Sir, I wish to ask the noble Lord the Member for Middlesex whether it is his intention to proceed with the Sunday Trading Bill?

Sir, in answer to the question of the noble Lord who has just sat down, I beg to say that I am in rather an awkward predicament. Nobody likes to be mobbed and bullied out of a measure which was introduced with feelings and intentions so dissimilar from those which have been so industriously attributed to me. I hope that the House and the country will recollect that this is not a measure for the better observance of the Sabbath; that it interfered with no man's recreation. [A cry of "Order!"] I am going to conclude with a Motion, and any hon. Member who pleases can answer me. I was saying that this is not a Bill for the better observance of the Sabbath, and that it interferes with no man's recreations or religious convictions, but that it was brought in for the purpose of procuring as large an amount of holiday as possible during one day of the week for the overtaxed thousands of the metropolis. But, considering that this is one of those measures which are peculiarly liable to misrepresentation and ridicule, and that that ridicule and misrepresentation have been most unsparingly exercised with regard to it; considering, also, the late period of the Session, and the formidable opposition I am threatened with, I think it would not be right to keep up the irritation that at the present moment exists for the bare chance of passing this measure during the present Session of Parliament. I, therefore, if the House, which has so cordially supported me in the progress of this measure, will permit me, will move that the Order of the Day which stands for Wednesday next for the further progress of the Sunday Trading Bill be now discharged.

I beg, Sir, to congratulate the noble Lord the Member for Middlesex upon the course he has so judiciously adopted; but, while I do so, I cannot help expressing my sincere regret that the noble Lord on a former occasion, when he was called upon not to go on with the Bill, did not conform to what appeared to be the general sentiment of the House. ["No, no!"] But, whether that be so or not, I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department a question relative to the proceedings which took place yesterday, and which I believe to be attributable mainly to the vacillation of the right hon. Gentleman. The Government has entirely abdicated its functions as a Government in this House with regard to this Bill. The noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) has expressed himself in a most flippant manner with regard to it, and the course taken by the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary having been most vacillating and uncertain, I believe that to that conduct is to he attributed the tumult in Hyde Park yesterday, the loss of life which I believe to have also occurred, and the incarceration of 104 of our fellow-citizens in the gaols of this town. Since the noble Lord (Lord R. Grosvenor) has expressed his intention of yielding to the general wishes of the country, and to withdraw a Bill which I believe to be most mischievous and pernicious, I wish to ask the right hon. Baronet (Sir G. Grey) whether it is his intention to procure the liberation of the 104 persons now in gaol for having assembled, I believe legally and properly, yesterday in Hyde Park, and also whether he will lay before the House a copy of the instructions given to the police on that occasion?

Sir, I do not know to what the hon. Member refers when he speaks of my vacillation. I do not remember the hon. Gentleman taking any part in the Committee against this Bill. [Mr. OTWAY: I voted against the second reading.] In the Committee, when the discussion took place, I expressed my opinion regarding several of the clauses, and I was prepared to express it again upon the subsequent part of the Bill if the noble Lord had proceeded with it. With regard to this Bill I do not know that I am justly chargeable with vacillation. It has already been stated that this was not a Government Bill, having been introduced by the noble Lord the Member for Middlesex. With regard to the proceedings in question, I was informed by the Commissioners of Police that several notices had been published in different parts of the metropolis calling upon persons to assemble in large numbers in Hyde Park on Sunday, with the evident intention of creating disturbance and disorder. Now it is the privilege of the people of this metropolis—a privilege which is not enjoyed in an equal degree by the inhabitants of any large city upon the Continent—to have the free enjoyment of the parks in and about London, and I do not know a more gratifying sight than to see the people thus assembled for the purpose of enjoying themselves. But nothing could be a greater dereliction from duty on the part of any person holding the office that I do than to allow a monster meeting, summoned by public advertisement, to take place in one of the public parks on Sunday, thus interfering with the right of enjoyment by all persons in those parks. The police, therefore, under my direction, issued a notice warning persons against assembling for the purpose contemplated, and a body of police; was stationed in different parts of the park. But it was not until the carriage road had been obstructed, and hooting and noise had taken place, which caused several horses and carriages and riding horses to run away, to the risk of life, that an order was given to clear the carriage road. In the course of the afternoon a good many persons were taken into custody, and the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Otway) asks me whether it is my intention to order their release. I am told that there are not 104 persons in custody charged with disorderly conduct, but seventy-one persons have been reported to me as having been apprehended for assaulting the police and for riotous conduct. The remainder belong to that large class of persons always assembled on occasions of this kind—pickpockets—and I suppose that it is not desired that any prerogative of the Crown should be exercised to release these persons from the consequences of the offences with which they are charged. With regard to other cases, they are by this time brought before the magistrate, and I do not think it necessary with regard to them to interfere with the ordinary administration of public justice. After a short discussion, in which Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, Mr. WILKINSON, and Mr. W. J. Fox instanced charges against the police, which were afterwards the subject of investigation before a Commission,

said, a few words of explanation were necessary before putting a question of which he had given notice. The Regius Professorship of Civil Law at Oxford had been treated as almost a sinecure, but there had sprung up a general desire on the part of the University to render it more efficient. With that view, a new statute was proposed, according to which the office was endowed with 300l. a year, subject to conditions, three of which were that the professor should reside six months in the year at the University, that he should give at least one course of lectures in the year, and that he should receive classes. That statute had not passed, but was under consideration, and there was a very general opinion in favour of it. Under those circumstances, he was given to understand that the office, which became vacant by the death of Dr. Phillimore, and the appointment to which was in the hands of the First Lord of the Treasury, had been, or was on the point of being, filled up by the appointment of Dr. Twiss, who had a large practice at the Admiralty and at Doctors' Commons. He wished, therefore, to ask whether any security had been taken for the fulfilment of the conditions to which he had referred, in accordance with the general wishes of the University?

said, when it became his duty to take steps for filling up the Regius Professorship of Civil Law at Oxford he was deeply impressed with the necessity, adverted to by the noble Lord, that the office should become really efficient, and not continue, as it had been, very inefficient. The name of Dr. Twiss was suggested to him as that of a gentleman eminent in his profession by his talents and acquirements, and highly qualified to fill that appointment. He communicated with Dr. Twiss, and put to him to consider whether it would suit him, in accepting the office, to engage to perform all those local duties which might be required, either by any new regulations or any existing statute. It being desirable that the appointment should be filled up without any further delay, Dr. Twiss accepted it, with the distinct pledge on his part that if any new regulations should be established which should render the performance of his duties at Oxford incompatible with his avocations in London, he would resign the appointment as readily as he then provisionally accepted it. Therefore, it so stood that the appointment of Dr. Twiss in no degree tied the hands of the University with regard to any regulations they might make for residence, lectures, or any other duties connected with the Professorship of Civil Law.

appeared at the Bar of the House, and, being called on by Mr. SPEAKER, announced a Message from HER MAJESTY.

I propose, Sir, that Her Majesty's most gracious Message be taken into consideration in a Committee of the whole House to-morrow at six o'clock.

said, he begged to move "That the Bill, having been officially declared by the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate of Scotland to be exclusively a Presbyterian Bill, and not, as it stated in the title thereof, 'A Bill to provide for the Education of the People of Scotland,' and that such declaration having been approved by the Committee of Council on Education; and considering that all denominations of Christians in Scotland, except Presbyterians, and others would be virtually excluded from partaking of the benefits intended to be provided by such Bill, though they would be liable to be assessed under the same; and also, considering that the several bodies of Presbyterians are disagreed among themselves as to the objects intended to be promoted by the said Bill, or mode of accomplishing the same, and the restrictions and conditions thereof, while some of them are actively and entirely opposed to the said Bill; and considering, further, the numerous petitions that have recently been presented against it, it is resolved that the Chairman do report progress." The Bill was now completely altered from its original shape, and instead of its being a measure to provide for the education of the whole people of Scotland, it was only intended to benefit one section—the Presbyterians. Neither the Episcopalians nor the Roman Catholics were to be at all benefited by the Bill; and of the Presbyterians, two out of the five sects into which that body was divided were inimical to the measure. It was originally said there was to be no test for schoolmasters, but the Lord Advocate had an Amendment on the paper which would institute one of the worst tests ever devised, by which a man was required to subscribe not merely to the Thirty-nine Articles, but to a catechism of some 107 Articles. He therefore contended that the Bill was now so changed in spirit and principle, that, looking at the advanced period of the Session, and the improbability of the Bill being passed into law, the best course would be to get rid of it altogether.

said, he wished to ask the noble Lord at the head of the Government how it was proposed to deal with the money which had been voted for education in England and Wales? According to the calculation of the hon. Member for Berwickshire (Mr. F. Scott), a sum of 200,000l. would be required to put this system in force in Scotland, so that for England and Wales, where education was in a far worse state than in Scotland, there would only remain for purposes of education a sum of 181,000l. as the whole sum voted for education in Great Britain, was 381,000l. He was far from being desirous of checking the progress of education in Scotland, but he thought that it was the duty of English Members to insist upon there being an equality throughout the country, and taking the difference of the population of Scotland from that of England and Wales, if a sum of 200,000l. were expended in Scotland, no less than 1,000,000l. ought to be expended in England and Wales.

said, that the Vote which would be taken that year for the purpose of education would be applied in the same manner as former Votes, under the direction of the Committee of Privy Council. The hon. Member for Lambeth was, however, mistaken in supposing that the Bill, if passed, would involve so large an increase in the allowance for education in Scotland as he had stated. It was impossible to state precisely, until the surveys were made, what would be the total amount required, but he (Lord Palmerston) thought it would not exceed 80,000l. With respect to the Motion of the hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Hadfield), he would submit to the Committee that this measure was one of great importance, and one which ought to be discussed in its details and merits; and he thought that the time of the Committee would be unprofitably employed if hon. Members were called upon to discuss the question whether or no they should proceed with the Bill, rather than in considering its merits. He trusted that the Committee would proceed in a practical manner, and apply itself to the transaction of the real business for which it had met.

said, that the Motion of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hadfield) had been made without his concurrence, or that of those Scotch Members who had taken the same view of the Bill as himself. He had opposed the Bill at the second reading, but had been defeated; and, as he feared that by the use of an official instrument in the person of the right hon. Member for Wells (Mr. Hayter), any attempt of his to obtain a modification of the measure would be again defeated, he should, if the hon. Gentleman divided the Committee, vote in the same lobby with him.

said, he trusted that the Committee would at once proceed to discuss the details of the measure, as those hon. Gentlemen who objected to its principle would have an opportunity of opposing it on the third reading.

said, he hoped that the noble Lord would take steps for the appointment of a Minister in that House to represent the Committee of Council, for, in his opinion, the expenditure of the large sums of money which were annually voted for educational purposes ought to be brought more directly before the House.

said, that if the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate would give him the data upon which he founded his calculation as to the expense which would be involved by the Bill, he would compare it with his own calculation and endeavour to arrive at a right conclusion, but at present he saw no reason to alter the opinion which he, upon calculation, had formed, that the expense would amount to 200,000l.

said, that, since the general feeling of the Committee appeared to be against it, he would not persist in his Amendment.

said, he wished to inquire why the clause should only take cognisance of the existence of burgh and parochial schools, when it was known that there were in many parishes other endowed schools? He thought the present clause was inconsistent with the 9th clause.

said, the object of the Bill was to establish complete uniformity in the schools to be provided by the measure, irrespective of the voluntary schools. His object was to extend the parochial schools and make them adequate to the wants of the people of Scotland. They had a national system of education in Scotland, but there were great deficiencies in it.

said, he would not say that the object of the Bill was to take the education of the people out of the hands of those who now had the control of it, and to transfer it into the hands of the Government, but he certainly considered that such would be the effect of the measure.

said, he fully concurred in the objection taken by the hon. Member for Stirlingshire (Mr. Blackburn), and, with a view to obviate it, he would beg to move, that after the word "parochial," the word "and" should be struck out; and that after the word "burgh," the words "and other" should be inserted, so that the clause would run thus—

"Whenever the Inspector had ascertained that the means of education afforded by the parochial, burgh, and other schools were inadequate, he should report the same to the Board."

said, he must advert to the injustice of taxing all districts alike, without reference to their requirements. He would point out the case of Heriot's Hospital, in Edinburgh, from the revenues of which schools had been established in various districts. Under the clause proposed Edinburgh would be assessed for schools as though such institutions had never existed there.

said, he thought, if a statistical return could be properly made, the amount of educational destitution would be found much greater than was believed. He believed, too, that the Bill—which he admitted was, as far as it went, a good measure—would fail to reach the educational wants of the country. Such means as were now adopted, relying upon the parents' will alone, would never bring education to the children in those great towns where it was most needed, and he could not help thinking that a compulsory system must sooner or later be established.

said, there might be some difference of opinion whether the voluntary principle alone should be relied upon for the promotion of education, but there could be none that that principle should not be cast aside where it already existed. The Bill proposed to ignore all existing schools not dependent on rates or national grants, and the practical consequence would be, that no schools on the voluntary principle would be allowed to exist in Scotland; and this was called a liberal measure, supported by Liberal Members.

said, that by the 9th clause it would be the duty of the inspectors to furnish to the Secretary of State detailed reports of the educational condition of each district, so that the wants of each burgh or parish in Scotland would be accurately known. He agreed with the hon. Member for Fifeshire (Mr. Fergus) that the Bill would not in all respects reach the existing amount of educational destitution, and it might be a question hereafter whether some kind of compulsory system ought not to be adopted. But, before they rendered it compulsory upon parents to send their children to school, there must be schools provided for them in every district. If, by the clause now under consideration, all private schools were to be recognised it would render the Bill completely nugatory. He therefore entreated the Committee not to destroy the integrity of the clause, which was, indeed, the very hinge of the Bill.

said, he considered the provision calculated to suppress voluntary efforts to promote education.

said, he hoped his hon. Friend would not be content with the alteration agreed to be made by the right hon. and learned Lord, and would press his Amendment.

said, he must condemn the attempt to set up an educational "platform," establishing a forced uniformity throughout the country, with schoolmasters' salaries at 50l. a year all round, whatever might be the varying circumstances of different districts. He also maintained that a compulsory attendance, if deemed advisable, might be combined with the retention of voluntary schools.

said, he thought the object intended was to extinguish all voluntary schools in Scotland, which amounted to nearly 3,000 in number. He should, therefore, divide against the clause.

said, as an English Member, he must protest against the compulsory spirit of the provision, than which nothing could be more worthy of the Inquisition. It was also directly antagonistic to the system under which the Privy Council distributed its educational grants.

said, he would suggest that the inspectors under the Bill should be required simply to ascertain whether the means of education in their respective districts were inadequate, without limiting their inquiry to the education afforded merely, "by the parochial and burgh schools."

said, he could not avoid making a remark upon the absence of English Members from the present discussion. There never was a more fatal error than for those hon. Gentlemen to suppose that the Bill would not affect their own country. If ever there was a case in which the rule of Proximus ardet Ucalegon applied, certainly it was the present. A purely secular system of education could not be introduced into Scotland—as would be the ultimate effect of the Bill—without exposing England to the danger of a similar measure. Having an excellent combined religious and secular system now in operation in Scotland, the representatives of that country ought to declare Nolumus Scotiœ leges mutari.

said, there were several efficient voluntary schools in his district, and he thought the ratepayers would feel it very hard on them if they were compelled to pay for the erection and support of another school.

said, he considered the Bill entirely opposed to the principle which had, up to this time, done so much for education in the country—that of allowing every sect to instruct their own children. The concession which had been made was entirely in the spirit of the solemn league and covenant.

said, that after the wishes expressed by hon. Members in various quarters he was willing to adopt the suggestion made by the hon. Member for Perthshire (Mr. Stirling).

said, he would now move, as an Amendment, to omit the words, "That it shall be in the power of such meeting, by the votes of a majority then present, to resolve that such additional school shall be established," objecting to the power thus given to any party which could obtain a majority to establish additional schools.

said, he wished to propose a proviso to the effect, that no schoolmaster should hold the office of inspector of the poor after the passing of the Bill, except such as might now hold the office and were approved by the General Board.

said, he should oppose the Amendment on the ground that there were many small parishes in Scotland in which it would be impossible to find a fit person to act as inspector of the poor, unless the parochial schoolmasters were permitted to take office.

said, he should oppose the Amendment, on the ground that it would fetter the discretion of school committees, who were the best judges of the propriety of allowing schoolmasters to engage in other occupations.

said, he very much regretted that the Amendment did not go further, for schoolmasters in Scotland were frequently employed not merely as inspectors of the poor, but as sessions clerks, land surveyors, and in other capacities. He knew one parish in Fifeshire, where the schoolmaster was employed as inspector of the poor, and he believed that during the last five years the highest number of children who had attended the school at the same time had been ten or twelve.

said, he thought that in many parishes the schoolmaster was the person best qualified to act as inspector of the poor, and that he could discharge the duties of such an office without neglecting his duties as schoolmaster.

said, that although in many cases, great inconvenience had undoubtedly resulted from schoolmasters having undertaken duties entirely unconnected with the management of their schools, yet in the Highland districts, it might frequently be impossible to find any persons except the schoolmasters who were qualified to act as inspectors. He would therefore suggest that it should be left, not to the school committees, but to the General Board, to permit schoolmasters, in special cases, where they thought it necessary, to act as inspectors of the poor.

said, he would withdraw his Amendment, and leave the matter in the hands of the Government.

said, he proposed to prefix to the clause the following words—

"The religious instruction to be given in all Parochial and Public Schools under this Act shall be in accordance with that heretofore in use in the Parochial Schools of Scotland; but"

said, that at present there was in every school in Scotland, with few exceptions, an hour set apart for religions instruction, during which children belonging to other denominations were not bound to attend. He thought it desirable to put that in the Bill, to show that the old practice in Scotland was to be continued. At the same time he did not like to legislate more than was necessary on religious subjects, and thought the proposed words unnecessary, their substance being set forth in the preamble of the Bill.

said, that in none of the clauses was it enacted that the religious instruction referred to in the preamble should be given.

said, he should support the proviso, believing that the people of Scotland wished for some such declaration.

said, he wished to move a proviso to the clause, to the effect that in cases of non-attendance on religious instruction, the parents or guardians of the children objecting should produce a certificate from the ministers of the religious denominations to which they belonged, that they received religious instruction. He thought it of the greatest importance that care should be taken that the children should receive religious instruction of some kind. That was the first time a Bill had been introduced by the Government separating religious from secular instruction.

said, he must deny the assertion of the hon. Member for Ayrshire: the Bill only carried out the principles of the present established schools in Scotland. He maintained that the promoters of the Bill were as anxious to further religion as any of its opponents. But if the certificate suggested were required, the result would be that when it was not possible to furnish it, the children in question would be debarred from the benefit of the secular instruction furnished in the schools. He could not assent to the Amendment.

said, he did not wish to deprive any child of secular education; he only wanted an enactment that religious instruction should be given in some way, and he proposed to secure it by requiring a certificate from the minister.

said, the professions of the right hon. and learned Lord as to care for religious instruction were not carried out in the Bill. If the right hon. and learned Lord was sincere in those professions, it was unaccountable that he should always object to Amendments calculated to promote the object. The principle of the Bill was the separation of secular from religious education. Hitherto religious instruction had pervaded the whole of the education. Now it was to be given only at certain specified hours. The right hon. and learned Lord refused to introduce any guarantee for religious instruction.

said, he was anxious for religious instruction, for he believed that secular instruction alone did not deserve the name of education. The right hon. and learned Lord declared that the Bill would not interfere with religious instruction; but if containing no guarantee for such instruction, it would surely produce the impression that secular instruction alone might be sufficient.

said, he would withdraw his Amendment.

said, he should move that the clause be omitted altogether. He agreed that no sound education could be given that was not based on religion; but he had so much faith in his countrymen that he was quite sure, without an enactment of the kind, a sound religious education would be given by the parents.

said, he should support the Motion for the omission of the clause, and he did so because it was wrong and an injustice to tax people in support of an institution in which they were not par- takers, and to which they had a moral and religions objection. If this clause were retained it would raise a religious war in Scotland akin to that which had prevailed from time to time in England on the subject of church-rates.

said, he objected to the clause, on the ground that it was framed so as to exclude from the benefit of the Bill one-third of the Presbyterians of Scotland.

said, the clause was very unpopular in Scotland, and he would vote for its omission.

said, he wished to propose the addition of the following proviso—

"Provided always, that it shall not be necessary for any industrial or Reformatory School in Scotland, in order to obtain the sanction of the Secretary of State, under an Act passed in the seventeenth and eighteenth year of the reign of Her present Majesty, intituled 'An Act to render Reformatory and Industrial Schools in Scotland more available for the benefit of vagrant children,' to provide accommodation within the premises of such school for the lodging and residence of such vagrant children. Provided always, that the rules of such school are otherwise satisfactory as provided by the said Act; and so much of the said Act as restricts the power of the sheriff to transmit vagrant children to such school or schools within his jurisdiction is hereby repealed."

said, he objected to the proposed Amendment, on the ground of its introducing matter not originally contemplated by the Bill, namely, the reformation of criminal offenders.

said, that he stated last week that he would on an early day declare the course he should take with regard to the Education Bill under his charge, and he should now move that the Order of the Day for the adjourned debate on the second reading be discharged. He had two reasons for taking that course—firstly, on any business with which he was connected he was always desirous of meeting the wishes of the House, and he believed that it was the wish of the House that they should not spend any more nights at that period of the Session in debating measures which were not to be passed into law. Another reason was, that in his belief any division which might be taken on the Bill would be taken now under serious disadvantages. The noble Lord at the head of the Government had offered Friday night for the resumption of the adjourned debate, but assuming that the House came to a decision then, which was by no means certain, it would be taken after debates which had taken place on three different occasions, the first in the month of May, the second in the month of June, and the third in the month of July. A subject of such great importance ought certainly not to be settled except after full, close, and consecutive discussion. Looking then to the magnitude of the question, he thought that he should best discharge his duty by not proceeding with the Bill during the present Session. He might, however, be allowed to say that he had devoted much thought and labour to the measure, and he could not part with it without expressing an earnest hope that the House would not let such an important subject rest where it was, and that in an early Session, he hoped the next Session, the question would be brought to a settlement on the principles laid down in his Bill. He believed the question could not be settled on any other principles. Those principles were these—First, that there should be no unnecessary interference with existing agencies, which had done and were doing much good. Secondly, that the deficiencies of existing agencies should be supplied by means of a public fund, ad- ministered by the local authorities; and thirdly, that the religious element should be retained in our system of education, but that it should be combined with the most perfect respect and toleration for all denominations of dissent from the Established Church. He believed that when the question came to be settled, it must be settled on those main principles, and which could not be applied to education without legislation. Much had been said of the efficacy of the voluntary system, but he was glad to hear the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) say that although that system had done much—and he (Sir J. Pakington) admitted it had done much—it could not overtake or meet the ignorance prevailing in the country. In bringing forward his Bill, he made statements with regard to the condition of education, and he was accused of exaggeration in his statements, and he was much pained by hearing that accusation repeated by the noble Lord the Member for London. Now that was a grave charge against a Member of long experience in that House dealing with such a subject. He would now emphatically say that he had studiously avoided exaggeration. The statements he had made were substantially true. He had said that in the quality of the teaching and in the numbers taught the majority of the states of Europe and America were in advance of this country. He had obtained that information from the best sources, and he adhered to the statement. He believed it to be strictly true, and if it was true, he could not as an Englishman regard it without deep shame. With regard to the condition of education in England, every statement he had made had been founded on official documents and obtained from official authorities, and in some instances he was informed that he had understated the facts. He had arrived at the conclusion that the children of the educated classes were divisable into three portions. The first was, that in which many children were well educated, and all of them fairly educated. The second portion were those who were sent to schools where they received some education, but in inferior schools, or their attendance was for so short a time that the training they received was worth little or nothing; while the third class were those who went to no schools, and received no systematic educational training. The last class was the smallest, but the second was much the largest. If this approximated to the truth, it was a state of things which Parliament ought not to permit to continue, and he hoped and believed that the people of this country would not be content unless Parliament addressed itself to this important social question. The people would say that Members of Parliament could find time for party struggles, while great social questions were made matters of minor interest, and he believed they would call on Parliament to battle with the question in an earnest and serious manner, and soon to settle it on sound and benevolent principles,

said, that whenever the measure was brought forward again, he should feel it his duty to give it his strenuous opposition.

said, that as the right hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Pakington) had alluded to him, and the next Bill on the Orders was one which he had introduced, he wished to say a few words. He honoured the right hon. Gentleman for the efforts he had made to raise the standard of education, and he agreed with him in the three principles he had laid down. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that it was desirable that popular education should be extended and improved, and that in extending and improving it, due consideration should be shown to those existing modes of education by which so much instruction had been afforded. He agreed also with the right hon. Gentleman in thinking that any system of education should be founded on a religious basis. He thought they would injure rather than serve future generations if they infused amongst the people an education in which religious instruction should not be given. At the same time, he also agreed with the right hon. Gentleman in thinking that, in doing this, they ought to respect the rights of conscience, and ought not to interfere with the religious convictions of the parents. When he spoke of exaggerated statements, he referred to the conclusion at which the right hon. Gentleman had arrived, and not to his statistics, which he admitted to be accurate and well founded. But he believed there was a value given to the education given in this country which was not to be found in the education given in some continental countries, although the number of scholars in those countries might be larger; and for that reason, that the people of this country had full religious liberty, and had open to them stores of literary study which his right hon. Friend (Mr. Macaulay) declared to be equal to the classical writings of antiquity. When it was borne in mind that the people of this country had open to them works of the highest conception, works of fancy and poetry, as well as the highest works of philosophical and historical reasoning, that must be in itself an education vastly superior to the education of those countries where the Government was fearful to admit such works, particularly in the department of morals and politics. He was lately amused by reading, that Southey's ballad, The Old Woman of Berkeley, was prohibited in Russia, because they would be too much frightened at reading it. That was a specimen of what was called a paternal Government. What he should like to do was to extend, and if possible to make universal, that system of education which, they already possessed, rather than go into an entirely new system. Reference had been made in the course of the discussions to the schools of New England and other parts of the United States, but he certainly did not think that the schools in, those places were at all analogous to those with which the Bills before the House proposed to deal. He was convinced likewise that the system of the United States, however well adopted it might be to the social condition of that country, was not suited to this country. Men like Mr. Everett and Mr. Webster might send their sons to be educated in the common schools of the United States, but it was not likely that the gentry of this country would send their sons to be educated in the common schools here. We must follow our own ways, our own genius, and the disposition of our own people, rather than that of the despotic States of the continent or of the United States of America. With regard to the future, therefore, his view was limited rather to the extending and improving the system of education they had than of introducing an entirely new one. There was one subject upon which the right hon. Gentleman had touched when he moved for leave to introduce his Bill, with regard to which he wished to say a few words—he referred to the Committee of Council of Education. When that Committee was appointed he did not think that any better means could be adopted for managing the Educational Votes than by intrusting the control of them to a council of several Ministers, but circumstances had since changed, and he thought that it would be for the benefit of the public service if the President of the Committee of Council were to be acknowledged as the Minister of Education, and that the department of education should be represented in that House by a person who might, perhaps, hold the rank of a Privy Councillor, and who might be able to defend any measure that might be adopted, and who would be prepared at all times to explain the views of the Government with regard to the general question of education. As to the steps necessary to be taken to carry that view into effect, he could assure the House that the whole subject was under the earnest consideration of the Government, and they hoped in an early Session to be able to lay before Parliament a scheme for the regulation of an educational department.

said, that it now became his duty to explain what he intended to do with his Bill. He presented a petition, signed by 62,000 of the adult male population of Manchester and Salford, in favour of a secular system of education, supported by local rates and applied by local authority. No less than 170 public meetings, held in twenty-eight different counties, decided in favour of the same plan. Indeed, no other plan, if to be supported by rates, met with any acceptance at all. The people of this country would not sanction a general system of rating for the teaching in schools of all religions, because it would be absurd, nor for the teaching of any one form of religion, because it would be unjust. He believed that if the State were to interfere in education at all, it had better confine itself to giving secular education in the schools, leaving religion to the care of the parents and the ministers of religion. He should regret if those whom he represented felt disappointed at the course he should take, but, under the circumstances in which he was placed, he could do nothing else than follow the example which had been set him, and withdraw his Bill. He should, however, bring forward his plan next Session.

said, he must beg to express his gratification at the statement made by the noble Lord. The value of the existing system could not be overrated. Mr. Mann said, that within five or six years from the present time there would be, according to the past progress of the existing system, fully one in every six of the population receiving all the advantages of it.

said, he would beg to ask the noble Lord whether he would propose in the present Session the appointment of a Minister of Instruction.

said, the Government wished to take time to consider the whole subject; though at the same time he should state that they fully contemplated renewing a measure next Session based upon the rating principle.

said, he would then give notice that whenever such a measure was brought forward he should be prepared to meet it with a direct negative.