governed by authorities who desire that
they shall be read, and insist on their being read. We would
like to see this matter carefully considered. For having to
do with schools, knowing how they are conducted, and what
goes on in them ; and having after long use some reasonable
and proper regard for the Scriptures, we are a little dubious, and
inclined to hesitate on the question whether a true regard for them
can be shown by the unthinking, an4 unreasonable, and improper
use made of them sometimes in schools. But however this may
be, it would be improper and unbecoming for us of the League to
say that the Bible shall not be used. Let the Bible be used if the
authorities in any district insist on its being used, but let us have,
at any rate, in our constitution the clearest and most positive
statement to the effect that no theological teaching, no note or com
ment of any sort whatever, shall be allowed in the national schools
of our country. Now, on the supposition that the local authorities
have the power to establish schools of this kind—secular free
schools—ought the people, by reason of their ignorance, and
the manner in which hitherto they have been neglected, to
�127
be allowed to oppose their inclinations to the decision of
the Legislature and the just wishes of the nation? We know,
all of us, that we have to submit to regulations and laws in con
nection with the maintenance of the poor, the punishment and
confinement of criminals, and the public health; and all of us
who think at all on the matter know that if the nation chooses to
express its will through the public laws in connection with the
matter of our sending our children to school, we shall have to
submit in that respect as well as in the others. With regard to
modes of compulsion, none of us think of compulsion as an end.
We are sometimes spoken of as though we were endeavouring to
introduce some principle of compulsion as an end. It is not an
end—it is a means; and those who observe the laws in this case,
who do what they ought to do in connection with their children,
will be under no form of compulsion whatever other than their
own sense of duty. As to the manner in which the principle of
compulsion may be applied, it would, of course, be possible to
introduce here in England what I understand to be the law in
Prussia, in which there is a complete system of registration, so
that the members of every family are registered, and in a sense
known • and the children of every family have in a certain manner
to be accounted for if not in their places at school. We might
have a system of registration of that sort. But without proceeding
so far as that, we might have a system by which no children
should be employed whatever when they ought to be at school.
This would be a kind of compulsion which possibly might be
exceedingly offensive. But in addition to having a labour clause
utterly excluding children in those years when they ought to be at
school from factories and workshops, we might have a vagrant or
truant clause similar to that which is enforced in Massachusetts.
Mr. Field, who is well acquainted with the American system, and
who, in his visits to Massachusetts, has taken pains thoroughly
to inform himself, has told me that the people have clauses
in operation of this nature. If children, for instance, are seen
in the streets of Boston during the school hours, they are at
once captured by the officers, inquiries are made of their parents
as to why they are in the streets, and not at school, and their parents
�128
are seriously warned and admonished that they will incur penalties
if this is continued. Of course, if the children go to school all is
well; if they do not go to school, the parents, as sometimes happens,
are fined in any sum not exceeding 20 dollars ; or the children, if
they show themselves to be incorrigible, are taken before a magis
trate, and by him committed to a truant institution. These penalties
are enforced in Massachusetts, and inflicted from year to year. If
we were wise enough to have a clause excluding children from
factories and workshops, and another keeping them from the streets,
these forms of compulsion might be sufficient; but if they did not
prove sufficient, it would be open to the Government to introduce
clauses of a more stringent nature. I talk to my friends and
acquaintances on the subject, and find a few of them shrinking in
regard to compulsion, but I tell them, as I will tell you, that most
happily we have now the power by which knots of various intricate
kinds and characters may be either untied or cut. We have this
in the political power which the people possess, and if only we will
take our stand on grounds that are logical and right, and appeal to
the country at large, but especially to those artisans who are really
intelligent and upright, and anxious for their own welfare and the
country’s good, we shall get the help whereby these intricate knots,
so puzzling and painful to timid and cautious people, may be alto
gether untied or cut, the difficulties will not trouble or embarrass
us at all. Let us, I say, take our stand on grounds that are legiti
mate and right, and appeal to the common sense and conscience of
the nation, and then we shall find we have just the force we need
to carry out educational measures, and everything else relating to
the well-being, honour, and happiness of our country.
Mr. Mundella, M.P. : Mr. Chairman, ladies, and gentlemen—
After the remarks of the last speaker, and, indeed, of some of the
preceding speakers, I think I cannot do better than submit to this
audience something of my experience of what compulsory education
has done abroad, what is the machinery by which it has effected those
results, and the necessity for it at home; and I trust the audience
will forgive me for saying that the few remarks I submit to you
will not be the remarks of a mere theorist or doctrinaire. I am
the son of a working man. I left school at nine and a half years
�129
of age, and my first master, to whom I served my apprenticeship,
is now in the body of the hall. I have been an employer of
4,000 workpeople, and have been an employer abroad, where com
pulsory education is carried out. I have addressed large audiences
of from 10,000 to 20,000 workpeople at once, in this country, on
compulsory education, and I never met with but one response—a
hearty assent to it. I just state these facts, not in order to give
you anything of my personal affairs, but that my remarks may not
be regarded as those of a theorist or doctrinaire, who wishes to
force his crotchets on the people. My attention was first drawn
to the necessity for compulsory education by observing its work
abroad. I first saw it in Switzerland, then in Saxony, and then in
Prussia. Ten years ago I saw it first in Switzerland, but my visits
to Saxony, as an employer of 600 or 700 workmen, have been
annual for some years, and the results of education there are so
remarkable, so incredible, that I should be afraid to describe them
to you. Nobody could realise or believe it. We are not only
incomparably inferior in the quantity of our education, but also
inferior in the quality ; indeed, we are more inferior in the quality
than in the quantity. We cannot realise in England what can be
attained by children under a compulsory system of primary educa
tion. Now, I have visited the schools in Saxony again, and again,
and again; and I have seen the children of peasants and
of framework-knitters, children of the humblest classes, of spinners,
and of weavers, and of ironworkers, at twelve years of age, convert
moneys from English into German, from thalers and groschen into
dollars and cents, then into francs and centimes, and transpose them
back again into German. I have gone the length and breadth of
the land, and have examined children by the wayside, children in
factories and cottages, and have never found one at twelve years of
age who could not read and write well—not as we understand
reading and writing, but such reading and such writing as I or any
other in this room have attained. They read and write intelli
gently. I have tried to find some comer or some spot in Saxony,
or the Canton of Zurich, or some Swiss Canton, where there are
uneducated children. I have always failed, and school directors
have said to me, “ It is in vain you search for them; there is no
I
�130
child in Saxony who cannot read and write.” My manager, who
has now been nine years in that country, and has had a daily
correspondence with numbers of workpeople scattered in the
mountains, with handlooms in their own cottages, has never yet
found a workman who could not correspond with him perfectly
and intelligibly about his own work. You need not wonder that
the North German Confederation is making such marvellous pro
gress. Well, I shall next say something of the machinery by
which it has been accomplished, because English people have
an idea, and interested parties are disseminating that idea,
that com pulsion means espionage and the policeman. A greater
fiction never entered into the mind of man. There is no
espionage, no policeman, in the case. I confess to you I under
took this part of the subject in fear and trembling. After being
shown a school of 3,000 boys, fifty in a class—the school, by the
way, being The handsomest building in the place—I said to the
head director in his counting-house, with his clerks around him,
“ Now, sir, tell me how often you have to call in the aid of the
policeman;” and he stood aghast. “I have been years head
director of this school,” he said; “ I never yet had to call in the
policeman.” He said, “ You do not understand the machinery by
which our schools are worked.” I have since mastered it; and I
tell you I do not believe in any truant law or vagrant law, or
Factory Act, or Workshops Act. They are all nonsense, and
will not answer the purpose. The machinery is simply this :
Every child in every cottage, hamlet, or town in Ger
many, Prussia, Saxony, Mecklenburg, Wirtemburg, or Switzer
land, is registered. You can keep a register of voters for household
suffrage; why not keep a register of children ? They have a house
hold register, and there are schools everywhere. They are not free
schools either; although the population is poor, they pay. The
children at six years of age must go to school. There are infant
schools, and they may go there before that age; but the compulsion
commences at 6 years, and does not end till 14. Well, the names
are inscribed in the register, and at the end of the sixth year the
parent receives a notice from the local board—the school board.
You could have a central board, and your political divisions would
�131
be your school divisions. It is so in Switzerland and in Prussia.
The wards of the town have their own local boards, represented at
the central board, and the local board would give notice to the
parent, “ Your child is six years of age, and must now come to
school.” The child comes to school or he does not; but suppose he
does not, there is no magistrate, no policeman, in the case. The
criminal law is never called into operation at all; the board has all
power, and they send for the parent. The head director said to me,
“ When it occurs that the parent does not send his children to
school, or neglects to send them regularly, after a certain number of
omissions I send for him and read the Act to him, or tell him to
read it himself, and say to him, ‘ If you are in duty bound, accord
ing to law, to send your child to school, why have you not done
so
This generally answers the purpose. But suppose the man
is contumacious, his case is laid before the school board, and he is
fined a franc. That is the first proceeding. Well, the matter
rarely, if ever, goes beyond it, for in a district of 50 odd thousand
persons, the school director told me he had only 42 cases of con
tumacy in 8 years ; and he is a strict man. But it is said by our
opponents, “ Oh, compulsion is not necessary there ; public opinion
does the work, and it will do just as well without compulsion.”
Now, I have put this question again and again. I am in corre
spondence with some of the principal school authorities in Saxony,
Prussia, and Switzerland, and I have asked them, “ Have you any
difficulty?” The answer has been, “We had a good deal of
difficulty at first, but after the first year or two it was wonderful
how smoothly things went.” “ Then,” I said, “ dare you now
relax the law ? ” In every instance I have had but one answer,
“We dare not relax the law.” And the reason is obvious. In all
communities there are some persons who shrink into habits of vice
and intemperance, and these persons would drag their chileren
down with them, and they would increase and multiply the vice
and ignorance of the country; but that the law prevents them. And
in answer to our opponents, who say that where there is a healthy
public opinion there is no need of law, let me make some allusions
to America. The Americans have been spoken of very honourably
by the last speaker, and I wish to speak of them with great admir
�132
ation; but there is one defect in the American system, and the
Americans are becoming conscious of it. They know they want
the compulsory power. The result is that public opinion, which
was a power when America was more sparsely populated, is now
ceasing to act. America is fast sinking into ignorance; and in
order that I may not misrepresent that great country, which has
made more munificent provision for education than any other, I
will give these facts. The superintendent of the Cincinnati schools
states that this is the percentage of daily attendance : In Cincinnati,
70-1 ; in Chicago, 58’9 ; in New York, 42’6. Is that the state of
things you wish to copy ? Listen to what he says about Prussia—
“ I refer to the Prussian system of education to call attention to
that feature of it which makes education compulsory, and I do this
because I believe that if we shall ever hope to derive the best
possible fruits from our own munificent system of education, this
feature must be incorporated into it.” This is American opinion.
America has recently appointed a Bureau of Education, and that
bureau is finding that with all this munificent provision, there are
thousands and tens of thousands who are not availing themselves
of it, and America is fast waking up to the consciousness —her best
men are already aware of it—that they must introduce compulsion
if they would wish to succeed. Now, our Workshops and our
Factory Acts are failures. Never was anything a more complete
failure than the Workshops Act. To neglect a child till he is 8, 9,
or 10 years of age, and then, when he first commences to work, to
insist on his going to school, is about the most objectionable and
unreasonable form of compulsion, I think, that it was possible for
the human mind.to devise. And, you know, in workshops and
factories we have espionage and the policeman, for nothing is done
unless either a policeman or a detective officer goes in. The Factory
Inspector is not a policeman, it is true, but he summons men before
the^criminal courts. Surely we can devise some means by which,
when children are neither at work nor at school, they shall be got
at. Low I ‘will notice the objection, that if we have compulsory
education labour will suffer. What a farce it is to say that parents
cannot afford to send their children to school because they will
sacrifice their children’s earnings. Children can begin to learn at a
�133
very early age, and where the education is persistent, as in Saxony,
what they learn is something marvellous. Now, I have the new
Labour Act of North Germany, which I received yesterday morning.
It applies to the whole labouring population of Germany, and it
prescribes that no child shall begin to work until the age of 12, and
he has been 6 years at school. That is the first clause. Every
child from 12 to 14 shall not work more than 6 hours daily, and
shall, attend school three hours daily. Every child from 14
to. 16 shall attend school 6 hours per week. Now mark this—
here technical education comes in, scientific instruction, know
ledge of languages; and then consider the moral, and not
only the moral, but the material prosperity of the country that
must follow. I say this: unless we wake up to this question
there are other interests at stake than moral interests ; there is the
interest of the stomachs of the people, their employment, which
will suffer as well as their moral necessities. Now, I do hope
nobody will believe I advocate this because I desire there should
be less religious instruction. What I have had I am most grate
ful for, and my reason for advocating education is that there
may be more. That word “ secular” is scandalously abused. All
truth is holy. The order, and system, and cleanliness of a school
are the most religious influences, I think, that can be brought to
bear. Go through the population of Prussia, and never, even in
its poorest districts, will you meet with the wretchedness, squalor,
and filth that stare us in the face in our large towns, and make
us so ashamed and humiliated. Now, following just after the new
law of the North German Confederation, I have received the new
Austrian school law. Austria has discovered that knowledge is
power, and that ignorance is weakness, and that to be weak is to
be miserable. What is the result ? Baron von Beust, the
Minister of Saxony, is now the Minister of Austria, and he has
taken the Saxon school system into Austria, and the Austrian
school system is now the most liberal in Europe. I ask you,
Englishmen and Englishwomen, are Austrian children to be
educated before English children ? My inquiries abroad have
stimulated me to plumb the depth of ignorance at home, and
I find it impossible to do it. I have, with the assistance of your
�134
Chairman, and at other times, in different parts of the country,
examined more than 12,000 young persons at work, who had
nearly all of them been at school; and what a farce our education
is 1 I mean religious education. How many have been at school,
and where much religious education is given, and yet some of them
do not know even that God is their Creator? It seems incredible,
but it is so. When they say a prayer, it is the merest confusion
imaginable. Ask them to say the Lord’s Prayer to you word for
word, and the first sentence is, “ Our Father, ’ch art in heaven.”
Again and again, hundreds of times, I have heard them say it.
What is the meaning? They have only a vague idea what is
meant. This comes from our system of teaching. I say to our friends
here that I am not a convert to the League. I was a convert to
national compulsory education for years, when many of my friends
thought I was an enthusiast and was going mad. Some of our con
verts, with all the zeal of neophytes, go further than myself; but I
say, with reference to this system, that I believe it can be applied to
agricultural as well as to manufacturing districts. There is in this
room a friend in the body of the hall who has for twenty years past
had his ploughboys in a good state of education ; he has done it with
out any sacrifice, and his people are the best tenantry in England,
and his farm is the best cultivated. He has his ploughboys so
well educated that a member of Parliament said, on examining one
of them, “ That fellow a ploughman ! he is a gentleman.” I thank
the meeting very cordially for having heard me patiently, and I
would say to those friends who stand aloof from us, “ Stand aloof
no longer. We have had some difficulty to arrive where we are,
but public opinion is growing so fast that the terms we offered
yesterday we cannot make to-day, and the terms we would gladly
make to-day cannot be offered to-morrow. We wish to deal with
you tenderly and gratefully for what you have done in the past;
but I would say, the sibyl is at the door with her last offer.”
Lord Campbell and Stratheden said : It seems to me that one
of the wants required to be supplied is some argument against the
compulsory principle. Such an argument it is utterly beyond my
capacity to furnish. Arguments in favour of the principle may
rather overstock the market to-day. • It would be useless to touch
�135
upon its necessity; for the whole audience seem to be agreed that
until the principle is introduced we cannot bring into schools the
whole of the masses we mean to have there. It is useless to touch
upon its justice, for the whole audience seem to feel that neglected
children really have no parents, that they become the wards of
the State, thrown upon the fatherhood of the law and the protection
of society. It would be superfluous, though easy, to dwell upon
the facilities for giving practical effect to this principle. There are
only two points that I, therefore, will venture upon, both of which,
if I am not deceived, have something practical about them. Of
course, on this question, as on many others, there is a great differ
ence of opinion. All are not equally advanced in their conviction
as to the necessity of the compulsory principle, and there is some
prejudice yet to be encountered. That prejudice, where it exists,
bases itself upon the idea that the State, or the central power,
ought not to be armed with domiciliary or autocratic functions such
as are proposed. I wish, therefore, to suggest to this audience a
distinction between a grant of such powers to the State, and the
accordance of them to local bodies, such as Town Councils or muni
cipal authorities, which are the immediate emanation of the very
individuals to be supervised. Don’t let it be imagined that I am
hostile to a grant of such powers to the State. All I suggest is,
that in conferring such powers upon municipal authorities, you meet
and indulge the prejudices of those who would view with jealousy
such powers if the central body happened to receive them. The other
observation I have to make is this—that it seems to me that the whole
question may be brought into a very narrow focus, and reduced to one
of downright justice to the taxpayer and ratepayer. It is obvious to
all men that to extend popular instruction in any shape or form there
must be a new expenditure. That expenditure must come from
general taxation imposed by Parliament, or it must come from the
local rates agreed to by municipal assemblies. In the one case, the
burden would fall upon the taxpayer ; in the other, upon the rate
payer. Both taxpayer and ratepayer are entitled to resist the
burden you are going to throw upon them, unless those burdens
involve some security for the attainment of the object aimed at.
The taxpayer might fairly say, “Now you are going to spend, say a
�136
million and a half, derived from general taxation. I will submit
to the payment of my share if your system involves some
guarantee that the schools shall be filled with children j but I will
not submit to the imposition of another Is. 6d. in the pound when
I know that there is a possibility of these schools being empty.”
Although we know from experience that our schools may be filled
without compulsion, yet until the principle is introduced you have
no guarantee for the attendance of even one child in all the school'
accommodation provided. So, too, might the ratepayer declare,
“ I am willing to submit to 2d., 3d., 4d., or even Is. in the pound
additional rates for a great public object which I am able to appre
ciate—for the conquest of ignorance, the repression of crime, and
the prevention of misery in many shapes ; but I will not submit
to any further rate for the erection of schools, or the employment
of schoolmasters when I have no security that another 100 will
come within the reach of these advantages.” I do trust that this
latter view may sink deeply into the minds of the taxpayer and the
ratepayer, without whose concurrence the great objects of your
association are impossible of attainment; and that so sinking into
their minds, it will create a general and irresistible concurrence of
opinion that, however the question of religion may be decided—
that whatever form of education is promoted—some powers for
ensuring the attendance of children at school shall exist.
Mr. George Howell, of London: I am decidedly in favour
of compulsory, free, secular education. This word “ secular ”
appears to me as though it were used to imply teaching the
peculiar dogmas of a small party in the country called
“ secularists.” Now, if it were so intended, this would at once be
sectarian teaching. We use the word “ secular ” as simply opposed
to ecclesiastical. The office of the clergyman or minister is eccle
siastical, but that of the schoolmaster is secular. By secular,
then, we mean that education which teaches those things which fit
children for the duties of this life as men and citizens. We want
our children educated in the practical knowledge and business of
life. Denominational, or religious, teaching must be left to the
home, the Sunday school, and the church. If we once admit the
teaching of theology into our public schools, where can it end but
�137
in compulsion ? Catholics, Protestants, and Secularistswill each
have their claim. Even the use of the Bible, as a text book in
our National Schools, will involve some difficulty, inasmuch as in
Ireland, and in all Catholic districts, the Catholics would claim
something different from our Protestant Bible. Besides which, I am
afraid that it would revive all the religious animosities which we
sought to remove by the dis-establishment of the State Church in
Ireland. With regard to compulsory education, the very term law
involves compulsion. We have compulsory laws to punish crime,
let us now try compulsion to prevent it. We demand compulsory
education for the benefit of the entire community, just as we demand
quarantine for the safety of our ports; and the removal of nuisances
for the protection of the health of our cities and towns; nay, even the
regulation of our traffic for the convenience of our streets. Ignor
ance is at once the most noxious of all nuisances, and the most
contaminating. It is also enormously expensive. The objections
to compulsion do not come from working men, although some wellmeaning men speak in their name as though we did object. Mr.
Walter, M.P., at a recent agricultural meeting at Maidenhead, spoke
somewhat against the platform of the League. During the last few
weeks I have been in personal communication with several of the
reformers of Worcester Cheltenham, Gloucester, Stroud, and Tewkes
bury, and in those towns I found no hesitation whatever in endors
ing the principle of compulsory, free, and secular education. And
here I may say that I am informed that so near home as the Scilly
Islands an almost complete system of compulsory education is in
operation. At the last general election I was a candidate for Ayles
bury, and one of the most prominent points in my address was
this one of national, compulsory, free, and secular education. I
visited every hamlet and village in the large borough, and not one
voice did I hear raised up against the principle. The only oppo
sition I found came from the clergymen and farmers. The farmers
were under the impression that education would unfit men for
work in the field; but both manufacturers and artisans know full
well that education is an immense benefit to both parties in the
daily work of life. In short, the working classes of this country
are anxious for, and demand, a complete national system of educa-
�138
,
tion, which shall reach all classes, and which shalj. be be compul
sory, unsectarian, and free.
Dr. Hodgson said the text of the few remarks he had to make
would be drawn from the admirable speech of Mr. Mundella. Mr.
Mundella said, most truly, that we were behind other countries, not
. so much in the quantity as in the quality of our education, and the
question of compulsion was very much mixed up with the quality
of education we intended to supply. The question they had to
discuss was compulsory attendance in schools, not the compulsory
provision of schools, for the schools must be provided before they
could be attended. He asked why it was that this necessity ex
isted ? There were many reasons ; but one special reason was the
indolence of parents who did not take any interest in the educa
tion of their children, and another reason was the indolence of the
• children themselves. He should regret exceedingly if it were to go
abroad as a general impression that the object of the League was to
establish a compulsory education which should be simply, or even
mainly, for the teaching of reading and writing, with even arith
metic superadded. They were not likely to disagree as to the
importance of reading and writing as instruments of education, but
one thing was certain—if we did not aim at something a great deal
beyond these things, we should neither obtain nor deserve that
support which would be requisite to carry the measure through the
House of Commons. The staple of our existing schools was reading
and writing, and what was the result? Everyone’s experience
answered this question, but he would mention one or two cases.
He had elsewhere published an account of a visit paid to a school
in the South of England, where the children read very passably
indeed. The passage read was a description of a crab. The
district was an inland one, and he asked the children if any of
them had ever seen a crab? There was a great sensation, and
after a little delay one girl said she had, but it appeared it was
not a marine crab, but a crab apple. That was the amount of
intelligence that had been developed. That child, and all the
others, would have passed muster in reading and writing. Another
story was told him by a benevolent lady, residing in the neighbour
hood of a country school, who took an opportunity of giving the
�139
children a lesson on their senses. It was a revelation to them that
they had senses. The lady asked, 11 What is the use of your nose?”
There was great silence for a time, broken by a boy who said, “ To
be wiped.” Another story was told him by Mr. Leonard Horner,
Factory Inspector, and it related to Birmingham. When the pre
sent Bishop of Manchester was head master of King Edward’s
School, Mr. Horner accompanied him on a tour for the purpose of
ascertaining the efficiency of instruction in the district, and espe
cially in the matter of religion. In one case the Scripture passage
read contained the word “ sacrifice,” and none of the children could
give the slightest explanation of the word except one girl, who had
been about four years in the school, and her answer was, “The
place where Jesus Christ offered up his son Isaac.” Now, this was
a state of things that must be put an end to. The instruction must
be made of such a nature as to develop the intelligence and to cul
tivate the understanding. There must be that kind of useful
knowledge imparted which would be suited to the comprehension
of the youngest child, and which was indispensable to children
when they grew up for their guidance in their after lives. He
wished to impress upon the audience that compulsion was not
tyranny, but the result of a law which we ourselves had imposed
for the general good. The way to make compulsion not only tole
rable, but successful, was so to dispose people that they should do
of their own accord those things which, if they did not do, the law
would compel them. In the schools for the poor the time allotted
for instruction was lamentably short, and therefore attention must
be concentrated upon those things which were most useful, most
indispensable, and most capable of application in after life.
Mr. Paget, formerly M.P. for Nottingham: I have now for, I'
think, sixteen years, as an agricultural employer, insisted that the
boys should spend some of their days at school, and some at work.
I felt that some such movement as this was evidently in the future,
and that it was better to be prepared with a knowledge of facts for
a time like this. And within my experience the results have been
so uniformly good that I have no hesitation whatever in saying that
the practice I have mentioned is a proved success. I have thirtyfour children upon the farm, employed on the condition that they
�140
spend the alternate days at school. It has been without any sacri
fice on my part. I felt that it must be a business success to justify
me in calling on my neighbours to adopt it, and it has been a
business success; for not only have I not lost anything, but I am
convinced that I have been better served, and my bailiff is of the
same opinion. I receive the boys at nine years of age, on condi
tion that they are able to write decently ; and I am quite certain
that no system of mixed school and labour will succeed, without that
preliminary condition. Coming on my farm at that age, and being
able to write decently then, they go to school and work on the
farm alternate days. I attend at the examinations in school, and
I have full proof that my boys fully maintain their ground against
those who are, or pretend to be, constantly at school. I have at
the age of 13 all the children who choose it, in the village, ex
amimed, and to those who can write correctly from dictation, read
intelligently, and work the first four rules of arithmetic, simple and
compound, I give a prize. There have been only two instances out
of 34 in which my boys have not had the prize. A very independ
ent witness—Mr. Sternhold, the Commissioner to examine into the
state of the children employed in agriculture—took very great
pains in the matter. He wrote to the employers of these children,
who are now some of them 25 years of age, and more than that; and
he received a uniform reply from the masters that they were
satisfied with their servants, and almost every one of the young
men wrote him letters, of which he spoke in high terms, and
which showed that they had not discontinued their education.
This, I conceive, is one of the very great advantages of the
system I have adopted; school-work becomes a relaxation and
a pleasure instead of being drudgery, because the boy compares
his day at school, not with a holiday or a day of bird’s nesting,
but with a day on the farm.
All his associations with books
are therefore pleasant, and in every instance I believe my lads con
tinue their education after they leave school. I asked one what he
was doing, and he said he was working logarithms; and another is
under-secretary to the Reform Club in London. They are qualified
for superior situations. There is no difficulty whatever in obtain
ing situations as farm servants for them after they leave me, because
�141
they are better than the ordinary run of boys. My bailiff says
when he was at their age he went to school till he was thirteen, and
then he had to go to the farm, and suffered extremely during the
first few months, because the labour was new to him. But my boys
are never tired ; they work one day on the farm, and rest the next
at school. They walk straight not slovenly, in the way those do who
are tired to death. Their minds and bodies are both improved.
The great subject, Lfancy, this morning, is how far education should
be compulsory. I have always held, and stated it publicly many
times, when I had the honour of representing Nottingham, that in
my opinion, society, being bound to provide for the poor and
criminal, have a right to see that the poor are brought up in such
a way that there shall be the least possible probability of their
becoming paupers or criminals. Therefore I have never had any
hesitation in saying I was in favour of compulsory education, and
I fully endorse what has been said by several gentlemen, that it
will not be ill received by the labouring classes. The schoolmaster
in my village tells me that men who are not educated themselves,
and who never cared about education before, send their children to
him to fit them to come upon my farm, because they find that is
the road to it. With respect to the religious question, I think it
will be an advantage to set the Sunday school free for religious
teaching. I think religion will not in any way suffer, but will
gain greatly by the education of the people being properly attended
to.
Professor Pawcett, M.P. : After the general remarks that have
been made this morning, and especially after the admirable speech
of my friend Mr. Mundella, it would be superfluous for me to say a
word in favour of the principle of compulsion. It may, however,
be assumed that every one who has joined this League has clearly
and distinctly made up his mind to this fact—that no settlement of
the educational question ought ever to be listened to, much less
earned as a permanent settlement, unless it involve the principle
of compelling the attendance of children at the school. I shall
endeavour to make the few remarks I have to address to you as
practical as possible. Will you, therefore, allow me to point out to
you what in my mind is the great danger which threatens the future
�142
|
of this education question ? I fear there is some chance that it
may be wrecked in the same way as so many good measures have
been wrecked, by accepting a compromise in part. It is all very
well for us to make bold speeches and talk outspoken language on
platforms like this, but you are little aware of the blandishments
which are brought to bear upon Liberal members when their party
introduces a bill. You say you think the bill unsatisfactory. You
then hear it whispered in your ear—“ Not going to support the bill
of your party? why, you are faithless to those whom you ought to
support 1” To show that my suspicions are not altogether illfounded, let me in one or two sentences describe to you the great
peril which the education question only narrowly escaped last
session. A National Education Bill for Scotland was introduced
into the House of Lords—a strange proceeding, to begin with. The
Dill—had when it was sent there—was infinitely worse when it left.
When it came down to the House of Commons, seeing that the Scotch
members are jealous of the interference of English members, I knew
it was no use moving myself. I went to a Scotch member, a friend,
and asked him to put down an amendment for the second reading
—an amendment similar to that which it is quite possible we may
have to move next session—that no measure of national education
could be satisfactory if it involved compulsory rating without com
pulsory attendance. You can have no conception of the pressure
which was immediately brought to bear upon that hon. member. He
was young, and he did not stand firm ; but I trust, at any rate, if
next session compulsory rating is introduced without compulsory
attendance, one at least of the fifty members of Parliament who
have joined this League—Mr. Mundella or Mr. Dixon—will be
stern enough to say this is a question on which there can he no
compromise. We are willing to wait one year, two years, or three
years, but when we have a national education measure passed, it
shall be such a measure as shall absolutely, with perfect certainty,
guarantee elementary education to every child in this kingdom.
What became of the Scotch Education Bill ? Liberal members
were told they ought to vote for it, and they did. I do not say it
to my own credit, but I believe I am almost the only English
member who, whenever there was a division on the subject, steadily
�143
walked out of the house. And what were the arguments to make
English members vote for it ? That bill, it is true, introduced into
Scotland what was never introduced into Scotland before—•
undenominational education ; but it was said, this undenomina
tional education was introduced in such a slight, slender, and
delicate form, that it ought to be passed with hurry and precipitation,
because there would be something worse in the English measure
next session. What I want is, that we shall be representing
you—the thousands who have joined this League—representing
you faithfully and accurately, if we say it is your earnest
desire that no measure of national education shall be passed
until we have the power to get a compulsory and unsectarian
system. I think we ought to have absolute security that no child
shall be permitted to work—whether we fix the age of nine, ten,
eleven, or, as Mr. Mundella suggested, twelve—no child shall be
allowed to work until it can show that it has been to school a
certain number of years. With regard to the only remaining
branch of the subject on which I shall speak—that is, the question
of applying some kind of compulsory education to the agricultural
districts—I was rejoiced more than I can describe to hear the
remarks of Mr. Paget—to hear from his own lips the admirable
success of his movement. He must be regarded as a benefactor—
the nation must feel grateful to him for having been a pioneer. When
I mention the word agricultural, I am reminded of another danger.
Here is a case you must watch carefully. Persons will rise
in the House of Commons as they have done already, and they
will say it is very well to apply the half-time system or the alter
nate day system to the industry of such a town as Birmingham,
but there is something exceptional about agriculture; we must
have a different system there. Are we not expressing your opinions
if we say that it is your desire that agriculture should not be thus
exceptionally treated ? The system that is proposed is that in
agriculture a child should not attend school either half time or
alternate days, but should attend school so many hours in the year.
If this scheme is proposed, we can at once meet it with most
valuable experience—that is the scheme that was introduced with
regard to the Print Works Act; and I say that experience con
�144
clusively demonstrates that the scheme of so many school hours’
attendance in the year has proved a lamentable and disastrous
failure. The great principle, I consider, of the half-time system
is this—that if it is properly worked, if there is a good school,
judiciously managed, the children learn better after a certain age,
and work better, if they attend school so many hours a day and
work so many hours a day. This, I believe, is one great principle
connected with the half-time system. I must, in conclusion,
apologise for having apparently introduced, yesterday, a certain
amount of discord into your deliberations. I fear some of my
remarks were misunderstood. There are some men who have not
joined this League because they differ upon minor points of detail,
upon which I also differ; especially, one of the most eminent of
your townsmen, the Bev. B. W. Dale,—no good movement in
Birmingham ought to be without his name attached to it—has
objections which I know are exactly analagous to mine. I thought,
therefore, I should state as strongly as I could what were my
objections, and that I was perfectly willing to forgive and forget
them in order to get a united movement on behalf of the movement
in order to get some good men to join this League. I am willing
to sacrifice any matter of individual opinion in order to throw my
whole heart and strength into the great, the unequalled, object of
securing unsectarian, or, if you like it better, secular compulsory
education in this country.
Mr. Webster, Q.C.: I should have hesitated to address you on
the present occasion, after the most powerful speech you have heard,,
if I had not the greatest anxiety to contribute, in whatever small
measure I can, to the success of this great movement. I am not
wholly inexperienced. I have watched for many years, as far as
time would permit me, the educational questions which have been
brought before the public' from time to time, and I have had the
satisfaction of establishing a Church of England schoool in spite of
the clergyman, in spite of the bishop, in an agricultural district
where there was none when I went into it. Nobody knows the
difficulty of such a labour who has not gone through it. I rejoice
that this League is placed upon a foundation from which it cannot
be displaced. I am satisfied, from considerable experience of Con
�145
gresses, that a more successful meeting of inauguration never took
place. I think we have to some extent lost sight, in our discus
sions, of the great practical fact with which we have to deal. The
Archdeacon, says there is an overwhelming necessity for education—
that it is a great public danger that there should be two millions of
uneducated children, growing up as Arabs in our public streets, who
will be the paupers and criminals of the next generation. That is
the fact we have to deal with, and when we are told that the
denominational or voluntary system has failed—I don’t quite like
the use of that word, failed—but it has been found incompetent to
deal with this great calamity; and therefore I trust this League will
he the means of founding a different system, which shall be more
calculated to deal with the difficulty. Let us not forget that great
fact—that we have two millions of uneducated children growing
up amongst us. That fact becomes a civil question as well as a moral
question. It is a question of pounds, shillings, and pence, and it
is patent that compulsion is the rock upon which our new system
must be founded. On this subject I adopt the admirable views of
Mr. Mundella ; and it is worthy of observation that in dealing with
this evil of ignorance we shall, in my opinion, do something to
remedy another evil also. By employing female teachers, you will
provide employment for women, and it has been proved in America
that they are admirable teachers. My own opinion about it is, that
it is an exceptional thing to find a woman who is not a good teacher,
and it is exceptional to find a man who is not a bad one. I look,
therefore, to this movement as contributing to the removal of two
great social calamities—the ignorance of the people, and the
want of employment for women. I believe we may appeal to our
friends on the other side of the Atlantic to show what might be
done by the system of Common Schools ; and, although it is
possible, for the reason stated—the want of compulsory powers—
that it may not have had all the succces that was hoped for, still
we may look to America for an example, which we shall do well to
follow. Let me remind you, that with compulsory attendance
schools must be free, and founded upon rates—local rates, because
you want local management, by men who are acquainted with the
wants and requirements of the district; and the schools must be
K
�146
subsidized by national funds, because you w,ant Government super
vision. The first step to be taken is to have a proper register kept
of all parents and children. Why should not towns be divided
into districts, as in Boston, and other cities of the States?
We have an approximation to it with reference to the elective
franchise, but we want a more perfect system to carry out that
■which, as Mr. Mundella pointed out with great force, is done so well
in Saxony. These are the practical matters we have to deal with.
If we want to get these schools free, I believe means will be found
whereby existing schools may be to a certain extent utilized; but
whether or not, let us not forget that we have to deal with two
millions of children who are growing up to be criminals or paupers,
and who will overwhelm us unless we deal with them fearlesslv.
Let me mention Joseph Lancaster : the motto he inscribed over his
own door was—“ All that will may send their children and have
them educated freely, and those who don’t wish education for
nothing may pay if they please.” He was the pioneer, in Bristol, of
what has been called the voluntary system, which lias produced
great effects, though it is inadequate to deal with the present difficulty. About the religious question : I would be very unwilling,
except from the necessity of conceding something in order that we
may all go hand in hand—I would be very unwilling that a portion
of the Scriptures should not be read day by day. But having
expressed that opinion, I would exclude all sectarian and denomi
national teaching whatever. I would follow the example of our
brethren across the Atlantic, and make it a rule that no book
teaching the tenets of any particular sect of Christians should be
purchased or used, but that they should use a portion of the Bible, in
the common English version, daily. But this is a secondary ques
tion, and I am delighted to hear Dr. Rowland Williams use the
expression “ men must be men,” because with these children left
as they are, they cannot become men—they cannot become citizens;
and let us remember people are citizens before they are Christ.ia.nR,
Our object is first to make them good citizens, and then bring them
under the influence of a proper system of religious teaching—not
teaching them religion, for I acknowledge the distinction between
religious teaching and teaching religion; but I assume religious
�147
teaching is that everything should be done with a proper regard to
■hose great truths of revelation, in which we all believe and trust.
T would not quarrel with the decision if the locality wished any
portion of the Scriptures read ; but Sunday should be kept for
religious purposes, and it should not be distracted by that kind of
teaching which is more fitted for the week days.
Dr. J. A. Langford : I am anxious to make two remarks—one
upon a point which, I think, has not been alluded to at the
Conference before, namely, that we have the highest cause to
congratulate ourselves, upon the progress which this question of
national secular education has made in this country during the last
few years. In the year 1849—only twenty years ago—an attempt
was made, in this and other towns, to organise a similar society to
this, for a similar object. It alfiiost enterely failed ; and here we
are to-day holding meetings like this, and listening to papers such
as we have heard. We have great cause to congratulate ourselves,
and to be hopeful for the future. I wanted to say also, that this League
must stick absolutely firm to the four principles which it sets out with :
that education should be compulsory, national, secular, free. There
may be a temptation to give up one of these points, because there
may be fear of a long agitation ; but it will be far better for us,
far better for the education of this country, and the question will
be far more speedily settled finally, if we persist in agitating for
this programme, than if we give up any one of the items ; for I
believe if we give up any one, the whole structure will fall about
our ears, and our children will have to do the work over again,
which we are doing now. I wished to say these two things to the
meeting, because I have laboured in this question more than .twenty
years, of my comparatively short life. Don’t let us squabble about
the meaning of the words “ sacred ” and “ secular.” Shakespeare
settled that point 300 years ago, when he said :
“ Ignorance is the curse of God.”
“ Knowledge, the wing wherewith we fly to Heaven.”
All knowledge is divine, and we have only to give children a
good secular education, and their children’s children will have for
themselves a religious education built upon it. Many people
who profess to speak for the working classes have said they
�148
were opposed to this compulsory measure. You have heard
from Mr. Applegarth, and others who mix with the working
classes, that they will not object to it, and I—as the representative
of one of the most active educational societies in this town, the
Society of Artisans, every member of which is a representative
man—can assure you that the working classes will not object to it..
Whenever this question has been brought before that society, they
have one and all declared, in support of a national system of educa
tion, secular, voluntary, free, rate-supported, supplemented by money
from the Consolidated Fund. There is no charity in going to a
school supported by rates. Look at our free libraries. Every man
who uses a book has contributed towards the purchase of it, and it
is part of his own proporty, because it is the property of the town.
So it will be with rate-supported schools ; there is no charity. They
must be secular and free.
FREE SCHOOLS.
The proceedings were resumed at half-past two, when
Mr. Alfred Field read the following paper on “Free Schools:”
—England, in the higher education, may not be behind the rest of
the world, but in the diffusion of a good general education Eng
land is very much behind other countries ; certainly much behind
Prussia, Northern Germany, Switzerland, and the United States.
It is not far from the truth if we say that while in those countries
every child receives a good useful education, less than half the
children of England carry into life with them an education that is
of any uge to them. And from this statement let us not conclude
that the education, of the masses of this country is half as good as
that of the Germans, Swiss, or Americans. Our comparative
deficiency is far greater than that; for the education of the children
I am obliged to let pass as educated, in order to make up the
half of the children of England, is very inferior in value, to the
good average education of all the children of those nations. We .
deal out a meagre pittance to half our children ; they give a liberal
measure to all. To understand more fully why the difference is so
great in the intelligence of the working classes of England, and of
�149
those countries I have referred to, we must remember that school
■education is only putting tools into the hands of the young for
after use in the real education of life ; and in those countries the
men and women, who in early life have had the doors of their minds
unlocked by instruction in excellent schools, meet together in their
homes and workshops, in the streets and in public places, and by
intelligent, social, and political intercourse, continue, or rather really
■enter into, their true education. In this country our working
people have no such educated families and neighbours to associate
with. In America the diffusion of popular knowledge and quick
intelligence, down to the very bottom of society is most astonishing
to all observant travellers. And the contrast of the slow, benighted
. minds of our lowest class, should be a warning and strong impulse,
in the cause of education, to Englishmen. You cannot discover in
the United States any line of separation, or marks of distinction
between the working classes and those we should suppose above
them. You hear people talking in groups, on the steamboats or in
the railroad carriages, with ready language and quick intelligence,
with easy manners and natural politeness ; and if you could learn,
you would find that nearly all had been educated in the public free
schools of the country, and that a good proportion of them were
working men. It cannot possibly be doubted, that the foundation
of this wonderful spread of popular knowledge and universally
quickened intellect, is the public free school. The only way in
which we can get the mass of the people of England educated, as
quickly and efficiently as will meet the awakened demand of the
country, is by a complete national system similar in principle to
that in America. If we are to make this national system complete
and sufficient, I do not think wo can dispense with any one of the
six points of our League. Our plan is clastic in its power of de
velopment. The beginning, of course, would be the establishment
everywhere of the sadly-needed efficient primary school. We must
start with primary schools. But then let each school district, as fast
as it pleases, build on them a system of secondary and high schools.
Ultimately, I hope, the new national school system will grow and
be a complete and connected system of graded schools—-primary,
secondary, and high schools—all free. Tliis system might readily be
�150
connected with the large endowed schools of the country, and
perhaps, by a system of scholarships, with the Universities. I will
ask everyone to compare a complete connected system of this sort
with the present schools. The voluntary and denominational sys
tem sets up separate, competitive, even hostile schools ; and if you
were ever to get this system developed enough to make a really good
education possible to all, you would have rival schools everywhere
too many in some parts, not enough in others—and each school
obliged to go to great expense to have a staff of different teachers,
from the infant class, to the really educated boys and girls of 14 to
16 years old. I on may have the contemptible pittance now offered
to the country continued and extended, but you cannot have the
good education demanded by England, out of the isolated denomi
national system, without enormous expense ; and this heavy cost
must in some way fall on the resources of the country. [ appeal to
everyone, acquainted with schools and education, whether, to give a
good education to all the children of England, and one higher and
more extended to the capable and diligent, it is not necessary that
we should have a connected system of graded schools, through
which the pupils shall rise by examination. As a matter of money,
the difference of cost of good education for England, between one
system and the other, is a difference between pounds and shillings.
As a practical fact, England cannot (jet good education by the deno
minational system, and she can easily by a truly national system. The
public school system of the United States, is a model for the general
education of a people. Such a system as their graded schools—pri
mary, secondary, and high schools—is demanded by economy,
and is absolutely necessary to efficient success. And the plan
of the League, not copied from them, is in truth the same in principle,
but improved, I believe, in details. The Americans are the same
people as ourselves, on the western side of the Atlantic instead of the
eastern. What they can do we can do. It is a firm and a safe position
for our League that we advocate no untried scheme, that we can
point to the complete, and grand success of it in America. The
public school system of the United States is the foundation of
their political edifice, and is the true cause of their extraordinary
industrial, and commercial prosperity. The rapid growth of wealth
�151
in the country, the happiness and morality of its people, and the
political safety of the nation, depend on the public school system.
Now, I have a few words to say on the desirability of having our
schools free to the scholars, and paid for out of rates supplemented
by Government grants—not by voluntary contributions, and school
pence. It is a necessary part of the completeness of the system
that the schools should he paid for by rates. If the control of the
national schools, of each school district should rest, as we think it
should, with the Corporation or other local authorities, who would
doubtless appoint a school committee to manage them, then the
right of the Corporations to this control, would be derived from
their being elected by the ratepayers, who would pay for the schools.
I have tried to show that a complete, connected, organized system of
graded schools is necessary to efficiency and economy; in fact, that
we cannot get a good education for all the people without. It
might be possible to have such an organized connected system of
national schools in France, without their being under the local
authorities : I do not think this is possible in England any more
than in America. I think that the position that schools should be
paid for by rates, is naturally connected with the other one, that
they should be under the control of local authorities ; and that
they should be free to all, would be made easy by their being
paid for by rates and Government grants. I think, first, that they
should be free to all children; and, secondly, that all children should
be required by law to go to the national schools, or some other school,
are two conditions, independent and complementary one of the
other. I cannot practically and successfully say to a man, 11 I will
compel you to send your child to school,” unless I say at the same
time, “ Here is a good school without charge, which belongs to you
tor the use of your children.” On the other hand, I cannot justly
say to a man, “You must pay your quota to the school-rate,”
unless I am able, in answer to his enquiry, also to say “ that all
children will now go to school; the law requires it and gives us
power to compel attendance, and we will see the law carried out
gently, considerately, with patient persuasion, but ultimately and as a
last resourse, by force, if in some few cases it should turn out to be
necessary.” I can tell this ratepayer that he himself will be bene
�152
fited by the money lie pays, that he never made so good an invest
ment in his life, or one that will bring so good a monetary return.
A commercial man myself, with almost as much personal knowledge
of America as I have of England, I have often pointed out to my
fellow merchants that the United States are now manufacturing
and exporting to the English Colonies and the common markets of
the world many articles, to a large amount, that formerly were
made in this district. In doing this, the American manufacturers
work under the enormous weight of nearly double the cost of the
iron and steel out of which the articles are made, and nearly double
the English rate of wages, to the American workmen that make
them ; and yet they send these articles to our English Colonies, and
thus supersede those that used to be imported from Birmingham.
What is the explanation ? There is none other than that of the greater
intelligence of the American workmen. And the foundation of this
high intelligence and ductility of mind is the American public free
school. Every £1,000 rightly expended for the education of the
future English workmen will produce, in a very few years, a return
of £10,000 to the country. Every ratepayer will receive an ample
return, at an early day, in the increased material wealth of the
country, of which all deserving merchants, manufacturers, trades
men, and capitalists will get each his own share. England, to
maintain her place among the nations, must educate her people.
Even as a manufacturing country, to keep her place—or, rather, to
check the yearly diminution of her proportion of the supply
of the world, with articles above the coarsest product of low
labour—England must educate her people. German merchants
have been for years, and rapidly too, supplanting English
goods the world over, with the products of the educated work
men of Rhenish Prussia, Saxony, and North Germany. The
manufactories of the United States, have been for years sending
hardware, and other manufactures to all new countries of the world
in place of English goods. And whenever they get rid of the
burden of an absurd protection system, the American manufacturers
are destined to cover the world, with their skilfully made articles,
each so intelligently suited to the purpose it is. intended for.
Without education, England must fall behind other nations ; we
�153
have already lost much, and we cannot begin too soon to knock oft'
the shackles of ignorance from our workmen. On the other hand,
with education, the sturdy inhabitants of the land, will make Great
Britain more and more the wonderful island of the world. In this
way, indirect though it may be called, I believe will the chief
return come to the ratepayers, for their investment in the new
national schools. But look at a more direct saving :—The rate
payers of England and Wales paid last year nearly eleven and a
half millions for poor rates ; the cost of the police for the year was
more than two millions • the cost of the prisons for the year was
more than one million ;—reformatories I have left out. Put the
poor rates, prisons, and police together, and the sum is more than
fourteen and a half millions. Educate the people, and does not
every one see, that the annual sum he will pay for the school rate
will soon reduce a man’s expense in poor rates, police and prison
expenses ? This dreadful sum—fourteen and a half millions—paid
for catching and punishing our rogues and maintaining our paupers,
is the shame of England. Educate your people, and in a very few
years the saving out of this fourteen and a half millions, will more
than pay your school rates. One proof that education will diminish
crime, and therefore the expense of punishing it, is found in the
ignorance oi our convicted criminals. The returns of the state of
education of the inmates of our gaols, for each of the two last
years show, that ninety-six out of every hundred could not read or
write, or only so imperfectly as to be of no use to them. In
America a native-born mendicant or pauper is very rare indeed.
Why is this ? Mainly because all have been educated, in the
public free schools of the country. Our present voluntary system
is unfair: the few contributors to the expenses of the denomi
national schools, pay for the large number who will not give. The
payment by rates will cause every man who pays rates to contribute
his proportion : and by so doing he will obtain a just right to use
the schools for which he pays his share. Those who are too poor
to pay rates, will send their children without pay, but without the
degradation of thinking they are paid for by charity. The child
ren of the country will stream into the new national schools—all
equal in the right to enter there, none oppressed with the degrading
�154
badge of charity. The very poor, and no others, will send their
children without contributing to the cost of the schools. Let me
ask many excellent men, who object to our schools being free,
whether this would not be a result much the same as they advocate.
Every ratepayer will be interested in the schools being well con
ducted. A real public opinion, exactly to the purpose, will be
created, and upon public opinion the character and success of the
schools will essentially depend. The ratepayer will justly want to
see the schools good enough to receive his own children. This will
help the schools to improve; and in school districts, with many
primary schools, secondary schools will soon spring up, to be fol
lowed later, probably, by a high school, belonging to several
districts. Thus, many ratepayers will get their money’s worth in
such schools as suit their own children. But some gentlemen
object, in the outset, to schools being free, saying, “ Englishmen are
apt to attach little value to what costs them nothing.” To this
objection I would reply, that at present, under the denominational
system, of those who send their children to National or British
Schools, none pay, in school pence, more than about one-third the
cost of teaching, and the very poor are, from charity, generally paid
for by others. In the system of payment by rates, all but the very
poor will pay in their rates ; and the very poor are now paid for in
a way tending more to injure their self-respect, than the way we
propose. But is it true that people do not value what they do not
pay for ? Englishmen value free parks, free common rights, and,
what is closer to the present case, free libraries paid for out of rates,
and free grammar schools. The truth is, I think, that people
value anything that is good, even if they do not pay for it. The
people of the United States,'who are of the same stock as ourselves,
value their free public schools, as their dearest birthright ; yes,
almost as much as they value the Union inself. I think gentlemen
uttering this objection will, on a little thought, give it up. Looking
at the call for education, from no higher point of view than the
mere economical one, I would say that not the coal of England,
not her iron, not the fields of her cultivated farms, can compare
in importance even to her material wealth, with the minds of her
people. In the brains of the children of this country Englishmen
�155
will find the true mine of wealth to work in. You may work here
without fear of exhausting the ore, and the wealth here contained
includes all the rest.
UNSECTARIANISM.
The Rev. F. Bariiam Zincke, Vicar of Wherstead, Suffolk, and
Chaplain-in-Ordinary to the Queen, read the following paper :—
I have been requested by our Committee to lay before the members
of the National Education League, at this our first general meeting,
a brief summary of the reasons which have brought us to the con
clusion, that the teaching of the schools we wish to see established
ought to be unsectarian. By unsectarian, we mean teaching, that
omits the inculcation of those particulars of religious instruction
which differentiate, the conflicting sections of the religious world in
this country. The reasons which have brought us to this conclusion
may be readily stated. Of course, wn are not satisfied with our
existing schools. First, because they fail to reach large classes of
our population. In this very town in which we are assembled there
is a sufficient number of children of the school age, growing up
uneducated, to form the population of no mean city. It is so, more
or less, in every city of the kingdom, and with a very large propor
tion of the rural population. To go into particulars—it is so
with the children of our criminal classes ; it is so with that class
which supplies our 1,000,000 paupers, and that still larger host
which is pauperised in spirit, and on the brink of the abyss of
pauperism. Take the first 100 agricultural labourers you can col
lect from the fields, take 100 operatives from the nearest factory,
take 150,000 soldiers, or 50,000 sailors, and what, we may ask,
will be the proportion, in these different sections of the community,
that our present school system has effectually reached 1 The state
of things this reveals we regard as an enormous evil, the continuance
of which can be no longer tolerated. Our present denominational,
and, as it is called, voluntary system—but it would be nearer the
truth to call it eleemosynary,—has, after a long and fair trial, left
us in this position. We believe that it has failed because it is
denominational and eleemosynary. Such a system does not aim at
educating the nation, and could not succeed were it to aim at doing
�156
it. But as it has been tried, and found wanting, and as we are
fully persuaded that it can never accomplish what is needed, we are
driven to the conclusion that nothing can do the work except a
public system; and we hold that nothing else will befit the dignity
of a free, and, very properly, a proud people. A public system, of
■course, can only be supported by public funds, and therefore must
be unsectarian ; for everyone who contributes either towards the
local rates, or the general taxation of the country, will have grounds
for insisting, that his contributions shall not be used for the purpose
of teaching what he conscientiously objects to. The compromise
-of our present denominational system, is a demonstration that the
great majority of, at all events, the upper and middle classes of the
people of this country feel in this way. Another reason for om’
dissatisfaction with the present system, is the insufficiency of the
instruction it gives, to those whom it does, in some sort, reach. Our
present theory and practice appear to come to this, that nothing is
possible or desirable, for the great bulk of the people—the
lower strata of the middle classes, and the working millions
{setting the -question of religion aside for the moment)—but
a smattering of grammar. This is a natural deduction from
the idea, that all that is possible or desirable in our highest education
—that is, for the education of that part of the people of this country
who are giving up nearly a third of tlieir lives to school and college—
is, that they should become the subjects, or the victims, of an attempt
to make them classical scholars. So that when the work of education
has been completed (it is so for all classes among us alike), no one
thing has been taught, which has the slightest bearing on the know
ledge or the thoughts of the age; which in any way fits us for the life
we have to live, and the world we have to live in or which makes
us at all acquainted with the materials we shall have to work with,
■or which gives us any guidance for the work we shall have to do.
Nothing has been taught which does at all contribute, as Bacon
puts it, towards the relief of man’s estate, or towards making us
more manly or more godly. I use this last word, because it calls
attention to the accusation, our opponents are so loud in alleging
against the scientific training we wish to see imparted in our
.schools. Bor our part, we do not believe that the effect of the ac
�157
quaintance with. Latin and Greek, and of the little grammatical
instruction that is given in our existing schools, is especially
religious. But we are of opinion that science, being only a know
ledge of the ideas that were in the intelligence of God, before they
were embodied in the objects, the operations, the forces, and thelaws of nature, can never take _us further from, but must always
bring us nearer to, God. In short, our present aims appear to us
very much like a pretence to teach something—a something, we
believe, which will rarely awaken thought, and will be of incon
ceivably little use to any of us, just and precisely for the very pur
pose of hindering the teaching of something else, which would
awaken thought, and which would be of very great use. We do
not, then, go in for a reform of these ideas and practices, but—I
hope I shall not compromise our League by the word—for a
revolution. We wish to give every one an opportunity for being
taught just what he will want to know. We wish to see our
primary schools, teaching the whole population the instrumental
parts of education—reading, writing, and ciphering—as well and as
universally as these things are taught in Northern Germany, and in
the New England States. And we wish to see the schools, cominw
next above our primary schools, aming chiefly at industrial, tech
nical, and scientific training, and at the correct use of our mother
tongue. I need not now say anything about schools of a higher
grade. It is possible for us—for it is done elsewhere—to impart
even to working men a very serviceable amount of this kind of
knowledge, which will not only make them better workmen, and
so enable us to maintain our position in the open market of the
world, but will also make the recipients of this knowledge them
selves, better and wiser men. Our beau ideal of a national system
of education is, that it should be so organised as to place within the
reach of every child in the country, free of all cost, the most
complete and thorough training our present knowledge admits of,
whatever his employment or profession is to be—whether that of
an agricultural labourer, a mechanic, or a miner; whether a
physician, a minister of religion, or a literary man;—and that no
bounties should be given to, and special preferences shown for,
any particular callings or professions, but that the circumstances of
�158
the parents, and the disposition and aptitude of the child, should
alone decide in each, case what the calling or profession is to be.
The realisation of such an ideal might a few years back, have
appeared quite beyond our reach; but it does not appear to be so
now, at all events to the members of this League; for we fancy
that we are able to catch a glimpse of it; and some approximation
to it is the goal of our thoughts and efforts. Now, we see no hope
of the general establishment, under the present system, of schools
of the kind I have been speaking of. It is inconceivable that
they will ever be established by the clergy, or by the ministers
of Nonconformist congregations, who are the chief promoters
and managers of our present schools. Because, then, we see no
shadow of a prospect of these things being taught in our present
denominational schools, which have been established for quite a
different object, we advocate the establishment of another set of
schools without any sectarian objects, which, as they will be partly
supported by local funds, will be managed by persons who will be
interested in having these things taught. This is the conclusion
we come to, when we regard the schools from the point of view
that will be taken, by those who will pay for them. We come to
the same conclusion, if we look at them from the point of view
that will be taken by those who are to use them. They must be
•equally free to all. No hindrance must be interposed, which would
be an obstacle to their being used by any member of the
•community. Now, the inculcation in the schools, of denomina.tional differences would be a hindrance of this kind. From our
wish, therefore, to make the schools equally open to all, we would
not have anything taught in them, to which any Christian people
do conscientiously object. We are all of opinion that as things
now are (we believe that it will not always be so), in some cases
some form or degree of compulsion, to secure attendance will be
necessary. Things have now come to such a pass, that the security
and well-being of society demand this. As we have already noticed,
with a yearly aggregate of 125,000 committals, with more than
1,000,000 paupers, and with a still vaster host on the brink of pauper
ism ; and with multitudes among us who do not know the name of
the reigning Sovereign, or of the Saviour of the World, and who
�159
derive their only ideas of right and wrong from the policeman; and
with our agricultural labourers, in a condition intellectually so
degraded, that the most sanguine politicians among us forbear to
demand for them the franchise, we think this necessary. But we
trust that, like the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland,
the necessity for compulsion will be temporary. The late extension
of the franchise, which places political power largely in the hands
of the uneducated, confirms us in our view of this necessity. But,
of course, the question of compulsion cannot be for a moment
entertained, so long as we have no other than our present denomina
tional schools. We cannot compel the children of Nonconformists
to attend the rector’s or vicar’s school; and the children of
Episcopalians anti-prelatical schools. The attempt could not be
made. These converging reasons, then, oblige us to advocate
unsectarian education in the schools we aim at establishing. But
we have not arrived at this conclusion, without having carefully
weighed the consequences of what we propose. We have looked
into the facts which bear on the consideration of the question,
and have estimated the pros and cons of the arguments that deal
with its probabilities; and, having done this, we have found no
.grounds for apprehension. The great and conspicuous facts con
tributed by past and contemporary history are easily stated, and
will be easily understood. In Italy and Spain—the countries in
which, whatever education there may have been, has been most
■completely of the kind, advocated by the supporters of our denominational system—the result has not been good as regards literature,
science, and, above all, as regards religion itself. The example of
Erance, as far as the education of the people of that country has
been in the hands of the clergy, points to the same conclusion.
There, too, the reaction against religion appears to be in the ratio
of the force religion has brought to bear, in the manner we are
now speaking of, upon the minds of the young. I should not
think it worth while to recall the fact, that the most celebrated
pupil of the Jesuits was Voltaire, were it not that the spirit of
Voltaire is so common among Frenchmen. Every one will under
stand that there is no question about bringing up children without
religion; the only question is as to the best way of making a
�160
people religious. The lesson Ave are taught by the experience of
Prussia is on the same side. There the Government has made
religious instruction, according to a certain formula, a part of the
school course. Again we ask what has been the result ? Upon
this very question, we have lately had a discussion in the columns
of the Times, which has left pretty distinctly impressed upon us
one fact, at all e\ ents that in Prussia the attempt to teach religion
in the school, according to a definite formulary has been a signal
and complete failure. The reason is not far to seek. It is impossible to teach religion in this way. Neither you, nor I, nor anybody
else, would be disposed in favour of doctrines forced upon us in this
Avay. Religion is not the child of drill and compulsion. I pass
from Northern Germany to another great country, Avhere, fortu
nately for the purposes of this inquiry, the two systems are brought
into the closest and most distinct contrast. The fruits of the one
are seen, side by side with the fruits of the other. In the United
States of America a large proportion of the population are German
immigrants, Avho were brought up under the school system just
mentioned. Throughout the North and the great West, they are
everywhere living intermingled with the native population, Avho
have all been brought up in Avhat we should call unsectarian schools.
It thus becomes easy to judge, upon which of these two people
religion has the greater hold. In the winter of 1867-68,1 travelled
through the Union, with the exception of the Pacific States. Among
other matters, my attention was naturally very much directed to
Avhatever had any bearings on the religious question. I frequently
heard native Americans speaking of the absence, as it appeared to
them, of the religious element in the character of their German felloAV
citizens; while at the same time, I everywhere saw clear evidence
of the streng religious feeling of the native population, brought up,,
almost to a man, as I just noticed, not merely in unsectarian, but
in secular schools. Wherever I Avent I saw and inspected schools
of this kind, and no others—on the Prairies of the West, and the
Rocky Mountains, as well as in Massachusetts. But the first
buildings that met my eyes, almost in every place, were the
churches—at Denver, beyond the Prairies and the Plains, and
further on, in the little mining toAvns in the Rocky Mountains, as
�161
much as in Boston itself. And we must remember, that these
churches have been built, and that their Ministers are supported
by those, who were all the while very busy in clearing away the
forest, and reclaiming the wilderness, and raising the first shelter for
man. As a general ride in the country I am speaking of, where all the
schools are secular, the foundations of the homestead and of the
House of God, are laid simultaneously. I believe—though of course
no one can be in a position to prove it—that a larger amount of
money is raised every year, by voluntary contributions for religious
purposes in the United States, than, over the whole continent of
Europe. Those who question our conclusion will have to convince
us that, notwithstanding these facts, the Continental school system
is more conducive to the interests of religion than the American.
What we want them to do is to disprove, or if they are unable
to do this, to bring into harmony with their theory, the asser
tion, that in those countries in which their plan has been most
thoroughly carried out, there exists the greatest amount of
hostility to religion; while in that great country in which
education is most throughly secular, more so than in any
other country in the world, more money is voluntarily given for
religious purposes, and the ministers of religion are held in higher
estimation, than in any other part of Christendom. But we are
not without experience ourselves on this question. Generally
speaking, our schools are denominational; and, again speaking
generally, the class which in the towns is most largely indebted to
them for its education, is that of the artisans. Now, if the theory
of our opponents is the true one, we ought to see the good results
of it here. But what is the fact ? We have been told again and
again, that there is no other class in the community which has
strayed so largely, and so far from the fold in which they were
brought up. Take a large London national school, under the
shadow of an imposing London Church. I take it for granted that
the greater part of the scholars, are either children of artisans or,
if not, still will be brought up to some handicraft. We may ask
how many of those, who have been brought up in that school are
ever seen in that Church? and what is the expectation in this
matter, respecting those who are now in the school ? It can, then,
L
�162
hardly be the results of our present system, which make any of us
desirous of maintaining it. We have another domestic instance
in the case of the Irish Roman Catholics, who for many generations
have maintained their religion, as no other people in Europe have
done, in consequence, not of the aid, but of the neglect, and even
the hostility of the State. Facts of this kind lead us to the
conclusion, that in advocating unsectarian schools, we are most
assuredly not acting in hostility to religion. I will only make one
more remark. All these schools will be day schools. The
children will, therefore, be still living at home. The parents will
thus have, in the morning and evening of each day, and during
the whole of Saturday and Sunday, as much opportunity as
probably they have at present, for bringing up their children
religiously. The Sunday school will supply similar opportunities
to the clergy, and other religiously-disposed persons. We know
that there will always be parents, who will be living immoral and
irreligious lives; but in the case of the children even of such
parents as these, we do not think that any advantage would result
from the teaching of the schools, being of a sectarian character.
Of course, no one supposes for a moment that there will be any
irreligious, or anti-Christian instruction, given in any school in the
kingdom supported by public money, and under the joint super
vision of a Government inspector, and of a local board of manage
ment. I will sum up in half a dozen words the different
arguments I have been laying before you—we cannot get what
we want without unsectarian teaching; and we see no reason for
supposing that evil consequences of any kind will result from it.
SECULAR EDUCATION.
The Hon. Auberon Herbert read the following paper on
“ Secular Education”:—In asking that national education should be
unsectarian—that is, unconnected with the teaching of any creed—
we shall all recognize the obligation of considering gravely if, under
such a system, the moral and spiritual life of the people will suffer
injury. With such a feeling in my mind, I shall try to show that
it is not merely the readiest way of dealing with our religious diffi
culties, but that it is to be desired in itself, as the system under
�163
which the office that the State, and the office that ministers of
religion hold in trust for the people, will he better understood and
better discharged. There still exists amongst us some confusion of
thought on this subject. We have formed the habit of looking
upon morality as the property, the special province of the clergy.
If this were a just view—as morality is of all things the most
important—then the present denominational system would be very
incomplete, the system of the middle ages, and Dr. Manning’s
teaching of to-day would be right, and all education ought to be
placed in the hands of the Churches. But morality is not to be
enclosed within such narrow bounds. Morality is of the home, and
the street, and the public building, as much as of the Church and the
class-room. Its limits, its tendencies, its developments are not
determined by a class amongst us, but by the action of all those
mixed intelligences which form society. The professional teachers
have always conformed, and must conform, to the climate of opinion
that grows round them. Even the seat of infallibility itself cannot
rise above this influence, and thanks to “modern Liberalism,” which
it excommunicates, the syllabus of to-day is milder than the syllabus
of earlier ages. If, then, morality is in no fashion a class-property,
who are to be responsible for the teaching of it 1 I answer, the
State, for that which concerns the State; our Churches, for that,
which concerns the Churches. Both have duties of teaching morality,. ■
though their appeal lies to different sanctions. The State has.
simply to deal with the relations of man to man ; the minister of
religion deals not only with these, but with the relations of man to
God. It may, however, be urged that the relations of man to man
are too vague, to be a matter of teaching. I reply, that the State
has never yet found them too vague to be a matter of punishment;
and he who is an awarder of punishment, is bound to know why he
punishes, is bound to act on principles which he can clearly explain,
and which, when explained, will command the moral consent of
those who obey. How shall the State do this ? I answer, by giving
to every child a clear conception, of the fact of his existence as a
member of society, and of the birth with him of obligations whicH
limit his actions towards others • by leading him to understand
what law is—to understand the necessity that where men and women.
�164
live together they should live under law, and the spirit and inten
tions of the laws, which a civilized community imposes on itself. It
must show him that the happiness of society, its power of progres
sion, its power of enjoying higher pleasures, impose on its members,
many obligations—obligations of truthful speech, of upright dealing,
of respect for feelings as well as rights—obligations which cannot
be neglected, without somewhere inflicting injury upon that society
which he is learning to place higher than his own individual ex
istence. Under such teachings the social bond will pass from the
region of phrases, and become to our children as they grow up a
distinct and living reality. The State will no longer be to them a
powei existing outside of themselves, a machine of resistless force
for imposing burdens, and inflicting penalties; but duties owed to
the State will be duties owed to themselves, and slowly, after’
many centuries, but safely in the end, for them if not for us, the
neglected facts of a common humanity will emerge out of the dif
ferences of class and sect. Such is the office of the State as regards
moral teaching, an office which it cannot rightly place out of itsown hands. The minister of religion appeals above, and beyond
these earthly sanctions. It is his, to lead us to form the largest and
noblest conceptions of God, and of God’s dealings ; to teach us to.
know the depth of that spiritual nature which is within us, and
the never-ceasing consolation we may draw from it. The last
minutes of my time, shall be given to consider the influence which
an unsectarian system of education, would exert upon the teachings
of the churches. These teachings would not be diminished ; for
those who labour for the spread of any religious belief would be
freed from all anxiety and responsibility, as regards the other parts
of education, and would be able to devote all their energy to their
special work. By the side of the State education there would grow
up, as in America, a great religious organization, voluntary in man
agement, voluntary in attendance, and taking great hold of the
mind of the people. Still greater would be the influence of the
system, upon the spirit of the teaching. As the State assumes an
attitude of perfect toleration and impartiality, refusing to disavow
the unity of national life, refusing to believe that those things
which divide are stronger than those which unite, I cannot doubt
�165
that the religious teachings of this country, will be affected by the
-example of the State, and gain in breadth and charity. Do not let
us hide from ourselves the fact, that the religious teachings of to-day
must pass through the fire, and all that is narrow and intolerant —
■all that is superstitious, all that fears the light, must be burnt
from them, if in the future they are to command the strongest
minds, and to act with a living, force upon the consciences of the
people. That this may come to pass, that the spiritual life amongst
us may be freer and purer, the State must faithfully discharge its
-own duties, and leave the churches to discharge theirs. A
■country whose churches are built upon the belief, (I quote the
words) “ that every individual must find his separate way to God
by the use of his own intellect and conscience,” cannot make a
State-lesson of the teaching of any church. But one thing it owes to
-every church, and that is to act in the belief, that great national
measures, across the face of which a people’s unity, and a people’s
toleration for every belief and opinion are written in plain
■characters, are religious lessons, which, however silently, reach all
hearts and influence all lives. I ought to add to this paper an ex
planation of a practical character. I have tried to show that un
sectarian education is not irreligious in its influence, I have tried
to show that it is the best form of national education ; but let it be
■understood that I do not wish to displace the present system. All
that I ask is, that the State should frankly recognize the unsectarian
system, allowing it to be introduced, first, where the inhabitants of
-a district desire the system, and decide to rate themselves • secondly,
where a district fails to supply itself with proper school accomo
dation, and is required to rate itself, by the central office or the
■district board. Where schools on the new and old system come
together in the same district, I confess my belief that the old
•schools must give up children’s pence, as a condition of existence ;
but if the State grant be raised, as Mr. Dixon proposes, to twothirds of the total expenses, school managers will have only to
raise about the same sum as at present, which is not an unfair tax
for continuing the luxury of denominational teaching. If all
■existing denominational schools, are wise enough to accept a
satisfactory conscience clause, Government inspection, and a
�166
registry of school attendance, they have probably a long life
before them ; as long, indeed, as their own vitality lasts. Englishwise, we wish, if it be possible, to work out the new pattern, with
out destroying the threads of the old warp.
MISCONCEPTIONS AS TO SECULAR INSTRUCTION.
Mr. G. J. Holyoake read a paper entitled “ Misconceptions as
to Secular Instruction.” He said : In public life it sometimes
: happens that particular persons excite terror and apprehension, yet
when the nation comes to know them, they are found to be wise
and pacific counsellors. The same thing often occurs with
debatable terms. A particular phrase is regarded with hasty
distrust, which, should it be looked at dispassionately, would be
found to indicate exactly what the nation is in want of. Such a
phrase is secular instruction. Eor all the purposes of national
education, it is sufficient to define secular instruction, as that kind
of instruction which pertains to the efficiency of the workman
and the duties of the citizen ; instruction which must be given,
and given with very great distinctness, or the working class will be
cheated of that knowledge which can alone make them creditable
and intelligent members of the State, able to acquit themselves in
the international competition, destined to grow fiercer in coming
years. Now, the term secular in no way denies or questions
that spiritual education which, in proper time and place, can,
in the opinion of most persons, inculcate yet higher motives to
nobleness, and peradventure conduct to the knowledge of God.
That knowledge which is secular is not, as many imagine,
necessarily opposed to that which is religious. It is merely distinct
from it. It merely ignores that which stands outside its province.
Just as mathematics ignores chemistry and does not assail it; just
as jurisprudence ignores geology, but does not deny it; so that
which is secular, stands apart from theology, but neither denies nor
assails it. In this sense, and in this sense alone, I, who have
elsewhere given special currency to the term, have always defined
and explained it. It is true that some persons, not understanding
the integrity of the term, have used it in a confusing way ; but I
take it, that the educated instinct of gentlemen is to employ a term
�167
in its intrinsic signification, and not to insist upon an interpretation
of it, founded upon its obvious abuse. All that the advocates of
secular instruction ask is, that the education given at the cost of
the State shall relate to the duties exacted by the State; and
these duties are, that the workman shall be able to maintain his
family, to pay whatever taxes are levied upon him, give no trouble
to the police, make no demands upon the parish, and fight generally
whomsoever the Government may see fit to involve us in war with.
Whatever knowledge is necessary, to enable the future workman to
do these things is his right, and should be given him in the
speediest manner ; and any other inculcation which shall delay this
knowledge on its way, or confuse the learner in acquiring it, is a
loss to the State and a peril to the child. It is in the interest of
public economy, that secular instruction should be given by order,
and religious instruction by option. Anyone who has had
experience of the working class, knows that what they suffer most
from is confusion of mind. They cannot see one thing at a
time. They mix up other considerations with the case in
hand. They judge the question before them, in the light of
something else. This is the source of that weakness and
prejudice, which often make them so impracticable. This habit
of the untrained mind, instead of being corrected, has been
confirmed by that mixed education, that confusion of things sacred
and secular, which charity and misconception, have made the
rule in this country. In Parliament, that member alone is regarded
as competent, and as not wasting the time of the House, who can
discern what the point before it is, and who can keep to it when he
does. We want this power in the workshop. The national scheme
which is not going to impart it, is going to waste the money of the
ratepayer. Mixed education makes muddle-minded scholars. To
acquire only what you need to know, to think out one thing at a
time, to keep separate things distinct in the mind, is economy in
learning, and is the shortest path to efficiency. The nation is busy,
and the people have no money or time to spare, and the State is
bound to adopt the speediest and cheapest transit to public know
ledge. No one has a right to stand in the way of this, in the
presence of a nation ignorant and struggling ; and struggling because
�168
it is ignorant. Many demur to secular knowledge because they do
not know why it is wanted, nor perceive what it will do. They
forget, that in England every inch of ground has a proprietor. Not
a fish in the river, not a bird in the air, hardly a flower on the
bank, but has an owner. A mechanic, as a rule, finds that employ
ment comes by chance, and wages by caprice. He must not steal,
or conspire, or fight. Secular sense and secular skill, are the only
usable weapons which can keep him from the poorhouse. Piety,
ever so conspicuous, scarcely fetches any price in the market. The
most devout employer, adjusts the wages he gives according to the
swiftness and expertness of his workmen. There is no creed, the
profession of which will induce the Chancellor of the Exchequer to
remit the assessed taxes, or the magistrate to excuse the non
payment of local rates. The State, therefore, is bound to expend
the public money in productive knowledge, and the only knowledge
which is productive is secular; and this knowledge the State is
bound in prudence and justice to give to the people. But this
knowledge, which will mercifully aid the children of the workman,
will make them clear-minded and grateful : and gratitude and intel
ligence, are the fairest of all the handmaids of reverence. With
secular instruction, religion will acquire freshness and new force.
The clergyman and the minister, will exercise a new influence,
because their ministrations will have dignity and definiteness. They
will no longer delegate things declared by them to be sacred, to be
taught second-hand by the harassed, over-worked, and oft reluctant
schoolmaster and schoolmistress, who must contradict the gentleness
of religion by the peremptoriness of the pedagogue, and efface the
precept that “ God is love,” by an incontinent application of the
birch. An enemy of religion would prescribe exactly this course,
if he sought to make it distasteful, and terrorful to the child. It is
not secular instruction which breeds irreverence, but this ill-timed
familiarity with the reputed things of God, which robs divinity of
its divineness. There is one advantage of the secular rule of instruc
tion which might commend it to all earnest men. So long as
religion is taught apart from school instruction, and with optional
attendance, it will matter little whether it is “ sectarian” or not.
Sectarianism is not a sin, when it ceases to be intolerant. It is then
�169
but that honest form of faith, which best supplies the wants of the
soul professing it. To reduce religion to an impossible generalization
of the Bible, and the mere belief in God—creating a sort of Par
liamentary piety (which is what is meant by “unsectarianism”)—is
to efface the individuality of devotion, which makes religion pic
turesque and passionate, and is harder for the earnest believer to
accept than secular instruction, which meddles intentionally neither
with his faith, nor his conscience. The last misconception relates to
the extent of this question. A magnitude is imputed to it which
does not exist. We are not dealing with education in its full sense
at all. That means the sum of all those influences of home, and
church, and society, which form the individual character. The State
never proposes to deal with these. The scheme before us does not
contemplate it, and would have no power to effect it if it did. All
we ask is, that in every district in England, the children of the
working class shall surely get as good an intellectual training, as the
children of the working class can get in any country in the world.
Tliis can be given in a few hours a day—in a few years of every
child’s life. This is the extent of the scheme proposed by this
League. Secular instruction, if adopted, will deal, during that brief
term, merely with the mechanical routine of elementary knowledge,
and the passionless facts of science; while it leaves in all the other
years, and during all other times, the young learner to the teachers
of religion, whose province is that side of human nature which
comes in contact with the infinite; where emotions arise which
colour life for evermore, and passions are stirred which pertain to
eternity, by the side of which, most men deem all that pertains to
this life minor and transitory. Should we succeed to the utmost of
our wishes, the State-student will still be under the far-reaching
influences of the nurse, the mother, and the minister ; churches and
chapels will still exist, and Sunday schools will still remain open,
and able to confine themselves to Sunday knowledge, which will
have distinctive value then. Household piety will still prevail,with
an interest which it now lacks ; theologians will still write, and
their literature still cover the land ; the institutions and character
of the country will still be Christian, and in a more self-respecting
and genial sense than now. Splendid philanthropy will still illus
�170
trate the human tenderness of Christ. Nothing will have been
changed, except that the nation will have added intelligence to its
greatness. The brain of the common people will be cleared and
trained, and every working father and mother, will thank with
gratefid heart that State which has given their clrildren the priceless
blessing of self-defensive knowledge.
DENOMINATIONAL SCHOOLS.
Mr. Jesse Collings, Honorary Secretary, read a paper which had
been prepared by Mr. H. J. Slack, and in which the “principle” of
Denominational Schools was examined. Mr. Slack, in his paper
said :—As powerful parties in this country, holding various and
opposite opinions upon theological subjects, have pronounced in
favour of what is called the “ Denominational System of National
Education,” an accurate investigation of the principles of such a
scheme, and of the consequences which flow therefrom, is urgently
needed. An objection of some force might be taken, at starting, to
the illogical linking together of the two distinct things designated
by the words, “ Denominational ” and “ National.” In a country
in which a multiplicity of denominations flourish, and divide
society into numerous parties, that which is denominational stands
in obvious contrast to that which is national. Considered from
the point of theological classification, to be denominational is to be
sectarian, and if regarded from a purely social or political point of
view, it is to be sectional, and though the nation comprehends all
its subordinate divisions, it cannot be confounded with them ; and
it should be remembered that large masses of people do not range
themselves in definite ranks, and that consequently the whole of
the denominations is a much smaller quantity than the whole of
the people. It is not customary to consider any church as a
national church, unless it is the special object of a State patronage
not accorded to other churches. If it merely stands as one
amongst many religious bodies, all of which receive State aid in
proportion to their numbers, it would be regarded as the church of
a larger or smaller section of the community, as the case might be,
and any such institution having the support of the majority to-day,
might, from change of opinion, represent only a minority to-morrow.
�171
In countries where various religious communities receive State pay,
the term “ concurrent endowment ” designates the kind of relation
that is thus established. In like manner, an educational system in
which various bodies, holding distinctive opinions, all received
pecuniary support from the general taxation of the country, would
be one of “ concurrent endowmentand if differences of theo
logical creed separated these bodies from each other, the Govern
ment which supported, or helped to support all, would act quite as
much upon the plan of “ concurrent endowment of religions,” as if,
instead of providing funds towards mingling reading and writing
with particular creeds, it gave the same amount of money towards
the church services of each sect. The denominational school
master, who is engaged to teach particular theological propositions as
well as to conduct the ordinary secular studies of a school, is, if not
the priest, at least the minister, of the sect employing him j and as
his two functions would be intimately blended, it would be a mere
subterfuge to say that State aid was given to him for his arith
metic without his catechism ; not for his doctrines of salvation, but
his rule-of-three. If the State aid took the form of local rates,
levied throughout the country, by order of an Imperial Act
of Parliament, and upon general principles of assessment, the
Government by which the scheme was carried out, would com
pel each ratepayer to contribute to the support of other folks’
religions, whether he liked them or not. The Evangelical Dis
senter would be compelled to contribute towards teaching, in the
schools of the Roman Catholics, what he conscientiously believed
to be soul-destroying errors; the Trinitarian would give his sub
scription towards inculcating the doctrines of the Unitarian, and
each party, in turn, would find • its conscience and its pocket
oppressed with the burden of sustaining doctrines it denied and
opinions it deemed to be mischievous and absurd. To be con
sistent in legislation, State aid for teaching various kinds of
theology in denominational schools ought to be supplemented by
similar aid, if required, to support the same sorts of theology in
churches or chapels. When, under the name of “ concurrent
endowment, it was recently proposed to do this in Ireland, an over
whelming mass of public opinion decided against it, and, indeed,
�172
if the nation had been in favour of the principle it involved, we
should not in this country have arrived at the abolition of com
pulsory church rates ; but our Legislature would have arranged
that if Dissenters paid for the theology of Churchmen, Churchmen
should make all square by paying for dissenting theology a pro
portionate sum.
The reason why compulsory church rates have
been abolished, and why the Irish Protestant Church has been dis
established, is that a strong conviction has arisen amongst the
majority of thinkers, that it is morally wrong for the State to
arrogate to itself the power of choosing a religion for the people,
inasmuch as this is a matter in which each man’s own con
science and intellect should be his guides.
But if religion is
so left to the conscience and intellect of individuals, no one can,
without violation of the principle of such an arrangement, be
compelled to pay in any shape towards the support of a multiplicity
of theologies differing from his own.
That everybody should be
called upon to support everybody else’s creed, is not a doctrine of
liberty, but a proposal of despotism, and it is none the better
because the compulsory aid is to take effect in one building called
a school, instead of in another called a church.
No one who
admits the principle which led to the disestablishment of the
Irish Church, can dispute the position taken by the Boman
Catholics, that the State ought to do for them, in proportion to
their numbers, what it does in the way of benefit for other religious
bodies ; and if all the theological sects were equally endowed for
educational purposes, the State would still have to meet the claims
of secularists, and of those who decline to register themselves
under any denominational formula.
When we consider the fact
admitted by all sects, that great masses of the working class,
especially in large towns, are in this position, the magnitude of this
question becomes apparent; and if we pass from masses of men to
distinguished individuals, the names will at once occur to our
minds of philosophers standing high in various departments of
scientific enquiry, who do not belong to any existing church.
Hitherto the denominational system, has not been associated with
any direct legislative compulsion to attend the schools; but the
country is obviously tending to the belief that the State must pro
�173
tect and safeguard the right of the child to education, even when
the parent desires to keep it away from instruction. Compulsory
education cannot be justly resorted to, unless religious liberty, that
is, perfect freedom upon speculative questions—is well protected
from aggression. Religious liberty is based upon the right of
private judgment, while the denominational teaching of the young
is intended to produce a strong bias, in favour of what those who
employ it believe to be true. In chemistry or astronomy, a pro
fessor does not hesitate to tell his pupils frankly, that upon certain
questions the opinions of men of learning differ, nor does he
shrink from explaining the grounds upon which diverging or con
tradictory theories are held ; but would any denominational school
master be allowed to show why historical critics, philological
scholars, or geologists, doubted or denied the particular propositions
he was paid to teach? Those who, upon grounds of critical
inquiry, reject the propositions of orthodoxy, ought not to be parties
towards compelling the orthodox to support their heresy in the
schoolroom; and if Dean Close, for example, cannot be justly
deprived of his shillings or pounds for an institute in which
Huxley or Tyndall might lecture, ought they or their followers to
be mulcted for a kind of education in which their labours are
spoken of in the following terms :—“ There was no question that
there is in the present day an evil spirit of the ‘ bottomless pit ’
rising up among us, poisoning God’s truth, poisoning the faith of
thousands, and turning them away from godliness ; and he was
bound to say he laid a large portion of it at the door of science.
Did not philosophers at the present day, dig out of the bowels
of the earth evidences against God ? Did they not seek in the
heavens, in nations, and in languages, every means to shake our faith
in the Bible? How fearful and how humbling a thing it was, that
there were those who would venture to overturn the whole Bible
narrative of the creation of man, which involved man’s salvation
by Christ, and would prefer any dream, however foolish or vain, to
the faithful testimony of God respecting the origin of our species f
He was bold to say that in all the dreams of Hindoos, and all the
false religions corrupted, degraded, and ridiculous—that were ever
amusing among the Pagans, there were none so frivolous and childish
�174
as those, unto which the science of the present day had reduced our
scientific men.” This passage is not quoted for the pleasure of
raising a laugh at its absurdity, but because the learned ecclesiastic
who uttered it is, to speak in natural history phraseology, a
remarkably fine specimen of a species, considerable in numbers and
tolerably wide in the area of its distribution. All the members of
this religious species would have a right, under the denominational
system, to State aid in frightening their pupils with bug-a-boo
pictures of the horrors of science, and the wickedness of scientific
men. It may be said, that a “ conscience clause” would be a suf
ficient protection against theological aggression, but this is emphati
cally contradicted by facts. At a recent Conference of the Wesleyans,
a body which carefully avoids separating itself from the Estab
lished Church, much complaint was made of the persecution to
which Wesleyan children were subjected at National Schools, on
account of their attending the Sunday schools of the Chapel
instead of those of the Church ; and where a school was founded upon
a theological basis, children who were not subjected to its theological
teachings, would occupy a position inferior to those who were. The
denominational system directly tends to brand, with the stigma of
inferiority children and their parents who do not belong to the most
influential sect of the locality. In Ireland the Protestant child
would be subjected to this injury in the Romish school, if he attended
one, on account of there being no other in the neighbourhood; and in
other places the children of Romanists, Jews, and Dissenters in
general, would come under the ban. In rural districts of England
the social distinction between pupils of the British, and pupils of
the National Schools, is painfully apparent. The park of the lord
or squire receives the little Nationals at their annual holiday, and
“ county families” assist at their cricket or kiss-in-the-ring. The
small “ Britishers” may look through the palings, but as they did
not learn the right catechism, they must not enjoy the fun. The
■Government, as the guardian of political and social interests, is
bound, upon the principles of civil and religious liberty, to permit
nothing, that can encourage odious distinctions in any school that it
-supports. So long as education was left’to voluntaryism, there was
some excuse for aiding sectarian schools; but to have made that
�175
system approximately fair, secular schools should have had equal
rights with denominational establishments. Voluntaryism has been
found insufficient in supplying school accommodation, and it is
generally believed that attendance at some school should be made
compulsory; and would it not inflict a great wrong upon the people,
if they were obliged to send their children to schools in which, in
any shape or way, a theological test was applied to discriminate and
separate the beloved sheep of any orthodoxy, from the suspected
goats of any heresy ? In large towns, schools of all kinds, from
Romanist to secular, would be established, and there would be con
siderable choice ; but in smaller places much hardship could not
fail to occur. Large-minded reformers, anxious for human brother
hood, and wishing that the progress we are making towards de
mocracy, should be accompanied by circumstances of safety to society,
and good-will amongst men, desire that the schoolroom should be
free from envy, hatred, and all uncharitableness. The honours of
that place should go exclusively to merit of conduct, and proficiency
of study ; no child should be made ashamed or uncomfortable on
account of his father’s opinions, or lack of opinions, on subjects of
theological speculation; no child should imbibe lessons of sectarian
hatred, or be encouraged to think himself better than another child,
because he had been taught something different about creed or
•catechism. Let voluntaryism provide all the theological divisions
it believes to be usefid, and keep them in their right place ; let the
State deal with a larger question of human culture, adapted to the
people as a whole.
FREE AND COMPULSORY EDUCATION.
Captain Maxse, R.N., read a paper, of which the following
is an abstract, on “Free and Compulsory Elementary Education.”
He commenced by saying that he was the representative of a
branch which was in course of formation in South Hants, to
■co-operate with the League; and he had long been an advocate
•of compulsory gratuitous elementary education. He proceeded:
First, I should like to say a word or two about the term
secular, as applied to the movement. In its best sense, I myself,
am prepared to accept this designation of—what I hope, gentle
�176
men of Birmingham, you will allow me now to call—our scheme :
in its ignoble sense, as implying irreverence, or gross worldliness, I
utterly repudiate it. If by “ secular” is meant of this world, as in
contrast to another one, I reply, that what is of this world is of
God, and I denounce as mischievous and unwarrantable the arbi
trary distinction, that an attempt is made to establish between the
spiritual and the earthly. I believe that it is intended, provided
we are worthy of the intention, that human nature shall be elevated
in this world ; and that it depends entirely upon ourselves whether
we, the English, are to assist in this elevation, or are to be pushed
aside by a stronger race, better fitted for progress than we, more
resolute to fulfil the nobler aspirations of human nature. I wish to
see children, taught, first to live, as the most religious duty that they
can discharge, taught to live in this world for the ennobling of
themselves and others, taught that the greater portion of human
misery is the result of human error, taught that we can be better if
we try to be better with courage, with faith, and with inflexible
honesty. I believe there is little hope for us in life until we place
morality upon a solid basis; until we learn that it is best to be good for
its own sake; until we learn that evil, as evil, is the cause of misery
to ourselves and others, and realize (I fortify myself by a quotation
from Locke) that “ To love truth for truth’s sake is the principal
part of human perfection in this world, and the seed-plot of all
virtues.” The object of this League is simply to teach the “ com
prehensible” to all neglected children ; to save them from despair,
degradation, and death, by placing about every child some moral
influence, giving them the opportunity of distinguishing between
right and wrong, and by securing to all persons in the realm the
additional means of livelihood which, in a civilized community, is
represented by familiarity -with letters and numbers. A movement
having such an object as this, I can only regard as a profoundly
religious one. In the interest of religion, not less than in the interest
of the national cause we advocate, there is but one course to adopt,
(and this course is a sorrowful course for some, but they must
remember we are pressed to it by a still more sorrowful condition;)
it is, to stand respectfully aside from Bible reading, not less than
from the use of the Catechism. Nevertheless, I desire myself to
�177
see some reverential attitude on the part of State schools, in rela
tion to the Unknown Power, and I believe this might be fulfilled
by drawing up a daily prayer, which would satisfy every shade of
religious opinion. If, however, this cannot be done, I am ready to
acknowledge the necessity of confining ourselves strictly to secular
education. And how much this means ! It means giving sight to
the blind, and limbs to the maimed. I hold, myself, that whoever
is permitted to grow up, without having had the opportunity of
learning to read and write, has a direct grievance, not only against
his parents, but also against the State. “ In a civilized community
reading and writing may be regarded as supplementary senses.
Not a few of us would hesitate, if the alternative wore suddenly
presented of losing a sense, such as the sense of hearing, or of
losing the faculty of reading. Who is there among us, who would
assume the responsibility of destroying a sense? Is there much
less in neglecting to provide for the liberation of a faculty, mani
festly equal to it in value ? It should never be forgotten that the
higher our civilization, the greater becomes our responsibility to
wards the poor. Civilization means luxury, comfort, and security
for all of us ; but, I fear, only rigour for those who have to provide
the necessaries of life. The advantage of quitting a natural state
is great, for those who are able to command food-—hardly so for those
who have to obtain it. Therefore, the Government of a civilized
State assumes, or should assume, a responsibility towards the indi
gent, in direct proportion to the degree of its civilization. It is for
those responsible—for those who, in a free country, frame public
opinion—to see that the disadvantage the poor are placed under by
civilization, is reduced to a minimum • and the least acknowledgment
of this duty is to provide for, and secure the liberation of what I
have called the supplementary senses. This does not in the least im
ply that the poor man or labourer is to be given learning, the latter
is for himself to achieve; he is to receive only the instrument to it, to
be given his hearing, not to be provided with music. I hardly
think myself that we have the right to protect property, if we do
not make known to everyone the reason why property should be
sacred, and this can only be done through education. It seems to
me that, as we advance in civilization, the one anxious problem we
M
�178
have to deal with is, how to preserve the food-getting condition of
the poor. A speaker at the Social Science Congress, the other day,
said that the misery with which we are surrounded is not the result
of ignorance, but is the result of poverty. And is not ignorance
one of the causes of poverty—one of the main causes ? It is owing
to ignorance that the labour-market is overstocked. The men who
are unable to read and write, are prohibited from entering any
calling but that of mere manual labour. How often do we hear it
said of some good agricultural labourer “ The worst of it is, he is
no scholarthe scholarly attainment in request being, perhaps,
to decipher an invoice of drain pipes, or sum up the productions of
a dairy. I am quite aware of Mr. Herbert Spencer’s views on the
subject of education, and I have listened respectfully to Mr. Faw
cett’s objection to free education as relieving the parents of proper
responsibility. Nevertheless, I remain an advocate of gratuitous
education. I do not believe that the majority of the parents we
require to reach are in a position to exercise responsibility. I
know that Mr. Fawcett would leave power to school managers to
supply education gratis, when the parents are destitute and unable
to pay, on much the same principle as food is supplied under the
poor-law; hut I cannot help thinking that there would be some
invidious distinction arising from this system ; the establishment of
a class that would be termed a pauper class, of which all callous
and improvident parents, would avail themselves at the expense of
the provident. I have never advocated myself the State’s providing,
free, more than elementary education. I believe that directly
parents are in a position to afford the indulgence of feeling respon
sibility, on the educational head, they will remove their children
from the public to the private and higher school. My experience
tells me that the responsibility of education is now evaded by
parents who can afford to educate their children. I constantly find
parents availing themselves of “ National School” education at the
(to them) nominal expense of Id. or 2d. per week, which school is
mainly supported by others, not for them, but for the very poor.
I would do nothing to weaken the responsibility that should exist
on the part of parents to their children. I recognise the force of
the argument, that parents should not. summon beings into the
�179
world without being able to provide for them, and I by no means
desire to see the individual gradually perish in the State; but we
must not demand too much, we must not insist on an ideal con
ception of parental duty for those who have not the means, or the
prospect of the means, of fulfilling it. To do so, would, in my opinion,
afford but too ready an excuse for society to return to its fatal
slumber. I would add, that the right to be instructed in the lan
guage of civilization offers the opportunity, which must be seized,
of supplying higher teaching. We can hardly teach how to read
and write, without imparting some rudimentary knowledge, without
teaching, I am happy to think, some of the facts of the universe,
and expounding reverentially some of the miracles of nature that
are ever at hand, whether exemplified in the anatomy of a tree
leaf, or expressed in the infinite immensity of the heavens. Finally,
we have the opportunity of awakening the conscience to a sense of
right and wrong. This briefly represents my idea of education for
the people. Call the process secular if you like, call it undenomi
national if you please—call it what you will—it must remain
neither more nor less, than noble and exalting. Perhaps you will
let me here offer a word or two upon my own experience, of the
effect of a compulsory education proposal among working men; it
will serve to supplement the larger experience of Mr. Applegarth.
I was one of the candidates at the general election for the represen
tation of Southampton, a town, as you are aware, far south. My
own pet subject, at every meeting, and upon every possible
occasion during a long house-to-house canvass was, not the “ glo
rious principles of our noble constitution,” but compulsory educa
tion. I do not believe the idea had ever been broached before,
certainly it had never been prominently broached before. It
was not long after I had commenced, that one or two leaders of
the party, who were conversant with the working class feeling,
were saying to me, “ Go on speaking about education, it takes
wonderfully; I should stick to that ideaand so on. I always
felt myself, that I struck a truly popular chord; the response
upon this subject was more fevent than upon any other. The
simple explanation is, that the working classes have common
sense, and that we have only to appeal to this on subjects which
concern them, to secure ultimately their hearty allegiance.
�180
DISCUSSION.
Mr. Edmond Beales, of London, most heartily congratulated
the President and all the Council of the League—if that congratu
lation was of any value—upon their admirable commencement of
the great work which they had set themselves to accomplish. The
fundamental principle of the League appeared to bo this, that every
one of those two millions of children, now without instruction,
should be educated, and that the frightful state of things which
they now saw, in the punishment of persons for the violation of
laws which they had never been taught to know or respect, should
cease to exist. The fruitful evils now resulting from the fact of so
many children being uneducated, was a shame and a disgrace to any
Christian country. The principle of the League was, that their
system, supported as it would be, partly by Government grants, and
partly by local rates, should be free and wholly unsectarian, as
it necessarily must be. He held that Christian morality was
the highest of all morality ; that no philosophy which ever
existed, could find an adequate substitute for it, and that the
Gospel of Christ was the best possible means of making a man
wise, just, honest, and virtuous. Still, he could never for the
life of him understand, how to teach a child to read and write, to
calculate, to instruct him in the elements of science, and in all
that was necessary for the faithful discharge of his after profes
sion or occupation, could make that child the less a good Christian.
He entirely agreed with Mr. Mundella, that all truth was holy; and
also with the principles laid down in the paper of the Hon. Auberon
Herbert; for whilst he conceived it to be the duty of the State to
assist in the education of the country, he also considered it the
duty of the State, not to interfere with the consciences or religious
principles of the parents. Still, no parent, whether Churchman,
Nonconformist, or Roman Catholic, should be allowed to exclude
his children from education simply because in unsectarian schools,
if they were established, there was not taught the special doc
trines of his faith. As he understood it, the League did not intend
to exclude the consideration of religion, or of the Bible from the
schools, nor to interfere at all with the existing d on om in ati on al
�181
systemj but what it was prepared to enforce at all times, and under
all circumstances, was, that the State must do its duty, and not
interfere with the freedom of religious conviction; that the parent
must do his duty, and not allow religious conviction to interfere
with the education which the State declared was necessary, to make
his child a good, upright, and honest citizen. Such a system
woidd bring about greater concord, and greater harmony between all
classes of society. No longer would there be antagonism and dis
union amongst them ; there would be one bond of mutual respect,
good-will, kindness, and social attachment pervading, interlacing,
and knitting together the whole national body, whilst the
individual welfare of each part of the body, would be promoted
and developed.
The Hon. G-. Brodrick : Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen,—
In following Mr. Beales, as I have been invited to do, and heartily
supporting his views, I do not feel competent to speak from any
personal experience of the practical details of school management,
but I am desirous to add my testimony to the broad principle of
national unsectarian education, inasmuch as there is no one of our
principles in which I more cordially concur. This principle, as we
have been reminded, gives offence to some. I observed the other
day, that Sir Stafford Northcote, who is a good friend to education^
said at Exeter that he heartily wished the words “ sectarian ” and
“ unsectarian ” had never been imported into this subject. I partly
agree with him, and yet I differ from him; for he dislikes the word,,
and I dislike the thing. Now, there is one objection to which
reference, I think, has not been made to-day, but which I believe
to be very widely prevalent. I mean the objection that some five
and twenty years ago a kind of compact, as it has been called, was
made between the State and the religious bodies of this country,
and that we are, as it were, morally bound to carry out the spirit of
that compact. I might, and do, reply, that we arc not proposing
to disendow denominational education, that we are not proposing
to disestablish it, that we are not even proposing to supersede it,
but only to supplement it. But I go further, and I must say, I
should like to know when the compact was made, by whom it was
made, and what were its terms. And even supposing any such
�182
compact to have been made, I want to know who were the parties
to it. Were yon and I—those bf us, at least, who are less than
fifty years old, and perhaps at that very time were under education
—were you and I parties to it ? Were those who are children, who
are now growing up in ignorance and vice, to be the inmates of
our woikliouses and our gaols, were these children, then unborn,
parties to the compact ? Were the working classes, then excluded
from the franchise, but now admitted to it, and who must
ultimately guide and govern the policy of the country, were they
parties to it ? And if not, what force is there in alleging the
existence of an imaginary compact, made a generation ago ? There
is one other objection, to which reference has frequently been made,
to unsectarian education, and that is, the religious objection. On
that I can only say, I entirely adopt what has fallen from so many
speakers. We leave untouched the influence of the church and
the chapel, we leave untouched the influence of home, we leave
untouched the influence of Sunday schools; we leave it in the dis
cretion of the managers or school committee, as the Chairman has
explained, to admit the teaching, the dogmatic teaching, of religion
out of school hours, and, if they think proper, to allow the reading
of the Scriptures, without note or comment, even during school hours.
Then, I ask—and this is the root of the matter—what is the religion
which we are said to sacrifice ? Not the practical religion of every
day life ; not the sublime and simple religion of the Gospel; not the
pure and undefiled religion of St. James, who teaches us to visit
the fatherless and the widows in their affliction; not the religion
of St. Paul, which embraces all things true and all things pure, and
all things lovely and honest and of good report; but the religion of
creeds and articles and formularies, the religion of dogmatic
theology,—the parent of the persecution which has been the re
proach of Christianity ; the religion which boasts, not of its power
of including, but of its power to exclude; the religion which at
this moment contributes to uphold caste and to prevent the growth
of national unity in this country, and which is the main obstacle to
the moral union of Christendom.
Mr. Follett Osler : Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen,—I
feel considerable hesitation, in undertaking to say a few words on
�183
the present occasion, but having been asked to address you, I have
jotted down a few remarks which have occurred to me, connected with
the recent journey I have made to America. Though I, in common
with a large portion of our countrymen, have long felt it most de
sirable that education should be extended throughout this realm,
so as to render it truly national, I never was so strongly impressed
with the importance of this, as after a tour I made last autumn in
the United States. In taking this journey I had no particular
object in view, beyond the desire to see and learn all I could of the
country, its people and institutions ; to accomplish which, I visited
most of the Northern States, from the Atlantic to the Rocky
Mountains. But it is not possible for anyone to travel in that
country at all observantly, without being struck by the great intel
ligence of the mass of the people. Even in the country districts
this is as noticeable as in the towns. So striking was this appa
rently universal education, that I was involuntarily led to inquire
into the system, and to visit the schools that produced such good
results. Accordingly, I devoted some time to that object, feeling
more strongly than I had ever done before, the pressing importance
of real national education, and that it was one of the first subjects
to which our Legislature should direct them attention. The question
that is of most interest and importance to us at the present moment
is, whether the main features of the system which has been so suc
cessfully carried out in the United States, may not be applicable to
this country. Some persons take alarm at the word “ America,”
and seem afraid lest we should denationalize our people ; but surely,
the adoption of a broad and extended scheme of national education,
be it based on the system adopted in the United States, or Prussia,
or of any other nation, or on the systems of all combined, does
not make us adopt, or desire to adopt, the mode cf government or
the political institutions of any of those countries ; though the
recent changes in our political institutions may render national
education not only desirable, but absolutely necessary. But, in
addition to any political considerations, it is necessary that our ar
tisans should be placed in a position, to enable us to compete with
those nations that, I regret to say, have left us far behind with re
gard to the education of the people. I contend that education, to
�184
be national, that is, universal, must be free. A large portion of
the population cannot pay; and if some are to do so, it will be ne
cessary to decide who are not. No arbitrary amount of wages can
settle it. A man with one child, and earning 20s. a-week, may be
richer than another earning 30s. or 40s. a-week, who has a number
of children. Then, as to those who can pay—is the sum to be uni
form, or is it to be graduated according to the means of the pupil’s
parents ? The subject becomes more complicated and difficult, the
deeper we go into it. Again, if some schools are free, and others
demand a fee, a class feeling will be provoked; for among artisans
there is an honourable pride, as great as among the wealthier members
of the community, and a distinction will cause the schools, where no
payment is made, to be regarded as pauper or charity schools. The
difficulties attending payment are so great, and the advantages of
having education free are so manifest to my mind, that I am sur
prised there should be any hesitation as to the course this country
should adopt. When in Philadelphia, I had some interesting con
versation on the subject with Mr. Shippen, the excellent President
of the Board of Controllers of the Public Schools of Philadelphia,
who strongly advises our schools being altogether free. Mr. Osler
here read the following letter from Mr. Shippen :—
“ Philadelphia, June 18th, 1869.
“ S.E. Cor. 6th and Walnut Streets.
“ Mr. Follett Osler,
Dear Sir, —Your favour of June 5tli is received. I am pleased to
accede to your wishes, and mail with this, six copies of my address, which
please use to your best advantage.
“The experience of all educators and legislators in this country, con
firms me in my judgment of the utter uselessness of legislation for classes in
the public schools. We built our system upon poor laws—pauper laws. We
practically divided our people into classes, and just so long as these founda
tions lasted, was the system a positive failure. This is not only the experience
in Pennsylvania, but of every other State which adopted the same discrimi
nating principles. I have studied this subject well, have given it the fifteen
years of my official connection with our public schools. I have remarked to
Lord Amberley, and other inquiring English gentlemen who have visited our
schools, that if England, in establishing her national school system, fell into
the grave error into which we fell, the system would in the end be a failure,
and the money laid out upon it would be expended with but trifling advantage.
�185
“Establish your schools ‘ for every child that draws the breath of life
within your borders.’ The system need not be compulsory, but open. You
will be met at the threshold with the objection that the lower class will de
moralize the higher ; that the morals of the lower class will contaminate the
higher. This is a dangerous and most fearful error. My experience does not
prove it. If there be any rule on the subject, it is the very reverse. The
poor girl or boy is not less virtuous than the rich. The rich have the means
to indulge in vice, while the poor have none. I candidly tell you that in
placing my children at school, I would infinitely prefer placing them in public
schools than private schools, and, in doing so, I would thus consult the better
their moral, spiritual, and scholastic welfare. So far as social relations are
concerned, I can always regulate this myself. The school association is only
an association of school hours. It need not be otherwise. England must
come to our open national system sooner or later, and, I trust, will avail itself
of our experience at the outset, and not wait to be taught her error. I take
a deep interest in the cause everywhere, and shall ever be happy to lend a
helping hand.
“ Very respectfully yours,
“Edward Shippen.”
I would only wish further to say, that I think we have been looking
too much on the dense dark spots of ignorance, among the poorer
children, and have not sufficiently borne in mind that we are now
contemplating a great national system of education to embrace all
classes. As these dark spots get lighter, we shall see more clearly
that there are very dark shades in higher grades, and shall become
more sensible that the whole system must be efficiently worked out
on one broad plan. I should like it to be possible for a child to
enter into the lowest class, and gradually progress to the highest
education that can be obtained in this country. I mention this
because a desire has been expressed by some persons to have schools
for the working classes only, to give them an elementary education,
and when they have reached a certain grade say, “ You are going to
be artisans, what need for anything further ?” I think all should
be on one system of general education, embracing even the higher
departments of knowledge ; so that while all go cn together, each
pupil may be able, as he advances, to study such special subjects as
his abilities or the circumstances of his case may render advisable.
A Gentleman here asked that the sense of the meeting might
be taken, as to the proposing of a resolution. He said the London
�18G
and other branches should be informed,what were the actual inten
tions of the League, and what was the meaning of “ unsectarian.”
The Chairman : We shall, at half-past seven, have a meeting in
the Town Hall, and it was intended that we should finish our pro
ceedings to-day. We have only eight minutes left, and the question
is, shall we enter into a discussion upon a resolution about which
we have heard nothing, or hear the three gentlemen who yet have
to speak? But let me tell you what the resolution is. When,
yesterday morning, I opened the proceedings of the Conference, I
said there had been a difficulty in some people’s minds as to the
meaning of the word “ unsectarian,” and I then proceeded to give
an explanation or definition of the meaning. Now, it would appear
that to some gentlemen’s minds that definition was not sufficiently
clear. Therefore, what they desire to do is this, to move a reso
lution, which resolution shall make clear what I failed to make clear
yesterday morning. Now, I have to observe that I have had two
distinct resolutions on that very same subject, and now another
gentleman wishes to draw up a resolution. In my opinion, not
one of those resolutions is any more clear than my definition—
in fact, not so clear. And further, if those three resolutions are put
to the meeting, we have no sort of confidence that there will not be
half-a-dozen more ; and my opinion is, that of necessity there will
be some more, though I do not know how many. What are we to
do under these circumstances ? The Provisional Committee specially
decided that there should be no resolutions whatever taken, and the
order of proceeding having been fixed, the question that arises in
my mind is, whether, as Chairman, I am to observe the order of
proceeding pre-arranged, or whether I am to open up, at the request
of one or two gentlemen—-whose object is certainly admirable—a
discussion, the length of which we really cannot foresee. What I
might do is this : I might put it to the meeting whether or not such
a discussion should be entered into. But I am inclined to think,
on consideration, that the meeting would rather that the Chairman
should perform his own duty, and decide the question for them.
However, I have been asked this question, which will take only
one minute to answer, and probably the answer to this question will
meet all that is desired in these resolutions. The Hon. Auberon
�187
Herbert asks me, 11 What is unsectarian education 1 Is it education
excluding all dogmatic and theological teaching, or creeds, or cate
chisms?” I feel authorized, on behalf of the Provisional Com
mittee, to say yes. He further asks, “ Whether the scheme
of the League necessarily excludes from the national rate schools,
the Bible, without note or comment 2” And I say, what I said
yesterday morning, that it does not; that that, is to be left to the
decision of the school committee, who will be the representatives
of the parents of the children.
The Eev. Septimus Hansard : Mr. Chairman, ladies, and
gentlemen,—I have to congratulate you on the perfect unanimity
on the general object of this League, which has pervaded these
meetings ; and it is a matter of considerable congratulation to
myself, as a clergyman of the Church of England, to find on this
platform, engaged in the same work, clergymen of different
denominations, and men who differ from me as widely as my friend
Mr. Holyoake does. It is a matter of congratulation to me to find
that in the speech which Mr. Holyoake made on this subject, on
which we all feel so strongly in common, he spoke in the language
of what I may strictly call the deepest piety. I have, as some of
you know, been now occupied over twenty years, in labouring
among the working populations of London ; and I do assure you,
that much as is the satisfaction, that all who, like myself, are
interested in education, must have in seeing the success of the
different educational works around them, nothing is more painful
than to see that there is still a residuum of savagery, and brutality
among the humbler classes of our neighbours. That is a blot
on our common Christianity, and a shame to us all. Let us take
it to heart, and see if we cannot combine to remedy it, putting
aside the special doctrines which distinguish us one from another,
and in a common cause, working for the welfare of those miserable
and neglected ones all around us. What a disgrace it is to us, who
boast of the Christian civilization of England, who are so proud,
and bragging about our Protestant truth, and about the light of
the Gospel shining on us, as we hear from every platform and
pidpit, to know that in these last few years we have been obliged
to invent a new name in the English language—“the rouyfe”—to
�188
■express the miserable condition of those who live in the back
streets of our large towns. Whenever you use that term, as
applied to the inhabitants of our back streets, you are using a
term which, however true it may he in its application, should
bring home a lesson to you, and a sense of disgrace to us all, that,
as Englishmen, such beings should live among us. Therefore, I
should like to say a few words to disarm the prejudices of those
who, I think, are at one with us, but who as yet hesitate about
joining us. It is a matter of regret, to find absent from the list of
those who have joined the League, a very large number of laymen,
Members of Parliament, and clergymen, who, from their liberal
principles, well known and established, might be expected to be with
us. I believe they are a little frightened—naturally enough—
because our movement is a new one, and because, as you know,
there is at the bottom of every Englishman a stratum of Toryism
which it takes a good deal to knock out of him; and because I
think there has been a great deal of misapprehension about these
very untoward expressions, “ secular,” and “ unsectarian.” I will
not detain you with an exposition of my opinions, but I would say
to all those who are able to join the League, “Deal as tenderly as
you can with religious people who have an objection to your
League; no scruples have more demand on your respect than
religious scruples, and I am quite sure the supporters and
■originators of the League, woifld not desire to say one word
which would express contempt to those who differ from us
in religious opinions.” But on the other hand, I would call
on clergymen of all denominations, to bear in mind that if schools
for primary education become an established fact, more religious
influence will be thrown into the hands of those, who wish to give
religious teaching, than they possess now. I am perfectly con
vinced that if you have a good school, managed without any special
religious teaching whatever, and if, as I presume, you must and
ought to allow the clergymen and dissenting minister, at the
recorded wish of the parents of the children, at some stated time,
to give religious education or instruction to those children, the
religious teachers will have infinitely more power, more real vital
power, of bringing home to the hearts of the children the words and
�189
example of their master, Christ, than they ever had by the system
that now prevails, of deputing to the schoolmaster the perfunctory
lesson which we know is given in most of our schools. To give
you an instance of what I mean, I know a clergyman of a certain
district in London, who collects together at certain times, once a
month, for two hours, any children of any school in his large
parish, who may choose to come into the church to be educated in
the Bible and Catechism; and the church is crowded with
volunteer children, who come and sit there with their minds as
attentive as grown-up persons, answering the questions that are
put, and evidently having those lessons brought home to the
practice of their daily life, in such a manner as is not done in
schools. A very High Churchman and Ritualist told me that he
believed it was the right way of giving education ; and I believe
instruction must be so given under the system we are advocating
I think the objection that will be made by the religious world
against that system, is an unnecessary bugbear, which I hope we
shall all do our best, when we talk to religious people, to remove,
by showing that we do not in the least wish to do away with
religious teaching, but simply to separate from it dogmatic teaching.
The Rev. H. W. Crosskey : Mr. Chairman, ladies, and
gentlemen, I rise for the purpose of mentioning one or two facts
which have not been alluded to at this Conference. Although re
ferences have been made to Saxony and America, there have been no
allusions to the educational system of Scotland, one or two facts
connected with which, I think, will interest the Conference as bearing
on the practical working of the subject. In the first place, I hold
that this so-called religious, or, rather, most irreligious, difficulty is
a thing that vanishes before the logic of practical facts. It disappears
entirely in the education of our own children. In ’Scotland, a
country that has not a reputation foi liberality, out of 12,572
children of Catholic laity, 7,343 have attended for many years
without compulsion the Protestant schools, in which freedom of
conscience is permitted. The Catholic laity have had no objection
to send their children to the schools, but now a cry is being raised
against them by the priests, and in both Ireland and Scotland an
attempt will be made to secure the denominational system. But
�*
190
here is the fact, directly and distinctly proving that if the laity are
left free to act, if the priest is told that he must not interfere with
the liberty of the subject, and the Government is firm, there can
be no practical difficidty in the matter. Now for another point,
touching the character of the schools. I would strongly protest
against the idea of striving to make the schools merely working
class schools. There is a free road open in Scotland from the public
schools to the Universities. Last year, I saw in the Highlands a
gipsy encampment pitched close to the school house, and a gipsy
bad sent his large family of children to school, with the children of
the farmers. Last year, also, a friend, shooting in the Highlands,
had for a gillie a youth, who in this way earned the money to pay
for his education at the University in the winter. In another case,
a shepherd was found reading a Greek author on his sick bed for
his amusement. I think it is perfectly possible to have national
schools, to which we can send all the children of the community. I
am ashamed to visit the school where my own children are,
and see that they there can get a knowledge of languages
and sciences; and then go to schools in this town, and see,
large branches of knowledge being kept back, that the children’s
minds are limited and confined, that they are taught only
rudimentary things, and that there is no chance of their obtaining
the liberal culture which we require for our own children. I would
express to this meeting a most thorough satisfaction with the
explanation made by Mr. Dixon, of the views and intentions of the
League. I think it should go forth, that while we do not in any
way wish to offend the feelings or injure the interests of the great
religious bodies of this country; while we are prepared to give the
freest scope to every sect and party to carry out its own ends and
aims in charity and peace, we do propose that the instruction of the
common school shall be confined to matters of common culture, and
that we do this for the sake of religion. We believe that religion
is injured by being made a task within the school. We are of
opinion that in the quiet atmosphere of home, in the sanctity of
those places where children are brought together apart from the
noise and tumult of their daily school-life, the great seeds of religion
ought to be sown • that religion is not a technical thing, to be
�191
taught by rule, but a loving influence, a power to thrill the spirit
within them. The education which we propose to give would be
favourable to religion, because if we excite the religious feelings,
without Culture, we have superstition. Who is there would not
rather plead for his Gospel to an educated than to an ignorant
man ? I will appeal to the clergy of the country whether, if they
had intelligent men and women to address, the divineness of the
Gospel ought not to be shown in the warmer enthusiasm of its
reception 1 It is a poor and weak timidity that distrusts the power
of an educated people. I hail this meeting with satisfaction. Its
object is the greatest cause we can engage in, and it has to me the
sanctity of an apostolic work. The future of our country depends
on it. A large and liberal culture will the better enable a man to
perform the humblest tasks of life, while the more cultivated the
mind, the larger the knowledge of the constitution and history of
the world, the greater will be the progress of morality and religion;
and our countrymen, instead of growing up mere devotees of sec
tarian interests, narrow in mind and distrustful of each other, will
become free men in the noblest sense, able to give an intelligent
reason for their faith, and to exercise a wide charity to their
brethren. The only boundary we can place to this movement, is
to furnish every child born within this kingdom with fair oppor
tunities for cultivating all the faculties God has given it.
Rev. Mr. Caldecott : Mr. Chairman, ladies, and gentlemen, I
will not detain the meeting by offering any arguments on the ques
tion of unsectarian education. That some such system is accepted
by you I suppose, or else why are we here to-day ? And some such
system I believe to be in a very fair way to be accepted by the
country. What I wish to do is to congratulate the members of
this League on the great advance that has been made in public
feeling of late as regards this matter. On all hands, whatever lan
guage may be held, the principle of a denominational system of
education is virtually abandoned. It is true that gentlemen seek
to cover their concessions, and to conceal their retreat under a mist
of words about compromises and conscience clauses. But, sir, the
day for conscience clauses has gone by. It is too late in England,
in the year 1869, to attempt, in a system of national education, to
�192
brand with a ticket the children of any creed as inferior to their
fellows of another creed. There is at this moment but a shadow of
a shade, that separates the adherents of the denominational principle
of education from ourselves. They insist upon it that some reli
gious teaching shall be given to all children, provided that the
parents of those children do not object to it. We, on the other
hand, would be glad that they, or any of them, should teach their
system of religion to any child, provided that his parents desire it.
At the last Social Science Meeting, in Bristol, this question was
very fully discussed; papers were read and speeches were made
upon it, and various suggestions were offered both in public and in
private. Speaker after speaker insisted upon the necessity of main
taining religious—that is to say, denominational—education ; but
as not one of those gentlemen condescended to leave his theories
behind and to come to the plain practical question, what was the
religious teaching that he was prepared to give, the whole fabric of
their schemes melted away. There was one gentleman who did
maintain that there can be no religion, there can be no morality,
there can be no goodness, that is not based on some creed or some
catechism; but I heard no one else in the meeting rise to support
that view. There was another gentleman who insisted that in all
State Schools, all children should be regularly instructed and pe
riodically examined in the main principles of Christianity; but
that gentleman did not explain to us what he himself conceived
those main principles to be, nor did he give the slightest indication
what is to be the authority that is to determine them. With the
great mass of practical speakers on this point, both in public and
in private, there seemed to be one thing agreed, that they would be
perfectly satisfied with the advocacy of the undenominational prin
ciple, if you would only allow, during some time, in the day a portion
of Scripture to be read to the pupils without interpretation, without
question, and without comment of any kind, merely as a recognition
of religion. Well, sir, I cannot help thinking it is something like
an abuse of words to dignify such a scanty scrap as this, with
the name of religious education. Yes, and when the advo
cates of denominational principle have come to this, we may fairly
congratulate ourselves on having found the vanishing point of the
�193
denominational system. The fact is, the time is ripe for the intro
duction of this League among the friends of denominationalism. I
believe there is really but one demand on which they seriously
insist; that demand is, that there shall be some recognition in
education of some religious principle or other. It is not that these
gentlemen love denominationalism for itself—far from it. They
fear that if you exclude denominationalism from the schools, you
will exclude religion from education. But surely the remarks you
have heard from Mr. Hansard, will show you their fears are vain.
The fact is, that at the basis of all our systems, the common foun
dation on which they, every one of them, rest, there are two reli
gious principles upon which we are all agreed, because God has
written those principles in the heart of every one of us ; they are
the principles upon which we recognize God’s love to us, and our
duty to our fellow men. Those are exactly the two principles
about which our neglected childhood knows nothing, and has never*
even heard. Those are exactly the principles which in the schools
to be founded, I hope, under the auspices of this League, every
child will be taught, without variance or without distinction.
Every child must be taught them, for there can be no teaching
given with respect to God’s works in God’s world, which does not
assume and develop them. These principles are the only principles
which the State, as a State, can teach in religion, because they are
the only principles in religion that all men, whatever may he their
creeds, will alike accept. I know it will be said that this is not
enough—that something more is required. Something more is re
quired, and in God’s name Jet something more be given. But the
State cannot give it. There are special voluntary associations whose
duty, whose right, whose delight it will be to give to their children
this something more ; for the question is, not whether denomina
tional schools shall cease to exist ■ the question is, upon what
material shall those denominational schools work ? Shall they
work upon young savages, or shall they work upon children who
liave already been taught to know something of civilization and
the truth ? Denominational schools can never cease to exist; they
will be everywhere, where men are .to be found who are fired with
zeal for God’s service, and are inspired with belief in God’s word.
N
�194
Surely it is the interest of every one of us, that the managers of
these schools should receive their pupils from the hands of the State,
already prepared for their instruction—decent, so to speak, and
clothed, and in their right minds; and should not have to hunt them
out, for themselves, through all the moral caverns, and the moral
tombs of our great cities, where at this moment they are hiding in
thousands, unclean and unclothed, and possessed by the legions of
evil spirits of wickedness and of crime.
On the motion of Professor Rogers, a vote of thanks was passed
to the Chairman.
The Chairman, after acknowledging the vote said : I have had
another question put to me—“If the school committee should
•decide that the Bible is to be read, must it be read without note or
•comment ?” My answer is, yes. Now, I wish to mention that a
gentlemen of the name of--------- , from London, writes and says
he is obliged to leave the meeting early, and he concludes by giving
fifty guineas to the funds of the League, and saying he has no doubt
whatever we shall have great support in London. And I am also
happy to say that we have an announcement of a donation of £50
from one, who calls himself a convert to our views by what he has
heard to-day. Now, in concluding our two days’ meeting, let me
say, on behalf of the Provisional Committee, that we have to give
•our warmest thanks to those gentlemen, who have come from a
distance to read papers, and to make those valuable speeches upon
this subject, which we have so much at heart. But let me repeat
what I said at first, that the League, as a League, is not responsible
for .what has been said ; each individual writer and speaker is alone
responsible, for the individual opinions that have been uttered. I
also thank, on behalf of the Committee, all those who have attended
at these meetings to support us ; and I fervently hope that the day
is not far distant when they will look back with honest pride upon
this meeting; and congratulate themselves that they took their part
in the inauguration of one of the most beneficial measures of this
-century.
The meeting then terminated.
�PUBLIC MEETING IN
THE
TOWN
HALL.
WEDNESDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 13th, 1869.
A public meeting, convened by the Executive Committee of the
League, was held in the Town Hall on Wednesday evening. The
Mayor (Mr. Henry Holland) presided. The orchestra was filled
■chiefly by gentlemen, who had been present at the meetings in the
Assembly Room. The side galleries were given up to members of
the League and to ladies, and the floor and great gallery were
•occupied principally by working men.
The Mayor, in opening the proceedings, said the League wa8
founded for the purpose of obtaining the establishment of a national
system of education, which would ensure elementary instruction
to every child in the kingdom; and he trusted that it would not
•dissolve, until it should have accomplished its object, whatever
•difficulties might have to be encountered.
Mr. Dixon, M.P. (Chairman of the League) was received with
•cheers. He said: Mr. Mayor, ladies, and gentlemen—The resolution
which I have the honour to move is, “ That, in the opinion of thia
meeting, the scheme of the National Education League is the one
best adapted, to secure the education of every child in the country.”
The Manchester Education Aid Society, after a most minute inves
tigation, came to the conclusion that one half the children of the
working classes of that great town were uneducated, and that the
remaining half were educated very imperfectly. The Birmingham
Education Society, after equally, if not more, minute investiga-
�196
tions, came to precisely the same conclusion with regard to
the children in this town ; and the London Diocesan Board of
Education reported that from 150,000 to 200,000 children, in one
portion only of the Metropolis, were without means of education..
There is reason to believe that the number of children educated in
large towns has not, during the last ten or twenty years, increased
much, if any, more than in proportion to the increase of the
population. Such is the state of things in our large towns. How
is it in the agricultural districts ? Canon Kingsley has written to
us, saying that he lias read the report of the Birmingham Education
Aid Society with great interest ; he did not know how' badly
educated we were, but he did know from twenty-seven years’
experience as a parson, that the voluntary denominational system
was a failure in the agricultural districts. Mr. Villiers, who was
called by Sir John Pakington one of our most able school
inspectors, corroborates the statement by saying that half the
children of the working classes in the rural districts, between the
age of ten and thirteen, receive no scholastic education at all,
and the other half, so long as the present system remains, will
nevei be more than half educated. Other school inspectors, and
not only school inspectors, but also a Cabinet Minister, a member
of the late administration, believe and endorse these statements.
These are the circumstances under which the National Education
League has sprung into existence, and my only surprise is that
it was not formed long ago. We begin by putting our hands
upon what we conceive to be the cause of all this ignorance.
think that it cannot be expected to be otherwise, when
we remember, that the whole educational system of this country'
is based, upon the benevolent activities of so small a number
of mon. The basis of our system is too narrow'. In this
condition of things what does the State do ? Where there happens
to be a clergyman who understands his duties; vdiere there
happen to be rich manufacturers or benevolent individuals,
who undertake to erect and partially maintain schools—where
it finds there is some education, defective though it be—
there it is ready to help ; but in other districts, where benevolent
individuals do not exist, and there is no education at all, what docs
�197
the State do ? Like the priest ’and the Levite of old, it passes by
on the other side. Its assistance is given where assistance is least
needed. Where the wealthy are doing something it heaps its
riches. The practice of the State with regard to education
reminds us of what the poet says of sleep :—
“ He, like the world, his ready visit pays
Where fortune smiles; the wretched he forsakes ;
Swift on his downy pinion flies from woe,
And lights on lids unsullied with a tear.”
What the League professes is this : not to interfere with the exist
ing system where it is effective. We don’t wish to revolutionise
the present schools, we don’t wish to sweep them away. What
we do wish is this : that where voluntaryism and denominationalism have failed, the State should step in; and that, the State
should be called upon to recognize the highest of all its duties, the
duty of saying, that every citizen shall be brought up to be able to
understand the laws he is bound to obey, and to understand
what are the duties of a citizen. Now, we propose that this should
be effected in the following manner :—That in every large town, and
in every county, school boards should be elected by the ratepayers
or their representatives ; that these school boards should ascertain
where there is a deficiency of education, and, wherever they are
wanted, erect and maintain free and unsectarian schools. Having
done that, they should appoint committees to manage those schools.
The State inspectors should have power to see that the various
localities perform, and perform efficiently, the duties imposed
upon them. If the school boards fail to perform these duties, the
State inspectors should then step in, and see that they are performed.
We propose—or rather I propose, for I am speaking now as much
in my own name as in that of the League—I propose that the
schools should be maintained not only by the State, but by the
local rates, in the proportion of two-thirds from the central govern
ment, and one-third from the local authorities. Now, the objection
to this system, in the first instance is, according to our opponents,
that it will kill voluntaryism. To that I reply, it need do no
such thing. We shall leave voluntaryism alone. Nay, we shall do
more—we shall create half as many more schools as are now in ex
�istence, and we shall require for these schools an army of volun
teers. Every member of our school boards, every member of our
echool committees, will be as much a voluntaryist as any school
manager under the existing system, and he will be a better, a more
efficient, voluntaryist j foi' he will have to do with an organised
system, and he will not only have the promptings of his own
benevolence to lead him to his duty, but he will have the ex
perience and the authority of the State system to guide him.
Besides, there is another most important thing to be remembered :
what is it that keeps enormous numbers of our children now out of
school, but poverty ■ poverty to that degree that they cannot
appear in our streets, because they are too ragged, and
have not food to maintain themselves. These children never
appear in our schools. If there be any excess of volunteers
wanting employment in this country, let it seek out thesechildren, and feed and clothe them, so that when they do appear in
our schools they may appear in that condition which will enablethem to take advantage of the teaching they are to receive. Let
me illustrate this. Time was, when in this town the rich peoplewere called upon to contribute from their own libraries, to thelending libraries attached to our Church institutions; that was
voluntaryism. There was much of that voluntary effort. But the
State stepped in and provided for the people those magnificent freelibraries which are now our boast. Voluntaryism may be said to havebeen killed there, but it only made place for something infinitely
superior; and the spirit of voluntaryism still lives, and has a betterand a wider field of action. Depend upon it, that so far from
voluntaryism being killed by the institution of State schools, it
will be utilized, it will be organized and developed. Another
objection is, that the education given in these schools will
be a godless education. But we have heard during the last few
days that in many of our schools—I will not say in most of them
—the education which is there given, and is called religious educa
tion, has but a very small tincture of real religion in it; and we
have been told by the most eminent men, who understand what
they are talking about, that in the new schools—schools wherethere will be no sectarian theology taught—there may be, and we-
�199
believe there will be, as much religion as in nine-tenths of the
schools that exist now. And even supposing that there were no
theology; supposing the children left those schools without any
knowledge of the difference between one sect and another, and did
not know what you meant when you asked what sect they belonged
to—what then ? The foundation would have been laid upon which
any or all of the sects could operate to advantage, and, no doubt,
upon the foundation thus laid, a superstructure of religion could be
raised that would be worth having. Having supplied these schools
—schools based upon the taxation of the country, and managed by
the representatives of the ratepayers, and belonging to the people
absolutely, because they would have paid for them, as much as if
they had taken the money out of their own pockets, in the shape
of subscriptions—three things would of necessity follow. We say
that most schools must of necessity be schools, where there shall
be no theological teaching of any sort whatever. We say that
we have no choice in the matter, if schools are to be national
schools they must be unsectarian. We say besides that, having
provided these schools, it would be not merely illogical, but it
would be a most unjust thing, if we allowed the children still to
run idle about the streets. Do you think it likely for a moment
that a ratepayer would consent to pay an additional rate in order
that children might be educated, and yet to see these poor children
for whom he paid the rate, neglected by their apathetic parents,
and not receiving the benefit which had been provided for
them ? It would be impossible to collect a school-rate under such
circumstances. Some people say that there would be great harsh
ness—that it would be un-English—that the people would resist
anything in the shape of compulsion. Now, I will not dwell upon
it to-night, because there is one who is going to follow me who is
able to do it much better than I can myself; but I will simply say
this, that the manner in which this compulsion may be exercised in
this country is extremely simple, and, in my opinion, will be com
pletely in harmony with the wishes of the people. It is most easy
to obtain a complete registration of all the children in the country ;
S3 easy as it is to obtain a registration of voters. When you have
obtained this registration, you must put against each child’s name
�200
the name of the school that it is intended to go to. Then send to
each one of the school committees a list of the children that ought
to attend its school, and throw upon the school committee the
duty of seeing that these children attend. Give the school
committee, officers, whose duty it shall he to go to the houses of all
parents whose children are not attending regularly at school. Let
these school officers explain to the parents what their duties are,
and the penalties that may attach to the non-performance of them.
And remember that these schools will be free schools—remember
that the Factory Acts will prevent parents from sending their
children to work, and then consider what motive can there be in
the minds of any parents to prevent their children going to school,
when they are entitled to send them, under such circumstances ? I
will engage to say that, after a year or two of the operation of such
a system as that, there will be very few, indeed, who will not regu
larly and willingly send their children to school. Of these few it
may be necessary to make one or two examples. Let them, if they
persist in neglect, be summoned before the magistrates; and what
will usually result is this—the magistrates will warn, and, on promise
of amendment, no other result will follow; but when the parent
is brought up a second time, the infliction of a fine will be very
well merited, and I am sure will not shock the sense of justice and
propriety of the working classes. Now, we say in the third place,
that these schools, if attendance he compulsory, must be free. I
have received, this morning, a letter from Edward Polson, and he
says—“ As one of the working classes, I wish to ask you if, in your
opinion, it is fair for an honest, hard-working, steady man, to be
forced to pay rates for the education of a drunken, lazy man’s
children ? In my opinion, it is not at all a fair thing; but perhaps
you can show me that it is fair. For my part, I cannot see it.”
Now, I am not at all surprised at this state of feeling ; but I would
reply, that he is already subject to this very injustice, because he is
called upon to pay a very much larger sum than he will ever
be called upon to pay for an education rate, in order that that
drunken and lazy man’s child-—nay, that man himself—shall
be kept in the workhouse, or shall be punished in the gaol. Meeting
the writer of this letter upon his own ground, namely, his desire to
�201
save himself from taxation, I say it is for his own interest that he
should ask for this education rate. But even supposing that it were
not so—supposing that for a few years he should have to pay
increased rates—surely there are considerations of a higher nature.
'Can he—not merely the rich, but the poor man, the working man
—can he pass by these poor children in our gutters, these neglected
Arabs of the streets—can he pass them by, knowing their miserable
state, and their wretched prospects, and steel his heart against their
highest interest, having the power to place them in a better position,
merely because their unnatural parents—(The close of the sentence
was lost in an enthusiastic outburst of cheering, which was prolonged
for a considerable time.) When these parents neglect their duty,
what the League says is this : that it is the duty of the State to
come in and be a parent to these innocent victims. And what we
wish to do is, to call upon the Legislature of this country to take'
upon itself that duty. We don’t wish to say anything in disparage
ment of the services of those men who have hitherto taken charge
of the education of the country; but we say that they have proved
that they cannot undertake to educate all, and we say that all
must be educated, and all shall be educated; and that it is the
State alone that has the power to act up to this. The State can do
it, and the State will do it. We have now a Minister of Education,
in Mr. Forster, who, in my opinion, has the will to do it; but I am
not so certain that he has the power. But what we are going to do
is this : by means of this League and its branches, we are going to
rouse the people—in whom now, happily, is placed political power—
in order that we may say to Mr. Forster, “ Be our leader, and give
us what we want; we’ll support you.” But if Mr. Forster should
hesitate, if he will not transfer the education of this country from
the voluntary and denominational basis, upon which it now rests, to
the basis of the taxation and self-governing energy of this country,
then, much as we respect Mr. Forster, much as we esteem his
strength of character, his excellent will and his great skill, it will
be our duty to say, even to Mr. Forster, our hitherto leader, that we
can follow him no longer. We shall say, “ We have taken upon
ourselves the performance of a duty than which, none can be higher
- the duty of seeing to the education of every child in this country •
�202
and that duty we shall perforin—with you as our leader, if you will,
hut if not, in spite of you.
The Mayor then called upon Professor Fawcett.
Professor Fawcett was received with cheers. He said, Mr.
Mayor, ladies, and gentlemen,—It is my privilege to speak to you
this evening on the greatest and most important of all social and
political questions. During the last two days the National
Education League has been inaugurated under the happiest auspices,
and the people of this town may indeed be congratulated, that the
name of Birmingham is destined to be associated with an organ
ization which will. prove as fruitful in its blessings, as were the
labours of the Anti-Corn Law League. This organization has been
inaugurated under happy auspices. A great body of gentlemen,
living different lives, looking upon questions from different points
of view, have come together with one common object. They have
resolved to sacrifice all minor differences of opinion upon points of
detail, because they are determined that they will be a united body
in the effort they intend to make, an effort which they promise you
shall never cease, until elementary education has been guaranteed
to every boy and girl in this country. Perhaps the greatest
danger that threatens this movement is, the possibility that some of
us may be tempted to accept a compromise. This is the rock
which has imperilled so many great movements. Free trade was
endangered by the offer of an 8s. fixed duty. Household suffrage
was imperilled by the offer of a .^6 rating and a <£7 rental
franchise; the future of national education in Scotland ran a
narrow risk of being wrecked last session, by as bad a bill as was
ever spoiled by the House of Lords. But will you authorize us to
say in the House of Commons, in your name—you, representing
a great body of the industrious classes of this country—that you
agree with us, that nothing will, nothing ought to satisfy you,
short of a measure which will impose rates 'where educational
appliances are insufficient, and which will compel the attendance
of those children at school, upon whom, by their parents, the
irreparable wrrong is being inflicted of allowing them to grow up in
a state of ignorance ? This, no doubt, is a great movement, and it
will require hard labour to bring it to a successful issue. It is a
�203
great movement indeed, because what is our end, and what is our
aim? To raise millions of our fellow-countrymen who are sunk
deep in the depths of ignorance. This is a movement which will
require all the popular support which such vast audiences as thia
can render it. No one can tell the effect which may be produced
upon the minds of our statesmen and our rulers by such meetings
as this. It is our privilege at the present time to be governed by a
Prime Minister who is ever ready to be instructed by the intel
ligently expressed public opinion of this country, and if Mr Glad
stone has not made up his mind on the educational question yet,
nothing is so likely to give clearness and distinctiveness of view
and firmness of resolution, as the expression of opinion of such an
audience as this, in favour of unsectarian, compulsory national
education. It is sometimes said that our proposals are revolutionary.
We cheerfully accept the title. We intend to effect a great
revolution, because we intend, if possible, to root out ignorance,
with its attendant misery and vice, and substitute in their place all
the self-dependence, all the material welfare, which result from
intellectual culture. If the revolution should be successful, the
displacement of the worst tyrant that ever afflicted a country will
not confer greater blessings, than will our efforts upon this country.
It is almost unnecessary for me to speak to you of the usual
aspect of this question. It is almost a truism to say that no
social reform, no scheme of philanthropy, can produce any per
manent effect, unless it makes the labourer self-dependent. If a
child is permitted to grow up to manhood in ignorance, he has to
pass through life, as it were, crippled and maimed, deprived of
half the power with which he has been endowed by nature to
secure his own mental and material advancement. Sometimes it
is said that these proposals of ours are anti-English. There is
something which is not only anti-English, but which is anti-human,
and that is the spectacle of millions sunk in such ignorance as if
they were living in a heathen land. Anti-English! will the
Conservatives venture to raise the cry? They-have not passed
many legislative measures during the last thirty years. But
what is the measure from 'which they take some credit ? Why,
they are never tired of talking about the honour which is due
�204
to their party by the passing of the Factory Acts. What is
one of the most valuable provisions in the Factory Acts ? The
compulsory educational provision, which declares that it shall be
illegal to employ any child unless he attends school so many hours
a week. By recent legislation the compulsory educational pro
visions of the Factory Acts have been extended—not in a good
form, indeed, but still the principle has been extended to every
branch of industry in England, except agriculture; and we shall
not be generous, we shall not be fair, to the class of labourers who
most require State intervention, if we much longer permit agricul
ture to be thus excepted. Assuming, then, as we may, that the
principle of the Factory Acts has now been approved of by all
political parties, it is indisputable that the principle of compulsory
education has been accepted.
How, then, can the monstrous
anomaly be permitted to intervene, that we should say, as we are say
ing at the present moment, that if a parent sends his child to work,
education shall be enforced upon that child, but that no similar
compulsion shall be used against the parent who is so base, so
degraded, that he will neither send his child to school nor to work ?
Many of you, most of you, whom I am addressing, are engaged,
either as employers or employed, in the industry of this town. You
know that facts, painful facts, are every day brought under your
notice which show, that unless we have national education, it will
be absolutely impossible for England to maintain her commercial
position. In various trades we have each year to carry on a keener
and more closely-contested competition with foreign countries.
Industry requires, now, the use of delicate machinery; it requires
the skilful application of that machinery; it requires those moral
qualities which make the labourer most valuable, and which enable
him to understand the true principles of trade. Bearing this in
mind, it is as impossible to expect that an uneducated country will
be able successfully to compete against an educated country, as it
would be to suppose that a hand-loom weaver, could profitably
struggle against the appliances of modern mechanical invention.
We are too much prone to deceive ourselves by the signs of material
wealth. We are accustomed to sing poeans of exultation over
increasing exports and imports, but behind all this glitter and show,
�205
behind all this evidence of material wealth, there are the ugly, there
are the portentous facts, that one out of twenty of our population is
a pauper, and there are countless thousands who are in such a
state of misery that they are verging upon pauperism. Tor twenty
years, various material appliances have been brought into operation,
all of which have tended to stimulate the production of wealth.
We have had free trade, we have had mechanical inventions, we
have had the extension of the railway system. When these facts
are borne in mind, does it not convince us of this great truth—a
truth which should never be lost sight of—that there is something
more required to make a nation great, and happy, and prosperous,
than mere material agencies. You must act upon the mind, and, in
that way, upon the morality and social character of the people. The
Education League has, to my mind most wisely, in the first instance,
confined itself to elementary education. Of course, this is the
first, this is the essential thing to be done. But this ought to be
regarded as only a part of our work. The opinion I am about
to express is, I know not whether it will be thought extreme, or
Quixotic, but I have long entertained the idea, and I do not mean
to relinquish it, that we never ought to be satisfied until the
poorest child in this country, if he has the requisite ability, should
have an opportunity of enjoying the very best education the nation
can afford. You ask me, perhaps, how is this end to be attained ?
I believe it can be attained by a just, by a wise administration of
our vast educational endowments. Those educational endowments
ought, to my mind, to bo devoted to reward the meritorious, to what
ever class and whatever religion they belong. I would not give, as a
matter of right, a free education, but no child should suffer from
want of education in consequence of the poverty of its parents.
But I hold that the greatest of all human responsibilities is incurred
by bringing a human being into the world, and I think every
parent should feel, that it is as much his duty to give his children
education as it is to provide them with food and clothing. Now,
with regard to the administration of the educational resources of
the country, much has already been done by the Endowed Schools
Bill, which was passed last session; for the main principle of the
Bill was this—that those endowments should be devoted to reward
�206
meritorious students. Therefore, when we have these elementaryschools which Mr. Dixon, who represents the League, proposes
should be established, we may look forward to see poor boys ad
vanced from the elementary schools to the first grade school, and to
the second grade school, and thence to the University. When
they get there, I can only say that we shall cordially welcome them;
for it is the great glory of those Universities, that they welcome
mental cultivation and intellectual power, from whatever class they
are drawn. As a Cambridge man—and I know I am expressing the
opinion of many Oxford friends also—I can say that we should
rejoice to see in Oxford or Cambridge two or three hundred stu
dents, sons alike of the poorest men and the wealthiest merchants
of this town, all being brought under the influence of the educa
tion which we can give them. There, we know no social favouritism,
we never ask who a man’s father is, we have no governing families.
What a happy thing it would be if the same remark could be
made with regard to English politics. But you may perhaps say
that something will require to be done, before the Universities can
do what you wish them to do. You know that there are still there
religious liabilities, and religious tests; but I venture to think that
the overwhelming majority of the country has already declared
that those disabilities and those tests shall be completely swept
away. A University Tests Bill—I say a University Tests Bill, for
it was only a half measure—passed the House of Commons last
session. Here again is an illustration of the danger of great ques
tions being wrecked upon the rocks of compromise. That bill
would have only done its work after a long course of years. It
would not have swept away those tests and disabilities, it would
only have given the colleges the power to sweep them away if they
liked, and the bill might possibly for years to come have produced
very little effect whatever. The bill passed the House of Commons;
but sometimes we derive signal advantage from the unreasoning
resistance of the House of Lords, and I feel more profoundly
.grateful to them than I can describe. It seems to me that the
one useful function which they perform, is to reject a bill when
it is a compromise, and thus give the House of Commons an op
portunity of waking up to its senses, and seeing its true position.
�207
Political predictions are dangerous, but I venture to predict that the
House of Lords will never see that bill again. The next session
they will have to express their opinion upon a very different measure.
They will have to say “aye” or “no” to a proposal which will
abolish, at once and for ever, every remaining vestige of religious
test and disability, and thus make the Universities truly national
institutions. It is for such audiences as this to say that this is your
will, and that nothing short of it will satisfy your just demands.
But great as is the vista which is opened by the education question
in all its aspects in England, we may, perhaps, not improbably have
to render as great service to the sister country as we have rendered
to her by the disestablishment of the Church, and as we shall
render to her by passing a land bill. Undenominational education
is a great principle in England. But it is a principle still more
dearly, still more carefully to be cherished in Ireland. There is
danger that the national school system of that country, which is
undenominational, may be imperilled. There is danger that the
University question in that country may be settled on a denomina
tional basis. I believe that if we permit this to be done, we shall do
more harm to Ireland by permitting the ascendancy of an ultramon
tane hierarchy, than we have done good by the destruction of the
ascendancy of the State Church. In conclusion, if I have not
already detained you too long, perhaps you will permit me to say
that the science which it is my privilege to teach, instructs us in the
lesson, that nothing more tends to promote efficiency and industry
than division of labour. With division of labour, each individual
can devote himself to the particular process for which he has the
greatest capacity, and without it we should find skilled mechani
cians doing what might be equally well done by unskilled labourers.
Unrestricted commerce, again, enables the capital and labour of
each country, to be applied to those branches of industry for which
it has the greatest natural advantages. This is the secret of free,
trade. Similarly, we believe that a complete system of national
education would enable the individual capacity of each person to
be utilized in the best possible way for the benefit of his country.
Many a person there may be, now toiling monotonously in the
fields, labouring in some deep-sunk mine, or carrying out, year after
�208
year, some work of mere routine, who, if his abilities had been
properly developed, might have executed some work of art, invented
some new machine, organized some political or social movement, or
produced some literary work which might have permanently en
riched and benefited mankind. There is in life no more melan
choly spectacle, than that generation after generation should pass
away, without sufficient knowledge to understand the beauties and
wonders with which Nature has surrounded them. Can it be
right, can it be just, that Nature, which has been so boun
tiful, should not be appreciated as she might he? And
is it not strangely sad, that some people who seem to arrogate to
themselves the title of religious, seem to care more about the
paltry triumph of a creed, than they do about education, which
would elevate the people from the ignorance which is alike degrad
ing to human nature, and antagonistic to moral and material
advancement ? Some of those who are willing that the education
question should stand still whilst they wrangle about bringing
children under the influence of some barren formality, such as
Apostolic succession, should remember the significant words of the
Prophet when he said, “ My people are destroyed for lack of
knowledge.”
The Mayor then called upon Mr. Mundella, member forSheffield.
Mr. Mundella, M.P.: Mr. Mayor, ladies, and gentlemen,—Thefew words that I shall say to you shall be in support of theresolution which has been so ably and exhaustively moved and
seconded by my two honourable friends who preceded me. I shall
address myself mainly to the working men, by the request of mv
friend your worthy member ■ and as it is the first time I have had
the honour of addressing an audience of working men in Birming
ham, I confess that I feel proud of the opportunitv of doing so,
•because you are represented in the House of Commons by one
of the noblest men and most honest politicians of any age orcountry. The considerations which I venture to submit to you
shall be of a purely practical character. First, I ask, what are theobjects of the association ? The establishment of a system which
shall secure the education of every child in England and Wales.
�209
How do we propose to effect it ? School accommodation being
provided, the State or the local authorities shall have the power to
compel the attendance of children of suitable age, not otherwise
receiving education. The means therefore are, first, by making
provision, and then compelling attendance. Now, I desire to point
out to you what has already been effected elsewhere, by compulsory
education, because although this is a new doctrine in England, it
has been in operation thirty years in Switzerland, forty years in
Saxony, and thirty-five years in Prussia, and on the first of
January next it will come into operation in Austria. Eighty
millions of the people of Europe will, on the first of January next,,
be subject to the operation of this law. What has been its effect
in the free republic of Switzerland ? They are the most intelligent
and best educated people in the world. You may go from canton
to canton, you may go from one end of the country to the other,
and you cannot find a child of twelve years of age that will not read
and write ivell, that does not know something, intelligently too,
of the history of its country, and has not also a knowledge of other
useful acquirements. It has been my fortune for some years past
to have an opportunity, of studying the effect of compulsory
education on the Continent, and I wish you, working men of
Birmingham, to comprehend what the effect of the system is.
I am an employer in the little kingdom of Saxony, now
part of the North German Confederation. I have a manager
there who has been fixed there for nine years. I have gone
there year after year, and have remained there a month
at a time, and I have visited its schools, which are marvels of
arrangement and pedagogic science (for these are the words with
them), and I have never yet found, nor has the manager yet found,
a man in the country who could not correspond intelligently with
his employer, nor a child of ten or twelve years of age who could
not read and write as well as myself; and although that country,
and Prussia, and Switzerland have many disadvantages, as
compared with ourselves, although their commercial position is
infinitely inferior to ours, although there is a lack of capital, and
geographically they are much worse in their position than Great
Britain, yet I am ashamed to say that I have never met there with
o
/
�210
that squalor, that brutal ignorance, that terrible destitution, which
I meet m my own country. Now, what is the state of things as
we see it m England? You working men, you know well what it
is. What has been the effect of the present system? It has
reversed the teaching of Scripture—it has filled the rich with good
things, and the poor it has sent empty away. It has bettered those
•who can and ought to help themselves, but those who can do
nothing for themselves it has utterly neglected. Look at our ragged
schools; they have had no assistance from the State, and look at
the thousands of poor children who cannot obtain admission even
into the ragged schools. You know—no men know so well as the
working classes—what is the educational condition of the poor that
surround you in the streets, and lanes, and alleys of our large
towns. By the assistance of your worthy member, an education
society was formed in this town, and 1,000 children in employ
ment were tested. I have had an opportunity of testing thousands
of children, in this and other towns, children, the great majority of
whom have passed through our schools ; and what is the result of
our education ? What with irregular attendance, few attendances,
and attendances for a short time only, when the child grows up to
fourteen or fifteen years of age, it has almost forgotten anything it
■ever learned at school, and the very little it retains is utterly use
less for any practical purpose. And what is it that we propose to
■accomplish ? We propose that the child shall commence at a cer
tain age and attend, for a certain number of years consecutively,
regularly at school • that when the child enters upon its labours, it
shall have the benefit of the half-time system for some years longer •
and that the poor man’s child shall, as the hon. member for Brighton
has said, have the same opportunities which the rich man’s child
has, to develop those faculties with which it has been endowed.
One thing you may be well assured of, the rich man in the middle
classes will take care that his children are educated, because he
knows that without education their career in the world is utterly
ruined and destroyed. Why shouldn’t the poor man’s children
be educated, then, in the same manner ? Why should they not
have open to them the same career and the same advantages ?
It simply depends upon audiences like this to demand it. Now
►
�211
I want to point out to you the machinery by which this is
to be accomplished; because many objections are raised to it,
and you are cautioned, above all things, that your liberties are
about to be destroyed, and your parental rights taken away. You
are told that, if you submit to the system of compulsory education,
the policeman will drag you before the magistrates, and you will be
shut up in prison, because your children may not be in attendance
at school. I wish to show exactly how this is done elsewhere, for
the 80,000,000 of people I have before referred to. Every child
in the North German Confederation, and in Switzerland is registered,
and next year every child in Austria will be registered, on a system
precisely the same as that of the political register in England. The
school boundaries are conterminous with the political boundaries ;
they are divided in Switzerland into cantons, districts, towns ; in
Prussia, into towns, counties, divisions of towns ; and in Birming
ham there would be the central district, and the wards. They are
managed by local bodies. These local bodies have the power to
demand that the children be sent to school, and it is their duty to
see that they are sent. If the parent neglects to send his child to
school, what is the result ? Is a policeman sent to him with a
summons in his pocket? No. There are persons called school
messengers. These school messengers are generally pupil teachers,
or have just finished their education in the school. They go to the
house and inquire why the child is not at school. If, as in nine
cases out of ten, or, I might say, in ninety-nine cases out of a
hundred, the child’s absence can be accounted for, it is perfectly
satisfactory. But if it is through neglect, and continued neglect,
the parent is brought before the school committee, and the law is
pointed out to him, and he is told that it will be enforced against
him if he rebels. If he continues contumacious, he is filled. I
have known it 6d., 10d., and up to 2s. 6d. for a second or third
time. But I tell you what has been the result of the compulsory
system : there is the same wholesome state of public opinion
with respect to the father who starves the intellect of his
child, as there is with you when a father starves his child
by denying it bread. It is a constant thing with me,
whenever I have an opportunity—it has become almost a
�212
habit with me—to seize upon poor children wherever I find them,
whether in the factory, the workshop, or the street, arid ascertain
exactly what our glorious system of education has done forthem.
A fortnight ago I found on the step of my counting-house door a
number of lads, and I coaxed them up-stairs into my counting
house. There were nine of them, and some were very ragged
specimens indeed. They thought I had some sinister motive,°and
it was with some difficulty I induced them to go with me. I
examined them separately on their educational acquirements. Not
one of those poor boys could read the simplest word. I had the
Times newspaper before me. Two of them could manage the The,
but not one of them could spell Times. Not one of thZm had the
slightest idea of the existence of God, except to use his name in
blaspheming. Yes, but some of them said, they had once been at
school, at five or six years of age, and they had been since, some
at the brickyard, some at one employment, some at another.
Their ages ranged from eleven to sixteen. There was only
one of those children, for whom there was any reasonable
excuse why he had not been regularly at school. The
absence of the others was mainly owing to drunkenness on the
part of the parents. Now I ask you, is this to be continued any
longer ? Are these children to be thrown as paupers or criminals
upon society, and that in the name of the most sacred rights_
British freedom, parental authority, and so on—to breed up a race
of criminals, paupers, and wretches to prey upon society ? We are
told that the working classes cannot afford to lose the earnings of
their children. It is this I wish to meet, and I think I can do so,
because it is really the gravest argument that can be brought to
bear upon the whole question. Now, I find in the countries I
have referred to in North Germany particularly—a new Labour
Act comes into operation next year, and this new Act runs thus :__
No child shall be employed in any regular employment, except
domestic employment, by the parent after school hours, until it is
twelve years of age. It has been repeatedly said to me that the
English workman cannot do without his child’s earnings until the
child is twelve years of age. “ What is to become of a man with
six or eight children ? ” they say, “ You are depriving him of the
�213
earnings of his children.” But those who make this objection take
children as if they were like rabbits—all of an age. They forget
that if a man has six children, the chances are that they run
something like 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12; that he has not to struggle to
keep them all at school at once, and that in a year or two, when
the eldest gets employment, it earns a great deal more money if it
has been educated. Nay, and what is more—and this is a question
I wonder that trades unionists have not seen, and I don’t care how
soon they do—if there were not so many children employed who
ought not to be employed, many parents would be better paid than
they are. Now, assuredly what can be done by 80,000,000 of peo
ple in other parts of Europe can be done by Englishmen, must be
done by them, if they are to keep their place as a nation. Are we
content to be the last in the race—we, who have been supposed to
be in the van of civilization and humanity ? Well, there is another
consideration, and that is the religious difficulty. Now, I never
find that this religious difficulty exists with the working classes;
it exists with those generally who make the objection, on behalf,
they say, of the working classes. T should be exceedingly grieved
- I should be more than grieved—if anything we did tended to
make working men irreligious or irreverent; but I know it is im
possible to effect anything of the kind by the means we propose. I
know that the more knowledge we give, even that secular know
ledge which is so much despised, the better they will be prepared
for the reception of religious truth. What is the drudgery of our
Sunday school teachers, what is the drudgery of our ministers,
dealing with unintelligent children and unintelligent congregations?
Why, I believe we should raise our people entirely, from that brutal
ignorance, and that state of besotted intemperance, that pauperism
and that misery which characterise the lower three or four millions
of the people of England, if we were to give them a good educa
tion. I regret to hear that some association has been formed in
this town, with a view of opposing this benevolent movement.
But I would venture to remind those who engage in that opposition
of some remarkable lines that were written by Charles Dickens,’
describing the constant contests between the sects, and this great
�214
religious difficulty which we now stand in the face of.
said,—
He
“So have I seen a country on the earth,
Where darkness sat upon the living waters,
And brutal ignorance, and toil, and dearth,
Were the hard portion of its sons and daughters ;
And yet where those who should have ope’d the door
Of truth and charity to all men’s finding,
Squabbled for words upon the altar floor,
And rent the book in struggles for the binding.”
The Mayor rose to put the resolution.
Mr. J. Rutherford interposed, asking permission to move an
amendment.
The Mayor said that that was a meeting of the members of the
National Education League, for the transaction of certain business,
and he could not receive any proposition that had not been allowed,
and accepted by the general committee.
The resolution was then carried, Mr. Rutherford' and another
being the only persons who voted against it.
Mr. Joseph Chamberlain : I have been asked to move the fol
lowing resolution:—“ That the Executive Committee of the
National Education League be requested to prepare a bill, based
upon the principles of the League, for introduction into the House
of Commons during the next session of Parliament.” Inasmuch as
this resolution is in fact a formal one, and follows almost necessa
rily from that which has just been, all but unanimously adopted, it
is not necessary for me to say much in its favour. It is clearly
desirable, that our views should be presented as early as possible to
the Legislature in a practical shape; and inasmuch as we believe
that we now have a Government, who are determined faithfully to
carry out the wishes of the people, it will be an assistance, and not
a hindrance, to them that our views should be presented in a proper
form. But I have been requested, as an officer of the local com
mittee, to say a few words in support of the objects and principles
of the League ; and, in the first place, I think I may congratulate
this meeting, and all the friends of education, upon the enor
mous advance, to which this meeting testifies, on the great
question of education. I see in this advance the result
�•215
and the justification of the great political reform, which has
made those most interested in education, the depositories of
a great share of political power. There can be no doubt that
the present officers and members of the League have not, and
cannot have, any personal or selfish motive in the agitation of
this question. One common motive we have, and that is the love
of our common country, which induces us to seek its prosperity and
progress, and which, in the present case, incites us to obtain that
prosperity by cultivating the intelligence, and securing the enlighten
ment of the people. But you have a much nearer and more
personal interest in this matter. Bor it is not merely a question
whether this country shall continue to maintain its position among
the nations, or whether it shall lag behind in civilization, and leave
the victory in industrial and intellectual progress to other nations ;
but for you, it is also a question of the future of your own class,
and perhaps of your families; and you have to say whether they
shall enjoy the advantages which education confers, or whether they
shall remain in the position to which ignorance will condemn them,
even if they do not enter into the ranks of pauperism and crime.
As one guide to your decision upon this question, I ask you to con
sider the character, both of the support and of the opposition which
our proposition excites. As to the friends of this movement, I will
only refer to the adhesions we have received, during the present
Congress from the delegates and representatives of the great Trades
Councils throughout the kingdom; so that, I believe we may say
that directly or indirectly, from 800,000 to 1,000,000 working men
have, at these meetings in Birmingham, given their support to the
platform of the League. But it is chiefly from the opposition
which our propositions excite, that I anticipate a favourable
result—not that the opposition is not formidable, both in ex
tent and in numbers.; but when I see, taking sides against us
upon this question, the selfish hosts whom we have seen ranged
against us, again and again, upon previous questions, and whom we
have again and again defeated, I see an augury of a good result. I
have read that Napoleon I., on the morning of one of his great
battles, told his soldiers that they saw before them those self-same
Prussians whom they had beaten at Jena, whom they routed at
�216
i
s
t:
ii
w
si
to
so
mi
of
wl
■ow
•anc
fou
•eve
less
acct
tain
regu
shah
and
has j
has,
One
classe
know
ruinei
be ed'
have
It sim
Leipsic, and whom they would crush that day; and when I see
taking sides against us now, a great portion of the Conservative
landowners, and a certain section of the clergy, I think of the Com
Laws, of Reform, and of the Irish Church. But the signs of our
success are even more apparent in the trepidation and doubt which
are beginning to operate in the opposite camp. President Lincoln
had a homely proverb, that it was “ bad to swop horses when
crossing a stream but we see our opponents, in the middle of this
discussion, abandon their old hobbies, in the hope that they may
yet save something out of the wreck of the system which is fast
passing away. Only a few years ago, at a meeting wrhich was held
in this town, to consider the state of its education, the local clergy
who were present voted, to a man, against compulsory education,
and most of them were opposed to local rating; but now you find,
in the programme of the society which has been started within the
last few months, in opposition to our League, these two points made
the principal points of their platform. But we, in the meantime,
have advanced a little further, and so these gentlemen are, as usual,
left behind. So it will always be, until they learn to give
up their prejudices a little more graciously, and a little more
quickly. Until they do that, they will never overtake the full
confidence of the people whom they profess to wish to serve. The
present issue between us is simply this : we say that the old
system, which has failed, after a trial of twenty years, should at
least be supplemented by something new; but they say, No, let
us extend and contiuue the old. We say that the nation has
been growing fast, and has outgrown its old clothes, and that it
ought to have a new suit; but they want to let out a tuck here,
and put in a patch there, to make the old rags last a little longer.
Underlying all this resistance, is the fear that, if we do have a new
outfit, we may refuse to employ those who made such a miserable
misfit of the last. His Grace the Archbishop of York, at a meeting
which was held in Liverpool the other day, and which was called a
working man’s meeting, because a large portion of the room was
filled by the clergy, at that meeting his Grace told his audience
that three-fourths of the education of the country was owing to
the clergy, and that the men and the system that had done such
�217
great things ought not to be superseded. I should be the last to
deny or depreciate the enormous sacrifices which have been made
by many of the clergy to establish and maintain schools; but I say
that, on their own confession, their motive has been, not the educa
tion of the people as a thing which is good in itself, but the main
tenance of the doctrines of the Church of England ; and the conse
quence has been, that secular education has been subordinate to this
object, and we remain at this time one of the worst educated nations
in Europe. I say that, even if they had been a great deal more
snccessful than they really have been, it is the worst kind of Con
servatism to say that, because a thing is good of its kind, it shall
not be supplanted by something which is better and more complete.
I cannot understand the propriety of keeping a grown-up man in
swaddling clothes, because he looked very well in them when he
was a baby. To plead for the retention of the denominational
system, under which more than half the children of this country
are growing up without any education worthy the name, because
three-fourths of the remainder are brought up in the Church of
England schools, is as ridiculous as for an old Protectionist to have
pleaded for the Corn Laws, at a time when thousands were perishing
for want of food, because three-fourths of the rest, drew their daily
supplies from the granaries of the farmers. But the real reason
why our opponents support the denominational system is, not be
cause they believe it to be the best means of securing the education
of the people, but because they believe it to be the only means by
which they can maintain a monopoly of instruction. Our choice is
between the education of the people, and the interests of the Church.
Education, to be national, must be unsectarian ; and I cannot sup
pose that there will be a moment’s hesitation as to the choice which
the majority of the nation would make, if it were not that theolo
gical professors, who ought to recognize in education the best foun
dation upon which religion can rear her temple, have perverted the
meaning of religion until, indirectly, it has become a hindrance and
a stumbling-block. The day is not far distant when all will look
back with wonder at this time, and be astonished that intelligent,
earnest, and conscientious men could have thought a profession of
faith in any creed, worth anything as long as it was unintelligent, and
�218
could have been bjind to the fact, that the best handmaid which
any truth can have is a mind trained for its apprehension. It is a
curious and instructive fact, that while almost all other sects are
welcoming the prospect of increased education, as the best pre
paration for their own religious work, there are two which strain
every nerve to preserve and extend the present system, in spite of
its clear deficiencies. These two parties are the Roman Catholic
Church, and the Evangelical section of the Church of England. I
think the latter should have some doubt about the propriety of
the course they are taking, when they see into what company
it has brought them. You know what the pious organ of the
party, the Record, said, when it discovered that Mr. Gladstone
had an acquaintance with Archbishop Manning; you know that
all the resources of Biblical bad language were exhausted, and
men searched the Scriptures diligently to find parallels for the
supposed baseness of the great Statesman. Now the same gentle
men who shuddered at the iniquity of conversing with a Roman
Catholic prelate, are actually rowing in the same boat with the
ecclesiastics of Rome. The interest of the Roman Catholics in
this matter is very clear. If denominational education is to be
extended in England, how can you in justice refuse denominational
education in Ireland? And then you will have this glorious
anomaly in our splendid constitutional system: you will have
the State spending money on mutually destructive objects, and
the patient people will be called upon in one breath, to swallow the
poison and the antidote, and to pay the bill for both. The only
way by which this baneful, dangerous, and senseless application of
the public money can be avoided, is to insist firmly upon the
principle that the secular education of the people should
be the province of the Government, apart from all theological
instruction, which should be left to the respective ministers.
This, at all events, is what the League sets before you. I
read, the other day, that Lord Sandon, in a speech which
he made in the House, said that, speaking from an intimate
acquaintance with the working classes, he was confident that they
would never accept any education which had not impressed upon it
a religious character. If his lordship’s acquaintance with the
�219
working class be correct, our work will be vain; but I prefer to
believe, with John Stuart Mill, that the time is shortly coming when,
the working class will no longer be content to accept a religion of
other people’s prescribing. And if this matter of education is taken up
by the working class, as we hope and believe it will be, and if it is
made part of their political programme, then our success is certain,
and we may yet live to see the glorious time when, prizing know
ledge as her noblest wealth and best production, this imperial realm,
while she exacts allegiance, will admit the obligation, on her part,
to teach those who are born to serve her • and thus only shall we
maintain our position as a great nation, and guard and protect the
highest interests of every class of the community,
Mr. Cremer : I apprehend that the reasons which induced the
committee to ask me to second this resolution were, because I am
known to entertain strong convictions in reference to the question
of national, secular, and compulsory education; and, secondly,
because, being a working man, I may fairly claim to speak of the
wants and wishes of the working class. Those of us who, year after
year, contended for the extension of the suffrage to the working
class, asserted that one of the first objects which the working men,
when they obtained the suffrage, would seek to realize, would be a
system of secular and compulsory education. That prophesy has
received a partial fulfilment in the establishment of the National
Education League, in the successful meetings it has held during the
last two days, and the enthusiastic manner in which you have
endorsed the platform of the League at this meeting ; and I am sure
that when the matter is fairly before the country, our prophecies
will have a complete triumph. Some three years ago, the working
men in the borough in which I reside in London, formed a political
association, and one of the planks in their platform—three years
ago, remember—was national, secular, and compulsory education,
and they declared that any man who came to them in the future to
ask for their suffrages, must be distinctly in favour of secular and
comprdsory education. The result was, that at the last general
election nearly 6,000 workmen recorded their suffrages for the man
who made that the most prominent feature of his political pro
gramme. The tendency of modern legislation was, I think, rightly
�220
described by Sir Stafford Northcote at the Social Science Congress,
when he said it was in the direction of more and stronger govern
ment. The old do-nothing policy has passed away for ever, and has
been succeeded by an earnest determination on the part of the
people to do something useful, and to do ’it well. I fear Mr.
Forster is likely to bring in next session a Bill based upon
the denominational system. I hope, therefore, that the Executive
Committee will as speedily as possible frame a bill embodying the
principles of the League, and get some staunch friend of education,
such as Professor Fawcett, Mr. Mundella, or Mr. Dixon, to intro
duce it into the House of Commons ; because its being in their
hands will be the best guarantee that there will be no unholy
compromise upon this question. Professor Fawcett’s conduct last
session proves that there is no greater enemy of compromise than
he. I wish we had a House composed of such men. With regard
to education, I know there are a great many who are exceedingly
timid at the mention of compulsion. They are quite willing to
provide schools, but the idea of forcing children to attend is
repugnant to them. But the right of the State to compel, where
the well-being of society is concerned, was acknowledged long
ago. In fact, this principle is at the root of all government. To come
to what has been done within our own day : was not the right of the
State to use compulsion acknowledged when the Factory Acts were
passed ? when the Bleaching and Dyeing Act was passed? when
the Inspection of Coal Mines Act was passed ? when the Health of
Towns Act was passed? when the Vaccination Act was passed?
When we talk of freedom, we mean freedom to do what is right;
when we say we don’t want Government to interfere, we mean
that we object to its mischievous interference; but the very pur
pose of its existence is forgotten unless it interferes beneficently.
The only question, then, is whether it is well for us to be educated,
and if so, whether we can have the work done more effectually by
Government than by any other agency ? If so, then the Govern
ment must interfere and do it. We provide inspectors to see that
people whitewash their houses and drain them, and we punish
people who injure society by neglect in these particulars. I have
read, within the last three or four weeks, of thirty or forty cases
�221
where, in the Metropolitan Police Courts, heads of families have
been fined for not having their children vaccinated. There may
be difference of opinion as to whether vaccination is beneficial or
not, and those who think it is not beneficial of course object to
people being fined for not practising it; but among men who are
convinced that vaccination is useful, there is no objection to Go
vernment enforcing it; in fact all people who believe it is good,
want it enforced for the benefit of society at large. It is only
when they become convinced that it is bad that they object toGovernmental compulsion. I hold that the case of education is
precisely similar. If it is good, let us have it—let compulsion be
used if necessary; let it be punished as a crime to starve a child’s
mind, as we punish it as a crime to starve its body ; but if it is
bad, or merely indifferent—if it is of little or no consequence whe
ther people are educated or not—let us have no compulsion. But
we who hold that it is good, and that it is a remedy against moral
pestilence, want the same principle applied to it as to the preven
tion of contagious diseases. Some people object to the programme
of the League, because they say the policeman must be called in to
enforce it. Mr. Mundella has just now disposed of that cry ; but
for my part, even if it were a well-founded objection, I should be
very glad to see a policeman drag a child io school, if I thought
there was a reasonable prospect that by that means he would be
saved the trouble of dragging him to gaol in after years. I would
rather employ the police to save our children from the moral snares
which beset them, than in preventing the snaring of hares, the
beneficent work which our aristocracy have found for a large num
ber of them. As to the state of education hr this country com
pared with some nations abroad, it was my good fortune to visit
Switzerland some years ago. I went through the cities, towns, and
villages, and into the mountains. I had full opportunities of
judging of the education of the people, and I can confinn the
statement of Mr. Mundella that there is not a man or woman,
or a child of ten or twelve years of age—not one, so far as I
could make out—who has not received a thoroughly sound and
practical education. They have not the miserable charity schools
that we have in this country for the people, but they have magni-
�222
cent colleges, built at the expense of the State, where the children
of the shopkeeper, the artisan, and the labourer sit on one commrm
form, and receive a common education; and nothing seemed
to me more likely to root out caste, prejudice, and privilege, and
to knit all classes together, than this intermixture of the children
of all classes in school. When I saw this hi Switzerland, I could
not help hoping that the time was not far distant when we should
see a similar state of things in the United Kingdom. A word to
my fellow-workmen : We are apt to lament the gulf which separates
class from class, and to bemoan our fate, and regret that there should
be such a thing as caste and privilege in society; but you may
depend upon it that you will never get rid of these things of which
you are the victims, until you place yourself upon an intellectual
equality with the other classes of society. That is the necessary
condition of all equality. Do what you will, a rude and ignorant
class can never be upon an equality with a polished and educated
class. What you have to do, therefore, is to educate and polish
yourselves; and if you do that, other classes will lose alike the
wish, and the power to elbow you aside and treat you with contempt.
I insist, therefore, upon education. Take no denial, be turned
aside by no pretext, but insist upon that as the one thing needful,
without which all the victories you have ever achieved or can
achieve, will possess but half then* value, and without which, there
aremany victories which will be impossible. I believe the programme
of the League will help to this intellectual equality which we now
require, and that is the reason why I give it my cordial support.
Let us, as working men, speak out boldly and manfully on this
question. It is of vital importance to us. Let there be no tempo
rising or compromising with us. Let us enter into no unholy
alliances, but do this thing now with all our might, for there never
was a work more worthy of all our energy. I believe we are all
Teady. Four years ago, when I was in the eastern counties, I
found the labourers in the villages, and in the country quite ripe
upon this question even then, and my conviction is that we shall
find an overwhelming force to help us onward. I hope you will
give us all the assistance in your power, and justify the predictions
made in your behalf when the franchise was demanded for you.
�223
One of these predictions was, that as soon as you canre into posses
sion of political power, you would insist upon the education of
every child in the kingdom.
Mr. Carter, M.P. : I don’t intend to inflict a speech upon you
at this late hour of the evening; hut one or two gentlemen have
referred to a speech of the Archbishop of York, and as I know
something of the views of the working men of Yorkshire, I
rise to assure you that when the Archbishop of York tells the
people of Liverpool that the working men of Yorkshire will be
opposed to secular and compulsory education, he says what he is
not authorized to say, and what he will find himself very much
mistaken about, if he will consult the working men of Yorkshire.
The gentleman who has preceded me has told you that a candidate
who inscribed compulsory and unsectarian education on his banner
got 6,000 votes. I did that, and I got 15,000 votes. You re
member that the Bishop of Ripon told the House of Lords, during
the discussion on the Irish Church Bill, that a great change had
come over the working men of Yorkshire, especially in the large
towns, where he said, they were going strongly against Mr. Gladstone.
Now, Archbishops and Bishops, I think, are not generally the best
informed of men on the subject of the feelings of the working
classes. At all events, Mr. Baines and I, a few days after that state
ment was made by the Bishop of Ripon, addressed a meeting of
15,000 working, men in the Leeds Cloth Hall, and we asked them,
was the Bishop of Ripon right ? And about twenty said he was.
Now I take it that the Archbishop of York, knows about as much
as the Bishop of Ripon does, of the views of the working men of
Yorkshire. I know as much of the working men of North York
shire as any man in Yorkshire, and I tell you that they will stand
•shoulder to shoulder with you in this fight. Mr. Mundella can tell
you what they think in South Yorkshire ; he himself represents
their views. One of the previous speakers has observed that if Mr.
Gladstone or Mr. 'Forster should shrink upon this question, you
know how, by your meetings and demonstrations, to give them
firmness and courage, and make them go faster ; you will find that
the men of Yorkshire will assist you.
Mr. Lloyd Jones : It is necessary that we should under
�224
stand precisely the ground we occupy. We are told that wo
shall have to meet a very vigorous opposition, and I have not
the least doubt of it; but I claim to know something of the
working people of this country, and I deny most positively
that any part of that opposition will come from them. It is
said that they have a very strong dislike to compulsion, but I
say that that depends altogether upon what it is, that they are tobe compelled to do. People are very ingenious in finding ex
cuses for inactivity, when they dislike doing anything. We know
Mr. Disraeli declared that the discontent of Ireland was due to the
proximity of the Atlantic Ocean, and that as England could not
remove
it was quite useless to attempt to do anything. Now,,
his party urge as a great obstacle to this movement, that the work
ing classes dislike compulsion, and we know that the party
have reason for considering compulsion a most painful thing;for what have we been doing with them within living memory, but
compelling them? We have kept them under a continued system
of compulsion, and they find it very irksome. We have com
pelled them to pass from one reform to another, and havecompelled them—if not to do—at least to accept, with the best
grace they could, the doing of things which every man fifty years
ago would have declared to be impossible. Only a few days agowe compelled them to disestablish the Irish Church, and, if neces
sary, we shall compel them, in a few days or months more, to
acquiesce in a system which shall educate the whole of the people
of this country. We were told by Mr. Lowe, when the late
Reform Bill was before the House of Commons, that the country
would have to teach its masters their letters ; and that is just what
in real earnest we mean now to do. We know he said it in no
friendly tone to the working classes, but we mean to do it in a
different spirit. The working people are now in possession of'
political power, and it is necessary to educate them to use it
for their own and the country’s good. We want them to be
educated, not that they may become the master-class—because we
believe the mastership of classes in this country has been destroyed
for ever—but we wish to educate them in order that they may be
able to take their part wisely with their fellow-citizens of other ■
�225
classes. With regard to compulsory education, it is said that it
may do very well for the artisan, but will be impracticable in the
agricultural districts, because a family deprived of the labour of its
children will not be able to sustain itself. If that is true, the
sooner such a state of tilings is put an end to by some means the
better. If the children of the agricultural labourers must either
remain in absolute ignorance, or else starve, that is a state of things
which every Englishman with a heart in his body, ought at once to
set about rectifying, if possible. But is it true ? I am sure the
working men will not be turned from the path of duty by
difficulties, especially by difficulties which are not yet actually
in the way, but are only expected ahead, and which may
be found to have no existence, or not to be of so formidable
a nature as is anticipated. We expect difficulties, but we
are determined to conquer difficulties, and do our duty in
spite of them; and the performance of every duty in turn,
as our hand finds it to do, will strengthen us for the performance
of the next. We intend to go on steadily, step by step,
vanquishing difficulties as they appear. A very wise man has
•told us that there is no culminating point in the ascension
of nations, that nations have fallen, not because they had gone
as high as nations could go, but because they have placed their feet
upon a rotten round of the ladder, and it has given way with
them. If we go stupidly and blindly into the future, with an
uneducated people, depend upon it we shall sooner or later step
upon that rotten round of the ladder, and come to grief. With
regard to the assertions which are made that the working people
are opposed to this movement, let those who say so produce the
working people who are opposed to it, let us see them. We can
produce tens of thousands of working men in its favour; let them
show us those who are against it. I know that the working men
of England will go heart and soul with this movement, and I have
no doubt whatever that before long we shall see a thorough system
of national education, unsectarian, free, and compulsory, established
in this country • and when we see that, we shall feel assured of
the perpetual growth of the nation.
The resolution was then put, and carried unanimously,
p
�226
Mr. Jesse Collings (Hon. Sec.): I have great pleasure in pro
posing , “ That the best thanks of the meeting be presented to the
Mayor for his conduct in the chair.” I have also to announce that
“ an early member of the League ”—I am not permitted to give any
name—who has been waiting for his faith to be confirmed by this
Conference, will give £200 in yearly instalments. That is the
second sum of the kind we have had to-day. There is something
very appropriate in having our Mayor in the chair, seeing that
before many of us knew anything about this question, and before
some of us were born, the principles for which we now contend
were matters of settled conviction with him. He is one of those
who hailed this movement in Birmingham, with recognition of the
greatness that belonged to it. He threw himself heartily into the
work of the formation of this League at the beginning, and he has
never ceased, up to the present moment, to give it his hearty aid
and sympathy. I congratulate the town that it has so appropriate
a chairman on this occasion, and I congratulate the Mayor, that it
has fallen to his lot, to inaugurate the most important movement of
modern times in this country. Our scheme is fairly launched to
night • or rather I should call it yours, for you have received it’
with a fervour which makes it yours, and which gives us confidence
in its success. It is a system that all may understand, whilst as to
the scheme or system opposed to it, if it have any principles at
all, no two of them fit into each other. We men of business
wish to deal as soon as possible with this great question; and
remember that if Members of Parliament make the law, the
people make the Members of Parliament. You have, therefore,
the making of the law in your own hands. Do not accept as a
Member of Parliament, any man who will not accept the prin
ciples which you desire to see carried out with regard to educa
tion. The leaders of our opponents could only tell us the other
■day, at the Social Science Congress, that the poor must do what
Canon Girdlestone described, as shutting their eyes and opening their
mouths, and waiting for what Heaven might send them. They
have done that long enough; and now we want them to shut their
mouths and open their eyes, and see what Heaven has sent them.
Let them see the rights sent them by Heaven, out of which they
�227
have been unjustly kept. One right—the dearest of all—is to
have their children educated as human beings. There has been
talk about compromise. We mean no compromise; it is well that
that should be understood. The road has been laid down for you
to-night; you have only to walk in it. It may be a little difficult,
but it goes straight to the point, and if you follow it earnestly and
with determination, you will find what you want.
Mr. Dixon, M.P.: I rise with the greatest pleasure to second
this resolution. We are extremely fortunate in having such a
Mayor to help us as we have this year. I cannot forget that
when I introduced, some time ago, into the Town Council a resolu
tion on the subject of education, our present Mayor moved an
amendment, because he said my resolution did not go far enough,
and he carried his resolution, and the Town Council did that which
was an honour to the town, and an example to the country; and we
are now doing that which satisfies, I am happy to say, our Mayor.
He is satisfied with us, and we are satisfied with him.
The resolution was carried with acclamation.
The Mayor : Ladies and gentlemen,—When my term of office be
longs to the things of the past, there is no event connected with it
that will give me so much pleasure, as that the formation of the Na
tional Education League, and the great movement which has been
inaugurated by it, took place during that term. Ladies and gen
tlemen, I thank you.
This terminated the proceedings.
�1
�FIRST
GENERAL
MEETING,
OCTOBER 12th and 13th, 1869.
LIST
OF
VISITORS.
Adair, Thomas, Derby.
Adams, Francis, Birmingham, Secretary.
Aitken, W. C., Birmingham.
Albright, Arthur, Birmingham.
Applebee, Rev. J. Kay, London.
Applegarth, Robert, London.
Ashford, W. W., Edgbaston.
Aveling, Thomas, Mayor of Rochester.
Bacchus, J. 0., Birmingham.
Baker, George, Birmingham.
Barber, Stephen, Birmingham.
Barnett, William, Birmingham.
Baron, Joshua, J.P., Over Darwen.
Bartleet, Thomas S., Edgbaston.
Basnett, George, Birmingham.
Basnett, S., Birmingham.
Bastard, Thomas Horlock, Blandford.
Batchelor, John, Cardiff.
Bayly, J., Plymouth.
Beal, Michael, Sheffield.
Beale, W. J., Birmingham.
Beale, J. HE., Banbury.
Beales, Edmond, London.
Best, J., Andover.
Bigwood, Rev. John, London.
�230
Binns, Rev. William, Devonport.
Black, Rev. Janies, M.A., Stockport.
Blackham, G., Selly Oak.
Bourne, Alfred, London.
Bottomley, J. Firth, London.
Bovill, W. J., London.
Bray, Rev. Charles, Coventry.
Bremner, John A., Manchester.
Broadhurst, Samuel, Warrington.
Brock, Rev. Dr.
Brodie, Rev. P. B., Rowington.
Brown, Rev. John Jenkyn, Birmingham.
Brodrick, the Hon. George, London.
Bunce, J. Thackray, F.S.S., Birmingham.
Burman, R. H., Birmingham.
Busk, Wm., M.R.C.P., F.S.A., &c., London.
Butcher, W., Bristol.
Caldicott, Rev. J. W., M. A., Bristol.
Campbell, Lord, London.
Carrington, R. C., Farnham.
Carter, R. M., M.P., Leeds.
Carter, John, Birmingham.
Chamberlain, J. H., Birmingham.
Chamberlain, Joseph, Birmingham, Chairman of Executive Com..
Chadwick, Edwin, C. B., London.
Chapman, Samuel, Rochdale.
Charles, David, Aberystwith.
Clarke, Rev. Charles, F.L.S., Edgbaston.
Clarke, Edward G., Hon. Sec. Bristol Branch, Bristol.
Clarke, Thomas Chatfield, London.
Clarkson, Rev. W. F., B.A., Lincoln.
Clayden, Rev. P. W., London.
Coe, Rev. Charles C., Leicester.
Colley, William, Leamington.
Collings, Jesse, Birmingham, Hon. Sec.
Congreve, Rev. John, Rector of Tooting, Graveney.
Connor, Rev. W. A., B.A., Manchester.
�231
Cole, Alfred A., Walsall.
Cornish, Charles Leslie, Birmingham.
Cox, Robert, Edinburgh.
Cox, J. Charles, Hazlewood, Belper.
Cremer, W. R., London.
Creighton, Mandell, Fellow and Tutor of Merton Col., Oxford.
Crosskey, Rev. H., F.G.S., Birmingham.
Curme, Rev. Thomas, Vicar of Sandford.
Dale, Rev. R. W., M.A,, Birmingham.
Davies, Rev. F., D.D., Haverfordwest.
Dawson, George, M.A., Birmingham.
Dixon, George, M.P., Birmingham, Chairman of the Council of
the League.
Dowson, Rev. H. E., Hyde.
Draper, E. Herbert, Kenilworth.
Earl, William, Birmingham.
Edwards, Richard Passmore, Bath.
Edwards, Charles H., Birmingham.
Ellenberger, Dr., Worksop.
Ellis, J. H., Leicester.
Emanuel, Rev. G. J., Edgbaston.
Esson, Wm., F.R.S., Fellow and Tutor of Merton Coll., Oxford.
Evans, Rev. C., Birmingham.
Fawcett, Professor.
Fawcett, Mrs.
Felkin, Robert, Wolverhampton.
Field, Alfred, Birmingham.
Fillingham, John Charles, Sanitary Inspector, Sheffield.
Fish, John, J.P., Blackburn.
Fooks, William, L.L.B., London.
Foster, Dr. Balthazer.
Franklin, Geo. B., Birmingham.
Fry, Herbert, Hon. Sec. of the London Branch, London.
�232
Galpin, Thomas D., London.
Gasquoine, Rev. T., B.A., Oswestry.
Gaunt, Edwin, Leeds.
Geikie, Rev. J. Cunningham, London.
George, Rev. H. B., Fellow of New College, Oxford.
Gillions, Charles Edward B., Bedford.
Glydon, William, Birmingham.
Gore, George, F.R.S., Edgbaston.
Gosling, Alfred, Birmingham.
Grattan, John James, Sheffield.
Grayson, Charles, Liverpool.
Green, T. H., Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford.
Green, Thomas, Birmingham.
Greg, Louis, Liverpool.
Grenfell, E. F., M.A., Rugby.
Grew, Frederick, Birmingham.
Griffith, Geo., Wolverhampton.
Guedalla, Joseph, London.
Guest, William, F.G.S., Gravesend.
Guile, Daniel, London.
Guise, Sir Wm. Vernon, Bart., F.G.S., F.L.S., Gloucester.
Guttery, Rev. Thomas, Wolverhampton.
Haarbleicher, M. J., Manchester.
Hall, James, Sheffield.
Hammer, Geo. M., London.
Hansard, Rev. Septimus, M.A., Rector of Bethnal Green.
Harris, William, Birmingham.
Harrison, John, Birmingham.
Hatton, Joseph.
Hawkes, Aiderman H., Birmingham.
Haycroft, Rev. Dr.
Haye, E., Stoney Stratford.
Heinrick, Hugh, Birmingham.
Heath, Rev. E., Blackburn.
Heathcote, Rev. H. J., Erdington.
Herbert, the Hon. Auberon, London.
Heslop, T. P., M.D., Birmingham.
�233
Hibbs, Charles, Birmingham.
Hill, Alsager Hay, London.
Hills, Harris, Essex.
Hime, Dr., A.B., M.B., Sheffield.
Hinds, Miss, St. Neots, Hunts.
Hodgson, W. B., LL.D., London.
Holland, Henry, Mayor of Birmingham.
Holliday, William, J.P., Birmingham.
Holyoake. George J., London.
Houghton, Rev. C. E., Rugby.
Hosken, R. F., Leamington.
Howell, George, London.
Hudson, J. Davidson, Birmingham.
Huhne, Thomas, Stoke-on-Trent.
Jacob, Alfred, Birmingham.
Jaffray, John, Birmingham, Treasurer.
James, William, Edgbaston.
James, E. H., Birmingham.
James, Rev. Wm., Bristol.
Johnson, G. J., Birmingham.
Jones, Lewis, Birmingham.
Jones, Lloyd, London.
Jordan, Henry, Birmingham Exchange.
Jubb, Rev. W. Walker, West Smethwick.
Judge, Thomas, Brackley.
Klein, Dr. Julius, London.
Kempson, W., Leicester.
Kenrick, William, Birmingham.
Kenrick, J. A., J.P., Edgbaston.
Kenrick, T., Edgbaston.
Langford, John Alfred, Birmingham.
Ladd, W., London.
Lake, Rev. J. W., Warwick.
Le Neve Foster, P., London.
Lester, Wm., Wrexham.
�234
Lloyd, G. B., Birmingham.
Long, William, jun., Warrington.
Longmore, J., Worcester.
Luckett, Rev. Henry, West Bromwich.
Maclean, L. M., Worcester.
Macfie, Rev. M., Birmingham.
Mackenzie, Rev. J. R., D.D., Edgbaston.
McRae, Robert, Birmingham.
Mantle, George H., Birmingham.
Manton, Aiderman Henry, Birmingham.
Manton, John S., Birmingham.
Martin, Robert, M.D., Warrington.
Martineau, R., Edgbaston.
Martineau, R. F., Edgbaston.
Mason, W., Leeds.
Matthews, Evans, Birmingham.
Mathews, C. E., Birmingham.
Maxse, Capt., R.N., Southampton.
McDougal, Rev. J. M., Darwen.
Miall, Rev. William, Dalston.
Middlemore, William, J.P., Birmingham.
Millard, James H., B.A., Sec. of the Baptist]Union of Great
Britain and Ireland.
Milner, Edward, J.P., Warrington.
Milward, R. H., Birmingham.
Moore, Septimus P., LL.B., F.G.S., London.
Morison, Colonel.
Morgan, William, Birmingham.
Mundella, A. J., M.P., Nottingham.
Murch, Jerom, Bath.
Muspratt, Edmund R., Liverpool
Naden, Joseph, Sheffield.
Nash, Thomas, Manchester.
Noel, Ernest, Godstone, Surrey.
�235
Odger, George, London.
Olding, B.
Olsen, Samuel, Birmingham.
Osborne, Aiderman E. C., Birmingham.
Osborne, William, York.
Osler, Follett, F.R.S., Birmingham.
Owen, Edward, Lee Port.
Paget, Charles, Buddington Grange, Notts.
Palmer, W., M.R.C.P., Warwick.
Park, John, Walsall.
Parkhurst, R. M., L.L.D., Manchester.
Partridge, J. Arthur, Birmingham.
Paton, W., Atherstone.
Payton, Henry, Birmingham.
Pears, Edwin, London.
Pease, Thomas, F.G.S., Bristol.
Peiser, J., Manchester.
Pentecost, John, Stourbridge.
Peyton, H., Birmingham.
Phillips, Thomas, J.P., Birmingham.
Pliillpotts, J. S., B.C.L., Rugby.
Pinnock, R., Mayor, Newport, Isle of Wight.
Popplewell, W. J., Manchester.
Postgate, John, Birmingham.
Potter, Edmund, M.P., Carlisle.
Prange, F. G., Liverpool.
Priddy, G. M., M.D., Wolverhampton.
Pryse, Joseph, London.
Quin, F. B. Wyndham, LL.D., F.R.G.S., Market Drayton..
Rabone, John, Birmingham.
Rafferty, Michael, Birmingham.
Ransom, Edwin, Bedford.
Ransome, R. C., Ipswich.
Rawling, S. B., Devonport.
Rawlins, James H., Wrexham.
�236
Rawlinson, Sir Christopher, Upton-on-Severn.
Richards, S. Wall, Birmingham.
Richards, Rev. James, Stourbridge.
Robertson, Dover, Liverpool.
Rogers, W., Edgbaston.
Rogers, Rev. Wm., London.
Rogers, James E. Thorold, Oxford.
Rothera, G. B., Nottingham.
Rumney, Aiderman Robert, Manchester.
Rusden, R. W., Manchester.
Ryland, Aiderman Arthur, Birmingham.
Ryland, T. H., Birmingham.
Sandford, the Ven. Archdeacon, Redditch.
Sandwith, H., Llandovery.
Salwey, Col. Henry, Runnymede.
Sayle, Philip, Liver-pool.
Schnadhorst, Frank, Birmingham.
Sharp, James, Southampton.
Shelley, Rev. Richard, Great Yarmouth.
Simon, Serjeant, M.P.
Simon, Louis, Nottingham.
Simons, W., Merthyr Tydvil.
Smith, Joseph, M.D., Warrington.
Solly, Rev. H., London.
Soul, Joseph, London.
Spark, H. H., Darlington.
Sykes, James Albert, Liverpool.
St. Clair, George, Banbury.
Steinthal, Rev. S. A., Manchester.
Stepney, W. F. Cowell, London.
Stevenson, George, Leicester.
Swinglehurst, Henry, Milnethorpe.
Tait, Lawson, F.R.C.S., Wakefield.
Taylor, J., Sheffield.
Taylor, Rev. Sedley, Cambridge.
Thomas, Joshua, Birmingham.
�237
Thomas, John, South Shields.
Thomas, J. H., Cardiff.
Thompson, H. B. S., Birmingham.
Thompson, James, Leicester.
Tilley, Alfred, Cardiff.
Timmins, Samuel, Birmingham.
Tobley, James S., London.
Tufnell, E., Carlton, London.
Tunstall, E., Smethwick.
Turner, George, Birmingham.
Underwood, Rev. Wm., D.D., Chilwell College, Notts..
Vickers, Wm., J.P., Nottingham.
Vince, Rev. Charles, Birmingham.
Webb, Edward, Worcester.
Webster, John, Birmingham.
Webster, Thomas, Q.C., London.
Wells, James, Northampton.
Williams, H. M., London.
Williams, R., West Bromwich.
Williams, Rev. Rowland, D.D., Broadchalk.
Williamson, W.B., Worcester.
Whitehead, James, Catford Bridge, London.
Wood, William Robert, Brighton.
Woodhill, J. C., Edgbaston.
Wright, J. S., Birmingham.
Wynne, T., Stone.
Yates, Aiderman Edwin, Birmingham.
Zincke, Rev. F. B., Ipswich.
With many others, whose names have not been ascertained.
THE JOURNAL” PRINTING OFFICES, NEW STREET, BIRMINGHAM.
�' Ji ft! ;Hli 7/ ,!>a»W
..'■J
i
v ....'crrMT ./• .1
''
it:
jjjoV/
���
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Report of the first general meeting of members of the National Education League, held at Birmingham, on Tuesday and Wednesday, Oct. 12 & 13, 1869
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
National Education League
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Birmingham
Collation: 237 p. : 21 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
'The Journal'
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1869
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5188
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Report of the first general meeting of members of the National Education League, held at Birmingham, on Tuesday and Wednesday, Oct. 12 & 13, 1869), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Education
National Education League
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/7350d239f753092f2825d94edb82404f.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=CKFVzEXnzX86PnCPWwAgBtKTw3PuCY0bN-%7ELZamq9NmnetSB-3SDAgMgrRBSmKJqFbbrL6WZYmsTT%7E1EVcSgQLpQV1jcTzeX4R%7E7XSYdvef0SU89Bt83lCSRJKOA6ZptG0-T81A0VnlGHhLMSW3yH9Z7%7ECgxDta1y4CkL8yoOZR0vecsb6lH8f7mAR9lZlSrjZHtwZqOasb6O1SlmGoc0Xf43GKgKhS6JqrLQVeGiaTxuDCRWEhVnXteBLmskR04MK5DeiGZ931L0glHIe2fFOfIk4Za2S67MfmRB16VsFFBKw%7EFOdO83AgHH05cp6OdcxBaRB8jVUKFcrpmmFHm5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
37f382eb8f173c1b1dc1fe8ae5668afb
PDF Text
Text
C( 2z5?
SACRED HISTORY
AS A BRANCH OF
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION.
PART I.
ITS INFLUENCE ON THE INTELLECT.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price, Sixpence.
�I
�SACRED HISTORY
AS A BRANCH OF
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION.
UGHT the teaching of Sacred History, in its tra
ditional and biblical form, to be approved of or
maintained in the primary schools of a free and pro
gressive people 1
Such is the question which I propose to discuss.
Thus stated, it does not address itself exclusively to
any one nation, nor to any one Church. It is not a
criticism of one denomination, nor of one school-system
more than of another. It has no special reference to
the religious instruction of Catholics or Protestants as
such. Important and interesting for all sects and
parties alike, it is addressed alike to all, and the dis
cussion of it ought to be entirely free from party spirit
and sectarian prejudice.
To avoid misunderstanding, it may be well, here, at
the outset, clearly to define and to circumscribe the
subject proposed for consideration. The position which
I am to maintain would be utterly absurd, if it were
extended beyond the limits which are assigned to it by
the very title of this essay. There is no question, there
can be no question here, of any but the popular Sacred
History,—of Biblical History as it is commonly taught
O
�6
Sacred History :
in schools, and as we have all learned it in onr child
hood. I declare formally that I am not to treat of the
Bible, nor of Biblical History, as viewed in relation to
the science of Religion, as studied in our universities,
in our theological halls, and generally in the higher
walks of learning, by the light of comparative philology,,
of archaeology, and of all the other sciences which are
now made subservient to the science of history.
I most expressly restrict my subject to the now pre
vailing popular primary teaching of Biblical History;
and I shall accordingly take for reference, not this or
that learned work of historical, critical, or exegetical
interpretation of the Bible, but only the authorized
translation of it, which every one possesses, and which
is used in our schools.
It will be seen that this question, though bearing
closely upon the highest theological doctrines, presents
itself here in a totally different relation; for it turns, in
the first place and chiefly, upon a practical problem of
popular education. The discussion of such a question,
however various may be the opinions held regarding it,
ought to be cordially welcomed by every man in a free
country such as this, where true progress is universally
desired.
It is not difficult to discern and to state the principles
by which we ought to be guided in this discussion; and
there can scarcely be any dispute about these principles
when stated. All must agree that education, in every
stage from the lowest to the highest, ought to have a
twofold purpose—the culture of the intelligence, and that
of the moral conscience. Such ought especially to be
the design and the aim of the primary education which
addresses itself to the children of the people, among
whom, in the majority of cases, it is not likely to be
followed up by any other regular instruction. Before
these children, who can scarcely be expected to have
afterwards either the time or the means for completing
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
7
or correcting the ideas which have once been inculcated
on their minds, a teacher ought to say nothing, do
nothing, inculcate nothing, which may not have a good
effect npon the intellect or upon the heart,—nothing
but what may contribute to teach them either to think
aright or to act aright. To make men:-—\his is the
glorious task of the teacher in modern society. To
make men, is to develop, in the youths committed to
his care, enlightened intellects and upright consciences.
It is from this twofold point of view that we propose
to consider the study of Sacred History; it is by its
effects upon our two essential faculties, the intellect and
the conscience, that we propose to judge it.
I. The
influence of
Sacred History
upon the
DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTELLECT.
Let us put ourselves in the position of a child who
is being taught sacred history, and endeavour to
realize and explain to ourselves the ideas of Humanity,
of Nature, and of God, which will thus be conveyed
to the mind of the child, in these three great depart
ments which complete the cycle of human thought.
Let us see, first, how the modern idea of humanity
will harmonize with that of a sacred history.
What is the meaning of this expression, sacred
history ? Wherefore sacred 2 In what respect is it
more sacred than other histories ? Is it that it will
present to us the ideal of sanctity or holiness in action?
Is it a history of the purest, the best, the most virtuous
men ? This title of sacred history would be intelligi
ble, if applied to a book which should present to our
view a gallery of portraits worthy to serve as models
to humanity, a series of biographies, such as those of
Joseph and of Moses among the Hebrews, of Aristides,
and of Socrates among the Greeks, of Cakyamouni in
Hindostan, of the great Roman Stoics, of the Christian
�8
Sacred History:
martyrs and missionaries, of a Spinoza, of a Luther, of
a Vincent de Paul, of all those in short who have lived
and died for the defence of their faith, their reason,
their conscience, their earnest convictions. We might
thus have an admirable collection of the benefactors of
the human race, of men devoted to their duty, taken
impartially from all periods, from all peoples, and from
all creeds. But these exalted and noble lessons are
not what men call sacred history. This history is thus
named, not on account of the holiness of the precepts,
or of the examples which it contains, but because it is
the history of a people who were not, like others, left
to their own resources, of a people who received, from
God himself, revelations, promises, supernatural lights,
who were, in a word, the “people of God.”
What idea is the child to derive from this title
alone ?
His first impression, if left to himself, will be that
God, like men, has His favourites, His proteges; that,
by an entirely unmerited choice, He honoured with a
special affection and care one nation to the exclusion of
all others. The child, with his simple, direct, and
wholesome logic, will say exactly what Calvin said.
“ Certainly,” wrote the great Reformer in his energetic
freedom, “ in that God of old adopted the seed of
Abraham, He has given a sufficiently clear proof that
He did not love the whole human race equally.
Having rejected all other nations, He loved one
alone.
He restricted His special love to a small
number, whom He was pleased to choose from among
the rest.” It is well known that, up to our own time,
this theory has been frankly accepted by the theologians
called orthodox. In these days, however, when it is
clearly becoming impossible to maintain such a theory,
a peculiar explanation has been adopted. The doctrine
of absolute predestination, which Calvin consistently
made the chief corner stone of the orthodox system, is
now rejected by many theologians as incompatible with
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
9
morality: and it is said that all nations and all men
have an equal share in the love of God,—that the
■provisional and exceptional election of the Jews is not
a privilege,—that Israel is chosen only as an instru
ment, not for himself, but for the benefit of the whole
human race,—as a monitor whom God employs for the
general instruction of all His children. Supposing this
latter interpretation to be the true one, it would in
some degree be a reply to the moral objection of the
Divine partiality, which we shall repeatedly find again;
but it does not at all remove the historical objection,
which is that the sacred history causes the child to
conceive a thoroughly false idea of humanity, by the
very fact that it teaches him to divide human history
into two parts, the one sacred, the other profane ; the
one, in which God speaks, acts, and shows Himself
directly or personally on every page; and the other,
in which He does not thus interfere, and in which He
acts only by the operation of natural laws.
Until recently, it was considered orthodox to see in
ancient history, the reign of God in Israel, and the
reign of the devil everywhere else; but it is now more
generally thought correct to recognise a negative pre
paration among the Gentiles, as well as a positive pre
paration in Israel. It is thus assumed that there have
been two distinct kinds of divine revelation, all the
other nations having been enlightened only by the dim
and indirect rays of natural light; while the Jews, on
the contrary, were alone privileged to be in constant
and immediate communication with God himself. See
how much is implied in the mere expression—sacred
history.
I do not at present inquire whether this notion can
be reconciled with that of divine equity; but I ask
whether it can be for a moment maintained in the face
of history. History now enables us to say with full
assurance, that humanity is one, in all the diversity of
its families; and that God, who is also One, has
�io
Sacred History :
spoken to man always and everywhere by the same
means, and in the same forms. He is the Father of
all men and of all nations, and has not shown himself
to some, nor concealed himself from others, any more
three thousand years ago than to-day.
The Jews, indeed, affirm that they received, from
God himself, revelations of an entirely special and
supernatural kind, which are recorded in the Bible.
But the Brahmins, the Budhists, the Parsees, and I
may say all the nations of the east, are no less positive
in affirming the same pretension. There is not a single
nation of Asia, ancient or modern, which has not its
Bible, or which does not declare that it is the holy
people—the chosen people of God; not one which, in
support of this exceptional “ calling and election,” does
not appeal to miracles, to numerous interventions of
the Deity, to the testimony of thousands of their best
men, and finally to books divinely inspired.
When among so many Bibles, among so many Words
of God, you take that of the Jews as absolutely true,
and declare those of all other nations absolutely false,
can you say, in all sincerity, that you have investi
gated, with equal attention, patience, and seriousness,
the claims of all these nations to this pretended revela
tion—to this pretended office of “ special instrument ”
of the Deity? Especially with reference to primary
instruction, is it not manifest that neither the pupils
nor the teachers are in a position to make this com
parison between the Hebrew Bible, the Veda of India,
the Avesta of Persia, the Koran of the Arabs, and the
other sacred books of the East ? They are virtually
forced to regard the Bible as an isolated monument,
without even dreaming of the possibility of tracing the
connection between the sacred codes of the various
ancient religions. The children do not know, and,
according to the present system, nine-tenths of them
will never know, that there are as many sacred histories,
and as many chosen peoples, and as many divine revela-
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
11
tions, as there have been, nations in the east, and almost
in all antiquity. By far the greater number, thanks to
this early instruction, will probably remain, all through
life, ignorant or misinformed regarding the fundamen
tal idea of human history—the natural progressive
development of all the human races, a development
which each of them attributes in the first place to a
miraculous revelation, but which the comparative his
tory of civilizations shows to be governed by law's
common to all, according to a general plan of divine
providence.
But how can the immense religious superiority of
the Jews, over all other ancient nations, be explained
on historical and natural grounds ?
In the first place, this superiority is neither so
decided nor so manifest, except to minds which are
unacquainted with the study of the ancient civiliza
tions. It is quite superfluous to say that, if we select
the most beautiful of the Psalms, or the purest and most
admirable pages of the Prophets, to be compared with
some gross form of fetichism, or of primitive idolatry,
if the Jehovah of Isaiah be opposed to the Jupiter of
Lucian, our minds may well be impressed with the
contrast. But take a wider view. Compare the moral
precepts of the Mosaic law with those of Zoroaster, or
of Manu,—the Hebrew poems with those of the Big
Veda; trace and remark the analogies of almost all the
prescriptions relating to manners, to legal defilements,
to ablutions, to the whole system of ritual, among the
Persians for example, and among the Hebrews. It
will then be found that the imaginary abyss of separa
tion has been nearly levelled up; and, instead of an
immense contrast, there will remain only inequalities
of various degrees. The Hebrews will have the advan
tage upon one point, the Persians upon another, and
upon a third the Hindoos, or the Egyptians.
Let us, however, forget for a moment that the mono
theism of Zoroaster is as real, if not as precise, as that
�12
Sacred History:
of the Hebrews; that the Persians and Parsees, no
less than the Hebrews, have had a horror of any
sensible representation of the Deity; that charity was
recognized and preached in India at an earlier date than
in Judea; that the appreciation and esteem of purity,
of holiness, and of labour, were more ancient, and pro
bably also more complete, among the Persians than
among the Jews ; and that numerous passages can be
quoted from the Vedas, or from the Yatpias, which
would sustain, in moral sublimity, a parallel with the
most admirable pages of the Bible.
Let us forget for a moment all these patent facts,
and many others similar, which might be noted, and let
us suppose that, in religion, the Jews have had, over the
rest of humanity, a clear superiority, equal to that, for
example, which the Greeks have had in the domain of
aesthetics. Would it be absolutely necessary, in order
to explain such a difference, to place that nation out
side of the common conditions of humanity, or to intro
duce for them alone the supernatural into history 1 If
you can explain, without any miracle, the genius of a
Homer, or of a Phidias, as well as that of a Zoroaster,
of a Budha, or of a Confucius, why should the same
explanation not apply to the genius of a Moses or of
an Isaiah ?
Seriously, whether we consult our own common
sense, or whether we examine the past, can we believe
that this same God, who now speaks to all men in the
same language, employed a few centuries ago extra
ordinary means, to make himself known exclusively to
a small Semitic tribe dwelling in Palestine, while, over
all the rest of the globe, the thousands and millions of
human creatures, whom He had there brought into
existence, were left by Him to grope in darkness 1 If
we desire to give to our children our cherished modern
idea of the unity, equality, and fraternity of men of
every race, and of every time, of every colour, and of
every clime, is it wise or right to teach them to behold
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
13
in the past some nations abandoned by God, and others
enlightened by Him, a handful of elect specially sur
rounded with miraculous cares, and all the rest,—that
is to say almost the totality of the human generations,
—deprived by God of these exceptional favours ?
Confining ourselves to this general criticism of the
dualistic character, which sacred history introduces into
the notion of humanity ; let us now see whether it will
give to our children better instruction upon the subject
of nature, and whether it will impart to them a more
correct idea of the physical than of the human world.
I shall not here formally enter upon the question of
the supernatural. Although perfectly convinced, for
my own part, that there have never been, in any time
nor in any place, more miracles than are now to be
seen in our daily life, I respect and would not unneces
sarily offend those persons who still to some extent
believe in the supernatural. Thank God, history
shows us, with sufficient clearness, the progress of
humanity in this question. From age to age, the
supernatural steadily loses ground. At the commence
ment of civilization all is prodigy,—the thunder, the
wind, an eclipse, a comet, the smallest meteor. By
degrees, in proportion as men come to understand a
little better the causes or the nature of such phenomena,
the circle of miracle becomes narrower; until at length,
as among Christians of the present day, men feel them
selves compelled to refer miracles to a remote period of
legendary antiquity, there to wait until another step of
progress be accomplished, which shall cause them to be
entirely renounced. Let us patiently and hopefully
await, from the force of events and the development of
humanity, the final fall of the few, frail, and ruinous
refuges of supernaturalism which still survive. Hu
manity moves, and is now again stirring itself; but
God guides the movement, and, notwithstanding every
obstacle, He will assuredly cause yet another stride on
�14
Sacred History:
wards to be taken in due time. It is only a question
of time, and it is useless for us to struggle passionately
against it.
But, without pausing to inquire what degree of
belief still generally retains its hold upon the minds
of men, and judging it more useful to regard the matter
from the believers’ point of view, let us seek to ascer
tain what part ought to be assigned to miracles in
education, especially in that of the children of the
people. However much you may believe in miracles,
I would say to a believer, yet you regard them only
as exceptions. You of course acknowledge that in
general the world is guided by invariable, inflexible,
universal laws. Would it not be well to maintain the
same position in the instruction of childhood ? Is it
not necessary to insist infinitely more upon the rule
than upon the exception ? In the first place, thoroughly
impress upon the child that there are laws of nature;
and let his mind, which is so readily inclined to fantasy,
be familiarized with those laws, and accustomed to seek
everywhere and always the physical explanation of
phenomena. After this has been done, it will be soon
enough to teach him, if you think it right to do so,
that in a very small number of extraordinary cases, two
or three thousand years ago, some revocations of or de
partures from those immutable laws have taken place.
If, on the contrary, at the age when his reason is still
so tender, so pliant, and so unsteady, you speak to him
continually of miracles and of prodigies, there must be
great danger of reversing the parts, of making him take
the exception for the rule, and, worst of all, of banish
ing from his mind the idea of seeking for the rule.
It ought to be borne in mind that reflection has to
be learned by the child. His spontaneous conception
of everything is under the figure of a material image ;
and, “as he has not yet any notion of the true condi
tions of knowledge and of certainty, his faith is in
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
J5
proportion to the effect produced upon his imagination,
and not in proportion to the evidence. He believes in
what is marvellous more easily than in what is simple.
The extraordinary is not only most interesting, but
also most convincing to the mind of a child. Miracle
is the thing which he most readily comprehends. It is
sufficient to make a strong impression upon his imagina
tion in order to convince him. The more brilliant the
colours, the more readily will his young genius be
captivated therewith. Nurses know this instinctively,
and hence their incredible stories often remain graven
in the memories of children, while reasonable and
probable narratives make little or no impression.
Phantoms have a much stronger hold than realities
upon the minds of children; ghosts are to them much
more formidable than living men; and fantastic pic
tures make a far stronger impression than the clear and
distinct reality.” These reflections of a great modern
philosopher explain how very difficult it is for a child
to acquire the idea of a Nature governed by regular
laws, and not by miraculous caprice.
Such being the instinctive propensity of a child,
must it not be injurious to the development of his
reason to implant in his mind at first, as the basis of
intelligence, a thick stratum of the marvellous, which
cannot but tend strongly to stifle the faculty of
rational reflection, of which the culture and the growth
are already so difficult and so slow 1 This is precisely
the danger which, in my opinion, is presented by
sacred history. Taking possession, as it does, before
any other history, of the still vacant mind, it widely
diffuses and plants therein a taste for the miraculous,
instead of furnishing an antidote to that taste already
by nature so strong.
Recall to mind the impressions of your childhood,—
your first lessons of sacred history. You will find that
these fall into two great classes, both belonging to the
�i6
Sacred History:
marvellous ; on the one hand legends, and on the other
miracles properly so called.
By legends, I mean narratives which believers them
selves can no longer take in the literal sense, but are
now constrained to regard as allegorical, while attribut
ing to them a symbolism as profound as they may wish.
Bor example, Adam and Eve are placed naked and
innocent, in a delightful garden, at the centre of which
two mysterious trees spread their boughs. Do you
remember their magical peculiarities ? The one is the
tree of life, the other gives the knowledge of good and
evil. All at once a reptile, the serpent (for, do not
forget, Genesis does not say that this serpent was the
devil,—a personage who does not make his appearance
in the Jewish religion until a very much later time;—
it says merely that it was “more subtile than any
of the field,” Gen. iii. 1),—the serpent, then, caused
our first parents to eat the fruit of one of these trees.
It was the tree of knowledge ; and you know that, as
soon as they had eaten that fruit, it had indeed the
effect of making them know what they had till then
been ignorant of. Then, says the Bible :—
Gen. iii. 22-24.—“ The Lord God said, Behold, the man
is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now,
lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life,
and eat, and live for ever; therefore the Lord God sent
him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from
whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he
placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and
a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way
of the tree of life.”
Surely it cannot wound the religious feelings of my
readers to enquire simply, whether any of them can
here believe the Bible in the literal sense. Who can
now be found to maintain that there really did exist
two trees of which the magical fruits had these virtues,
the one to make man think, and the other to render
him immortal ? Who ever imagines now that the
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
17
knowledge of good and evil, which we all in some
degree possess, is actually derived, as Genesis says it is,
from a certain fruit eaten by our first parents 1 Who
can believe that God drove man out of Eden, for fear
that he should steal for himself immortality, as he had
already stolen knowledge ?—No one, assuredly. It is
so little believed, that, among modern theologians, it
is now generally thought necessary to apply a fanciful
interpretation to the whole of this primitive legend.
It has also been argued by some that it is impossible
to determine clearly what portion of this picture ought
to be taken literally, and what in a figurative sense.
Perhaps so; but that is precisely the character of a
myth. The phrase magical fruit, as here employed,
may be objected to, because there is no such expression
in the Bible; but then is not this one tree called the
tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and that other
the tree of life ? These words must either signify
nothing, or else they suppose qualities very different
from those of ordinary trees. Doubtless you may
spiritualize all this •, but then, who hinders you from
doing the same with all the analogous myths of the
Vedas and of the Avesta? If you were to give this
story to the children, as you in reality take it your
selves,—as a beautiful myth,—as an ancient and
simple legend, enveloping a great moral truth, it might
then be all right and proper. But was it necessary
that God should intervene to dictate only myths ? If
so, what difference, of any value, can you establish
between the Word of God and mythology1? Among
two neighbouring nations you find the same cosmogonic
allegory under different forms more or less poetic : in
the one case it shall be only an imposture, while in
the other case it is celestial truth ! Is this reasonable?
Without insisting upon a crowd of other myths, to
which the same or similar reflections would apply, let
us come to the miracles properly so called.
May it not be said that the most important function
B
�18
Sacred History:
and aim of instruction ought to be, to make children
early practise the habit of putting to themselves always
these two questions,—WHY ? and HOW ? It is only
thus that they can acquire the knowledge that the things
which they learn from their teachers or from their
books, are truths and realities; and this alone is true
knowledge. It is only thus that they can be educa
tionally inspired with that thirst for the knowledge of
all things real and true, which is the mainspring of
human progress. It is only thus that their reasoning
powers, the highest faculties of their minds, can be
exercised, disciplined, trained, and developed.
But will a history composed of miracles, that is to
say, of things which cannot be explained—of which it
is impossible to know the why and the how ;—will such
a history tend to encourage or to extinguish the scien
tific curiosity of a child ? It has, to all his questions,
a stereotyped reply, which cuts short the spirit of
investigation:— Why.?—Because God willed it. How?
—As God willed it.
It is the peculiar character of the Semitic peoples,
and especially of the Jewish race, to disdain secondary
causes, and to prefer always, overleaping all intermedi
ate steps, to ascend at once to first principles, or to the
great First Cause. The necessary consequence of this is
a general want of relish for the detailed study of facts,
for the scientific observation of nature, for comparative
criticism and analysis. Ask an Arab how the grass
grows, how the stream flows, what produces earth
quakes, famines, or epidemics,-—a thousand similar
questions; and he will reply to you, astonished at your
ignorant curiosity,—Allah is Allah. Is not the reason
and cause of everything a decree of God ? What is the
use of climbing step by step in the series of secondary
causes ? Why not accept the will of God as a univer
sally sufficient explanation ?
This is exactly the effect which sacred history inevi
tably produces upon the intellect of childhood. It
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
J9
accustoms the mind to dispense with the laborious
investigation of the how and the why, causing it to
refer things directly to God without any other explana
tion. Instead of being trained to see God in all those
secondary causes and natural laws, by which He con
stantly manifests himself to us,—instead of being made
to perceive that every pathway of science leads straight
up to the Author of all, the child is led, through the
irregular eross-roads and by-ways of miracle, to seek
God chiefly by imagination, and is hindered from
learning that He is rather to be found by reason on the
one hand, and by conscience on the other.
Suppose that a pupil were to ask the question,—
Why and how could there be a universal deluge 1—■
Instead of having imparted to him a few scientific
notions as to the natural character and physical causes
of the great changes and revolutions of the globe, his
legitimate and wholesome curiosity will be snubbed and
repulsed, and he will be instructed to behold and to
wonder at the act of God, whereby “the fountains of the
great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven
were opened,” (Gen. vii. 11). Will not that child be
very much enlightened ?
When the account of the appearance of the rainbow
after the deluge is the Bible-lesson for the day; this
might be a favourable opportunity for making the chil
dren understand, in opposition to their natural propen
sity for seeing miracles everywhere, that there is
absolutely nothing at all supernatural about the rain
bow, and that it was quite in the nature of things that
a rainbow should be produced at the time, for example,
when the rains of the deluge ceased. But listen to the
explanation of the matter which they will be required
to accept:—
Gen. viii. 13.—“ And it came to pass in the six hundredth
and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month,
the waters were dried up from off the earth.”
Gen. ix. 8-17.—“ And God spake unto Noah, and to his
�20
Sacred History:
sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I establish my cove
nant with you, and with your seed after you; and with
every living creature that is with you: . . . neither shall
there any more be a flood to destroy the earth. And God
said, This is the token of the covenant. ... I do set my bow
in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant be
tween me and the earth : and it shall come to pass, when I
bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in
the cloud; . . . and I will look upon it that I may remem
ber the everlasting covenant between God and every living
creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.”
I do not insist upon the significance of this latter
clause, which, taken in its literal sense, as it must be
taken by children, will represent to them God looking
upon His bow in order that He may remember His
covenant. The myth, which is here put in the place
of natural causes, is of small importance for wellinformed persons, but the truly important consideration
is that it is presented to children as an absolute fact,
and that they are thus taught and accustomed to rest
satisfied with merely chimerical explanations of natural
phenomena.
What must be the influence of a primary education,
which turns thus continually upon an inexhaustible
stock of marvels 1 How can we expect the intellectual
faculties of our children to be awakened, confirmed and
developed, if, to all their questions about the nature of
things, the only reply is this,—God is God, and He is
omnipotent.
Master, the child will say, is it really true that there
have been men who lived more than 900 years ? Is it
really true that one or two men have ascended up to
heaven in a chariot of fire ? That two or three others,
being actually dead, have come to life again ?—What
presumption to ask if these things are true ! How can
you be so wicked as to doubt it ?—They are written in
the Bible.
Master, how can a she-ass speak?—Everything is
possible to God.
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
21
But that cruse of oil which never failed nor was
exhausted, how was that?—God is all-powerful.
And how could Jonah have been able to live three
days and three nights in the belly of a fish?—My
child, if the Bible said that Jonah swallowed the whale,
instead of being swallowed by it, it would still be
necessary to believe it.
It is thus that, while wishing to teach our children
to honour God, and to believe His Word, they are in
reality taught to learn nothing, but to bend their minds
in passive submission to this modern and Protestant
form of the worst feature of Popery,—the Bible says
so, or the Bible does not say so.
I have often heard it said that there is nothing
which children learn more willingly than sacred history.
I can easily believe it ; for, excepting fairy tales, there
is nothing better suited to please their childish minds :
it is so full of prodigies ! But will the recounting of
prodigies convey genuine instruction to the children?
Will they thus be taught to think, to reflect, to observe,
and to search always for truth and reality ? Or will
the influence of such teaching be exactly the reverse ?
You see it is a practical question, demanding the
most serious consideration. The teacher of a primary
school is in the presence of children, by far the greater
number of whom cannot be expected to acquire in after
life any regular knowledge of the natural, physical, or
mathematical sciences. It must certainly be injurious
to make such children believe that one day, at the end
of a battle between two Asiatic tribes, in order to con
fer upon a Jewish captain the signal advantage of
slaughtering a few more fugitives, God actually caused
the sun to halt in its diurnal motion through the sky,
and to stand still for “ about a whole day,” and that
He moreover set to work, (for the Bible says so, and
the children will take it in the most literal sense,)
to “cast dozen great stones from heaven,” (hailstones)
whereby more of the fugitives died than those who
�22
Sacred History:
were slain by the victorious Israelites. (Josh. x. 11-13.)
To confirm the impression of this prodigious miracle as
a literal fact upon their minds, the children will
probably be reminded of another occasion, when,
touched by the prayers and tears of a sick king who
had been told that he was about to die, God relented
so far as to promise him a supplement of fifteen years
of life, and, as a sign that the promise would be ful
filled, “ He brought the shadow ten degrees backward,
by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz,” (2
Kings xx. 11); “So the sun returned ten degrees, by
which it was gone down,” (Isaiah xxxviii. 8).
What man of common sense, if he will only give the
matter a serious thought, can ever be persuaded that
this profusion of miracles, bidding defiance to all the
conclusions of human reason, and even to the laws of
mathematics, is a wholesome education for the minds
of children, ignorant, credulous, imaginative, and con
fiding, who will probably never afterwards be in a
position to acquire a scientific notion of the laws of
nature, and to whom therefore and henceforth, it will
seem, as it did to the primitive peoples, quite natural
that a miracle should, at any moment, interfere with
and upset the regular course of nature ?
There are, however, some teachers who, on the con
trary, maintain that nothing is better fitted to form the
intellect and to improve the mind of a child, than the
study of miracles. The miraculous is, according to
them, one of the best means of culture. Such a thesis
can only be maintained by those who do not properly
understand what a miracle is. If a child sets himself
to reflect upon the miracle of Isaiah or of Joshua, how
ever little he may have been taught of the elements of
cosmography, it will immediately occur to him that, if
the Sun (or the Earth) had stood still or gone backwards
in space, there must have thence resulted, in instant
succession, throughout vast systems of worlds, endless
perturbations, huge catastrophes, universal destruction ;
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
23
and, rather than, suppose such impossibilities to serve
no purpose but to favour a petty Jewish king, or to
complete the massacre of a troop of Amorites, a child
who has been truly taught to reflect will think of these
miracles exactly what you think of those of all re
ligions, except your own.
It is impossible to find any mode but one, of recon
ciling the miraculous with good instruction ; and that
is to explain it, or, in other words, to deny it; and
this is what even the believers are now, in some
measure, forced to do. In these days, for example,
even among the orthodox, you will find very few
persons who believe in the plagues of Egypt. It is
not now uncommon to hear even fervent defenders of
miracle explaining, that these plagues arose from natural
causes which occur in Egypt every year but in smaller
proportions; that frogs, lice, locusts, water resembling
blood, etc., are well known there; and that the Bible
narrative only shows us God giving to these facts a
proportion and a fitness, which raised them to the
sphere of the miraculous. Well, be it so ; but having
once entered upon this path, how far are we to go ?
With regard to the passage of the Red sea, the
physical possibility of this famous miracle may be
explained to the children by the action of the tides
combined with violent winds. As to the manna and the
quails it may be said that in winter innumerable flocks
of quails reach the warm countries, and that the manna
appears to have been the savoury fruit of a shrub which
grows abundantly in thedesert of Arabia. Elsewhere, the
teacher may explain to his pupils that the art of discover
ing springs of water, and of rendering the water drink
able, still continues to be a requisite qualification for the
guide of an army or of a tribe in the sands of Arabia, etc.
It is thus that some of our Protestant theologians
are now disposed to treat sacred history, while others,
more conservative, are ready to exclaim,—Take care
what you do, to explain a miracle is to reject it, and
�24
Sacred History:
all the miracles hang together, so that if you reject
one of them, you reject them all.
Very true; and, likewise, if you adopt one of them,
you adopt all the others. Human history is one great
book, of which every page is full of miracles. How
can the supernatural be preserved whole and entire in
a single one of these pages, when it is banished with
out hesitation from all the others? Tf God has
performed miracles among the Jews, why deny that
He may have done the same among the Hindoos and
among the Persians, among the Celts and among the
Germans, as the ancient writings of all these peoples
abundantly affirm that He did ?
Then you had better say at once that, in the name of
science and through hatred of the supernatural, you mean
to deprive us of the whole Bible, Old and New Testaments.
No, this discussion has no tendency whatever to
deprive you of the Bible, but only of the superstition
of the Bible. Even you who profess so absolutely to
revere the Bible as the “Word of God,” do you think
it would be difficult to make you confess that you
reject many passages of it as containing indefensible
errors? Do you believe, for example, that the hare
and the rabbit are ruminants ? It is not merely Moses
however, it is God himself who, according to two
formal texts of the Bible (I speak always of the Bible
which is in every hand), directly affirms that both these
animals chew the cud, (Lev. xi. 4-6; Deut. xiv. 7).
If there be one single error in the Bible, there may
be two, there may he ten, and we thenceforth differ
from one another only about a question of number;
which amounts to saying that no person can any longer
maintain the absolute infallibility of the Bible; and,
if it contains errors, then there is nothing, even from
the believers’ point of view, to hinder us or them from
regarding the supernatural as one of these errors.
Upon the third point, it is often affirmed that sacred
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
25
history abundantly compensates, in precious advan
tages, for all the objections which can otherwise be
brought against it. There are many who admit that
it presents deficiencies and inaccuracies with regard to
the knowledge of humanity and of nature, while main
taining its entire perfection with regard to the know
ledge of God.
I do not forget that Biblical history, suitably treated
from the Christian point of view, often serves admir
ably to impress upon the children these two grand ideas,
—that of the one God, and that of the living God.
Even here, however, is there not some illusion ?
Among the men of three or four thousand years ago,
the notion of God evidently was not, could not be,
that which it has become with the progress of humanity.
In the earliest times of which the vestiges have been
preserved to us in certain books of the Bible, it bore
the stamp of a rude anthropomorphism. But, however
rude it may have been, it is not we who shall forget
that, in its time, anthropomorphism was a progress,
and that it marked the first dawn of religious and
philosophical thought.
We do not at all wonder to see God humanized in
the most ancient pages of this same Bible, in the later
portions of which we shall find the purest and highest
expression of the religious sentiment, precisely because
we know that the Bible is neither an exceptional book,
nor even the work of one single period ; but merely a
collection of Hebrew literature from its first attempts
to its highest development.
In the earliest portions, everything bears the trace
of a primitive social state, everything there has, so
to say, the tone and the aspect of childhood; but by
degrees the images change, the symbols are purified,
and the worship, as well as the literature of the nation,
becomes more elevated and more spiritual. If this
development be taken into account, the differences
which appear between Genesis, for example, and the
�q.6
Sacred History:
poetic writings of the later period, are not greater nor
more surprising than the interval which separates the
Niebelungen from Klopstock and from Goethe, or than
the contrast between the “ legends of the round table ”
and the works of our modern historians. If, on the
contrary, this successive and progressive character be
abstracted from the books of the Bible, then sacred
history becomes a chaotic mixture of sublime and of
rude ideas, and then it must tend, upon many points,
to mislead the mind of a child.
If the Bible is a human book, its anthropomorphism
is not only no reproach, but must even be admired, as
it is admired in the commencements of other ancient
religions. When I read therein, God repents, God is
angry, God forgets, and God remembers, God is glad,
and God is grieved, when I read on every page, God
speaks, or God appears, I easily reduce to their true
value these various symbols, while fully appreciating
their ingenuity or simplicity, and the beauty or the
truth which they may contain. But when you give
these same symbols to a child, as so many supernatural
facts, derived from a book which not only is true, but
which is the very Word of God, then the danger com
mences, and it is necessary to protest against this sub
stitution of ancient Hebrew anthropomorphism for
eternal and pure truth.
God is not only thus humanly personified in the
Bible, but He is therein sometimes materialized to an
extent which is now almost inconceivable to us, who
are accustomed to contemplate Jehovah only through
the light of Gospel times. For example, when Noah
came out of the Ark, he offered a burnt-offering of
many animals to God ; “ and the Lord smelled a sweet
savour
“ and the Lord said in his heart, I will not
again curse the ground any more,” (Gen. viii. 21).
Would the most fervent imitators of the Biblical style
now venture to employ such an expression, even
under the pretext of symbolism ?
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
27
It would be more than wearisome to collect here all
the traces of a similar materialism, all the texts in
which corporeal forms are attributed to God. Think
of the burning bush; think of Sinai, where, from the
midst of cloudsand of thunders, with “the voice of
the trumpet exceeding loud,” God gives, with his own
hand, to Moses, two tables, written, says Exodus,
“with the finger of God,” (xxxi. 18 ; xxxii. 16). Think
especially of the prominence given to this idea,—
majestic, if its poetic symbolism be understood, but
extremely rude if taken literally as given in the Bible:
—no man can see or hear God without instantly
dying: one single people has been able to hear him,
one single man has been able to see him—without
perishing. Would it be easy to explain the following
passages, so that they shall not have, at least for
children, a sense decidedly too material ?
Exod. xix. 18-24.—“And Mount Sinai was altogether
on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire:
and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace,
and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice
of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder,
Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice. And the
Lord came down upon Mount Sinai, on the top of the
mount; and the Lord called Moses up to the top of the
mount; and Moses went up. And the Lord said unto
Moses, Go down, charge the people, lest they break
through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish.
And let the priests also, which come near unto the
Lord, sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon
them........... Thou shalt come up, thou and Aaron with
thee; but let not the priests and the people break
through to come up unto the Lord, lest he break forth
upon them.”
Exod. xx. 18-21.—“And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and
the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they
removed, and stood afar off. And they said unto Moses,
Speak thou with us, and we will hear; but let not God
speak with us lest we die..............And the people stood afar
�Sacred History:
off: and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where
God was."
Deut. v. 24-26.—“Behold, the Lord onr God hath
shewed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard
his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this
day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth. Now,
therefore, why should we die ? for this great fire will con
sume us : if we hear the voice of the Lord our God any
more, then we shall die. For who is there of all flesh that
hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the
midst of the fire, AS WE have, and lived? ”
And, as a commentary upon this scene, as grand
and imposing, as it is possible for an exhibition of
symbols to be, addressed only to the senses through
the imagination, let us see how Moses afterwards sums
it up and estimates its importance:—
Deut. iv. 32-36.—“ Ask now of the days that are past,
which were before thee, since the day that God created
man upon the earth, and ask from the one side of heaven
unto the other, whether there hath been any such thing
as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it. . Did ever
people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the
fire, as thou hast heard, and live? .... Out of heaven he
made thee to hear his voice, that he might instruct thee :
and upon earth he shewed thee his great fire; and thou
heardest his words out of the midst of the fire.”
Elsewhere it is not the voice, it is the sight of God
which kills. It is said to have happened, in a small
number of quite exceptional cases, that God has con
sented to let himself be seen, and seen by the eyes of
the flesh. These miracles are accordingly narrated to
us with the greatest solemnity.
One day, the seventy elders of Israel followed Moses
up into “ the Mount of God.” Moses, however, alone
went up to God in the mount, but the elders went up
so far, that, according to the text,—
Exod. xxiv. 10. 11.—“ They saw the God of Israel: and
there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a
sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
29
clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he
laid not his hand : also they saw God and did eat and drink."
Moses alone,—and it was this which gave him in the
eyes of his people a supernatural character,-—was able
to penetrate into that cloud where resided “ the glory
of God,” and out of which God appeared like a con
suming fire. God himself renders to him this testimony,
that He would speak with him “ mouth to mouth" even
apparently, and not in dark speeches,” (Num. xii. 8.)
This peculiar privilege is repeatedly described —“The
Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as -a man speaketh
unto his friend,” (Exod. xxxiii. 11; Deut. xxxiv. 10,
&c.).
Such declarations as these, and many more such
might be quoted, have a character thoroughly and
undeniably materialistic, if regarded as records of literal
facts, and not as poetic fictions; but even these are
Dot the worst. The material conception or representa
tion of God has been carried to a degree of still more
astounding grossness. Witness that passage which
equals, in primitive rudeness, anything which the most
barbarous nations have written about the nature of
their, gods. Moses had long conversed with God, but
hitherto he had not seen him. He said to God one
day, “ I beseech thee, show me thy glory! ” God did
not reply that his essence being incorporeal cannot be
seen ; but, on the contrary, He consented to pass before
Moses, and to let him hear his voice: but, added He,—
Exod. xxxiii. 20-23.—“ Thou canst not see my face; for
there shall no man see me and five. And the Lord said,
Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon
a rock: and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth
by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will
cover thee with my hand while I pass by : And I will take
away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts; but my
face shall not be seen.”
Would it not be highly irreverent and even profane
to regard this passage as a literal, and divinely inspired,
�30
Sacred History:
and therefore infallible record of facts ? What would
be said of such a story, if it were found anywhere else
than in “ the Holy Bible I ”
When people and teachers come to see, in all these
pretended miracles of Horeb and of Sinai, only their
true character of tragic and sombre poetry, there will
no longer be any question about the propriety of putting
them into the hands and heads of children, any more
than there is at present about the ‘ Prometheus ’ of
TEschylus, or the 1 Inferno ’ of Dante, or Milton’s
‘ Paradise Lost.’ But, once more, do you not perceive
what an abyss there is between admiring myths as
myths, and accepting them as supernatural facts dic
tated by God himself?
Elsewhere, God is represented as a man obliged to
make personal inquiry as to whether a rumour which
has reached him is correct or not:—
Gen. xviii. 20, 21.—“ And the Lord said, Because the
cry of Sodom and Gomorrha is great, and because their sin
is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they
have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is
come unto me; and if not, I will know.”
Again, men began to build a tower, whose top should
reach unto heaven :—
Gen. xi. 5-7.—“ And the Lord came down to see the city
and the tower, which the children of men builded. And
the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all
one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing
will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to
do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their
language.”
And it is thus that the famous confusion of languages
is explained !
Surely the specimens which I have quoted, though
the series might easily be largely extended, are amply
sufficient to show, to those who require such proof,
that not everything in the Bible is fitted to convey to
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
31
our children such a pure and spiritual notion of God as
it has been customary to believe. Some one will hasten to reply:—11 But we never
read these passages in the schools, we suppress them,
or we suitably modify them in our lesson-hooks.”—I
am fain to believe that in many cases it is so; but,
whether you teach these things or not, they are never
theless in the Bible, and are there by the same title as
the most admirable passages; so that they suffice to
show to us clearly, in its true aspect, the degree of
civilization and of enlightenment, to which the books
containing them belong.
And then, although you may, in some measure,
suppress such passages as bear too visibly their date
upon them, you do not suppress those innumerable
revelations, apparitions, or manifestations of God, of
which the Bible is full, and you cannot deny that they
all (excepting perhaps some of the prophecies which,
moreover, do not come under the denomination of
sacred history) address themselves to the senses through
the imagination.
From one end of the Bible to the other, God speaks
to patriarchs, to judges, to kings, to warriors, to priests.
Is it by the voice of conscience 1 No, it is by a vision,
a “ sign,” by a miracle, by a dream. When He
speaks to all his people, it is by blessings or cursings
of a temporal kind. It is not from within, it is from
without that He governs : it is not by love, it is by fear.
Ah ! my readers, is there not still a necessity, even
after so many centuries of Christianity, for a fresh and
vigorous effort to extirpate that superstitious instinct,
which even now makes so many people tremble at the
noise of thunder and at the flash of lightning, as if God
were then either more present or more to be feared
than when the sun shines clearly in a serene sky ?
Must we still continue to propagate, in our families or
in our schools, that false idea which is the very soul of
the primitive history of every nation, and of the- Jews
�32
Sacred History:
as of the others :—if you suffer, God is punishing you :
if you prosper, God is blessing you: if an epidemic, a
famine, or an earthquake ravages a country, God is
angry : if the harvest is double, God is favourable : you
have been victorious, then the Eternal has fought upon
your side : vanquished, it is because He has abandoned
you 1
One of the masterpieces of Semitic literature, which
has been and must ever be in all ages admired,—the
poem of Job,—presents to us the first recorded protest
of the human conscience against this idea. Job is struck
with plagues and afflictions, and his friends thence infer,
according to the custom, that God is thus punishing
him for his sin. But Job replies with indignant
eloquence—“ No, I am not guilty. No, my suffering
is not an expiation.”
Job xiii. 15-18.—“ Though he slay me, yet will I trust
in him ; but I will maintain (in the margin, prove or argue)
mine own ways before him. He also shall be my salvation ;
for an hypocrite shall not come before him..............Behold
now, I have ordered my cause: I know that I shall be jus
tified.” (Read also ch. xxxi. &c.).
Every one knows that, at the end of the poem, God
declares to the three friends that they have been wrong,
and that Job’s view of the matter is correct :—
Job xlii. 7.—“For ye have not spoken of me the thing
that is right, as my servant Job bath.''''
This is manifestly the chief signification and purport
of the book ■, and it is to this that the attention of our
children ought chiefly to be directed, if we would have
them to understand what they read; instead of insisting
precisely upon the one circumstance which weakens the
lesson, by shewing them that, in the end, God restores
to Job all his possessions, and by thus teaching them,
here also, to regard material prosperity as a criterium of
the divine favour.
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
33
Plato, wishing to make us understand how entirely
the moral life is independent of external conditions,
shows to us the just man overwhelmed with sufferings,
with contempt, with calumnies, and with afflictions of
every kind; in the midst of which, and even upon the
cross where he dies, we are taught to recognize in him
the just man, the teacher of truth, the friend of God,
the pattern for our imitation, and, at the same time,
the most truly happy of men ! Would not this sublime
lesson be worth more than hundreds of Biblical miracles
for teaching our children to realize that they are more
or less near to God, not in proportion to the success of
their enterprises, not according to external indications
of prosperity or adversity, popularity or contempt, but
according to the internal testimony of their own con
science, according to their degree of obedience to duty ?
It would be absurd to look for this profound intelli
gence of the spiritual sense of religion, in a nation or
tribe at the commencement of its social development.
But it is none the less absurd that, three or four thou
sand years afterwards, it should still be imagined that
we have only to reproduce, without any change, the
first lispings of human thought, and to regard this
reproduction as an infallible revelation.
Where the notion of the Bather Almighty, revealing
himself to the reason and to the conscience, has not yet
acquired all its fulness, we need not wonder to find
that the relations between God and man are often pre
sented in a very imperfect fashion.
Take, for example, prayer or blessing, as it appears
in the first books of the Old Testament, and try to
discover in these a spiritual and moral character. You
will not find it any more than you will find there the
God who is purely spirit and purely love.
Prayer* is there, as among all the peoples of that
period, a mystic spell, a sort of magic power, a cabal* And Imprecation. See the history of Balaam, Num. xxiii.
25, 26.
�^4
Sacred History:
istic formula. Let us look at a single specimen. It is
at the crisis of a battle : Moses has not taken part in
the fight, but has withdrawn to an adjoining hill, armed
with his rod, and there he intercedes for his people.
Exod. xvii. 11-14.—“And it came to pass, when Moses
held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let
down his hand Amalek prevailed. But Moses’ hands were
heavy ; and they took a stone and put it under him, and he
sat thereon : and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the
one on the one side, and the other on the other side : and
his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.
And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the
edge of the sword. And the Lord said unto Moses, Write
this for a memorial in a book.”
Here again I would be the first to recognise a beauti
ful poetic image, if the story is to be understood in
the same manner as the analogous stories, which we
may read in the Vedas, or elsewhere. But those who
desire to make us and our children believe that the
thing has actually taken place, ought to see that, if
such virtue must be literally attributed to this
mechanical prayer of Moses, they have no longer any
right to ridicule the prayer-mills of the Budhists, or
the rosaries of the Roman Catholics.
But, it is said by some, this is a type, an emblem, an
allegory, which we must “interpret spiritually.”
Be it so, but who hinders you from interpreting
spiritually all the similar imagery, which abounds in
the other religious and mythological books of antiquity?
If you have so much indulgence for the rudest allegories
of Hebrew legend, whence comes your severity or con
tempt for the most beautiful and symbolical stories of
Greek, Hindoo, or Scandinavian legend ? God speaks,
God appears in person, God dictates a book ! and that
book contains pages which, in order to be accepted by
reason, require to be “ spiritualized,” neither more nor
less than those of Hesiod, of the Vedas, or of the
Eddas!
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
35
The truth, is that, among all primitive peoples,
prayer, blessing, and cursing have a peculiar virtue, a
mysterious influence, a magic power. Of this the
history of Isaac is one of the clearest examples.
The old man, wishing and intending to bless Esau,
is the dupe of a coarse imposition; and the words
which, in his thought, he addresses to Esau, fall,
unknown to him, upon the ears of Jacob. When
Esau returns from his hunting, to which he had been
sent by his father himself, Isaac, astonished and
trembling, says to him :—
Gen. xxvii. 33-37.—“ Thy brother came with subtilty,
and hath taken away thy blessing........... I have blessed
him, yea, and he shall be blessed............ I have made him
thy lord, and all his brethren have I given to him for
servants; and with corn and wine have I sustained him:
and what shall I do now unto thee, my son ? ”
Can it be denied in presence of words so clear, that,
for the Isaac of Genesis, the blessing was a kind of
talisman or spell, an enchanted formula, consisting in
the words, not in the thought, and having a virtue
equally independent of the intention of him who gave
it, and of the merit of him who received it 1 A stolen
blessing was not on that account the less valid I
How can all this be explained to children 1
But an explanation is not withheld, we have often
heard and read it, as follows :—Isaac knew very well
that, before the birth of the twin brothers, God had
said to Rebecca, “ the elder shall serve the younger.”
Moreover, when the blessing had been given to Jacob,
Isaac felt that it was, notwithstanding the imposture
of his son, an accomplished fact, which he did not feel
himself at liberty to undo, and which had acquired, by
its very accomplishment, a providential character.
The whole was the result of a divine decree, and this
was perceived by the conscience of Isaac at the very
moment when the act of blessing was consummated.
�36
Sacred History:
We frankly confess that, in morality no less than in
good sense, this incredible theory, of an accomplished
fact which acquires by its very accomplishment a provi
dential character, appears to us even more deficient, if
that be possible, than the explanation of the biblical
Isaac. “ Thy brother hath come with subtilty, and hath
taken away thy blessing, I have blessed him, yea, and he
shall be blessed.”
Samson is again another example, among a thousand,
of these false and rude ideas, regarding the relations
between God and man. Here it is neither a prayer
nor a blessing, but a vow, in virtue of which the hair
of Samson’s head (orthodox theologians believe it
still), was the thing, the charm, or the talisman,
wherein his supernatural strength lay !
Samson keeps company with a woman of loose
character, (Judges xvi.); but that does not in the
smallest degree deprive him of the divine favour
attached to his hair. His head being cropped, he
loses the distinctive blessing of God; but his hair
grows again, and with it comes back the divine bless
ing. It is impossible to see anything else in the text,
unless it be put there by force; for, immediately
before narrating the last exploit of Samson, the Bible
explains to us how he has regained his strength by
telling us :—
Judges xvi. 22.—“ Howbeit the hair of his head began
to grow again after he was shaven.”
What is the profound religious idea which we may
hope, without sophistry, to derive from this lesson, for
the improvement of the minds or the hearts of our
children ? Explain it as you may, Samson will always
be for them only the Jewish Hercules ; and, I confess
it, I greatly prefer for their instruction the Hercules of
the Greeks. The latter, at least, will not now teach
them to think that God—the true God, the God whom
they themselves ought to worship—has actually figured
�Its Influence on the Intellect.
y]
in scenes and anecdotes, which, like those about Samson,
are trifling, superstitious, and absurd.
In conclusion :—To excite, to over-excite, in children
the taste for the extraordinary, to make them seek God,
not where He is ever to he found, not in the laws of
the physical or moral world, not in the eternal har
mony of the stars, not in the marvellous organisation
of the flower or of the insect, not in the sublime spec
tacle of unity and design presented by the Universe,
but in all sorts of disorders and capricious interferences
which, if they had taken place, would have proved
nothing but the divine instability, improvidence, and
weakness ; thus greatly to exaggerate and to confirm,
instead of counteracting, in their young minds, their
naturally fantastic and chimerical notions of things,
their ignorance of causes, their disregard of rule, fear
instead of thought, credulity instead of knowledge ;
and then to seal the whole with this disastrous idea,
that, if they have the misfortune to contest the absolute
truth of even the most absurd narratives, doctrines, or
miracles attested by a pretended Word of God, they are
guilty of blasphemous sacrilege, and doomed therefore
to eternal damnation, unless they repent and learn at
least to say, that the whole book is a divine revelation
of truth:—behold and consider the kind of influence
which the teaching of sacred history always inevitably
exerts, only in greater or less degree according to the
absence or presence of various antidotes, upon the cul
ture of our children’s intelligence, and upon the forma
tion of their ideas of humanity, of nature, and of God.
Ere long we will publish the second and the more
important division of the subject; and therein we will
strive to show how this kind of teaching acts upon the
conscience, and upon the moral direction of life.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Sacred history as a branch elementary education. Part I. Its influence on the intellect
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 37 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date of publication from British Library catalogue.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT208
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Education
Bible
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Sacred history as a branch elementary education. Part I. Its influence on the intellect), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Bible-Criticism
Conway Tracts
Education
Religious Education