Slike strani
PDF
ePub

reading, and of these 176,299, or 72 per cent, passed the examination. The number examined in writing was 130,781, and of them 71,824, or 73 per cent, passed the examination. Taking the examination of the three R's, he found that in Ireland the proportion of those who passed it was 627; whereas in England it was only 59.2. These figures showed that the Irish national system was not the complete failure it was represented to be. It also showed that the quality of the education imparted to the children was superior in quality to that which was given in the schools of this country. Favourable as were those Returns, he believed they would be still more favourable if a stimulus were given to education by increasing the salaries of the teachers, a body of men who laboured hard for the State. Some of them he knew walked from 10 to 12 miles a-day in going to and from the school-houses. They had hoped, and had felt little doubt, that a grievance which was an admitted injustice would be removed. They expected something would have been done in 1874, but were disappointed. This year they knew that further inquiries were prosecuted, and on the 5th of March, when the question was brought forward in the House, the Government appeared to have matured a scheme which had since been made public. The right hon. Baronet the Chief Secretary, however, did not venture to offer an opinion as to the result of that scheme; if he had he would probably have said that not a penny of the proposed local rate would be levied. Since 1838 it had been the aim of the Government to prevent any addition being made to the local rates. It was equally hopeless to expect that all sects would combine to make the present system a really national one. Ever since 1838 successive Governments had done everything they could to divorce religion from education, and to frustrate the original design of Mr. Stanley, by depriving education of voluntary supporters; and if the schools were denominational, as they were, it was because the Government had been beaten. The national system had been declared against by nearly all the Boards of Guardians in Ireland, and many of the Irish people were more deeply pledged to a denominational system than to anything else. The right hon. Baronet Mr. Meldon

was, indeed, sanguine if he thought that local aid under a Permissive Bill would do anything to save the system now. The first objection to the proposal that the Board of Guardians might, if they wished, contribute towards the payment of teachers, was that dependence on the will of the Guardians would make a teacher uncertain of his income from year to year, for the Guardians might withdraw their aid from any school not managed to their satisfaction; and with their aid the Treasury grant to meet it would be withheld, and the teacher deprived of two-thirds of his income. Another objection was that this plan would take the management of the schools out of the hands of the patrons and place it in the hands of the Guardians, and thus it would happen that where the Guardians were Protestants they would not aid in schools where the children were Roman Catholics; and again, where the Guardians were Roman Catholics, they would refuse to assist in schools where the children were Protestants. But, apart from all that, it was, he considered, a gross insult to Ireland that the children attending the national schools should be treated as paupers. He would not say that the scheme was an absurd one; but the right hon. Baronet had more confidence in his powers of inducing the Irish people to adopt the system than he had. They had almost got rid of religious differences in Ireland; but if the scheme was passed, an apple of discord would be thrown in, and would produce results which it would be impossible to conceive. The way in which the Government proposed to give relief was so manifestly unfair that he trusted it would not be persisted in. Payment by results was injurious to education in Ireland, and the larger the payment that depended upon them, the worse would the results be. Hitherto it had done most for the large schools in the towns, which were well attended, and least for the smaller schools in rural places, where the attendance was less regular; and the managers of 1,140 schools had petitioned against the extension of the system. If the teachers were to have further relief, he would suggest that it should be in the form of augmentation for class salaries, to which half of the amount to be now devoted under the scheme for payment by results might be appropriated.

MR. WARD said, that if the Government asked the people of Ireland to assist education by a local rate they ought consentaneously to give them local control. Until they did so the Government were not entitled to claim any local aid at all. He complained that the national education in Ireland was administered on a bureau system altogether foreign to the feelings of the Irish people.

MR. M'CARTHY DOWNING said, he thought the scheme of the Government would not be acceptable to the people of Ireland. It was not desirable to further extend the system of payment by results, because in a vast number of instances the schools derived no benefit whatever from that system. In the country districts during the harvest and spring time a number of the children were, of necessity, taken away to aid their parents in the cultivation of the

In conclusion, he repeated that this was not a national system of education at all. It must be remembered that a large class of people in Ireland would have nothing whatever to do with it. A large number of children were educated at the cost of their families, and so did not take one penny from the State. The Church Education Society had schools all over the country, which were entirely independent of Government assistance, and in which thousands of children were educated of whom no return was made to that House. Again, they had in Ireland the assistance of the Christian Brothers, than whom there was no better society in Europe for the purpose of education. They had bodies giving education, erecting buildings for educational purposes, and many schools were carried forward in opposition to the national system, as it was termed. The Christian Brethren had been extending their operations, and were taking a num-land, and the consequence was that the ber of children from the national schools. Indeed, the Report of the Commissioners admitted that the voluntary aid outside the national system amounted to no less than £108,000-a fact which constituted a sufficient answer to the statement that no local contributions were made towards the maintenance of schools. The alleged inefficiency of Irish teachers was sufficiently accounted for by their being denied training, except on conditions which, as Catholics, they could not accept. The disparity between the salaries of Irish teachers and those of English teachers was glaringly unjust. In England there were very few salaries under £50; but in Ireland there were 2,886 under £24, 1,577 under £30, 471 under £38, and 132 under £50, and Irish teachers had responsibilities thrown upon them in respect of securing attendance and collecting fees which were not cast upon English teachers. Was it any wonder that in the past their minds had been diverted from their work to agitation for the improvement of their condition? Now they were told, not that their agitation was to cease, but that they must influence the Guardians and the landlords. As it was almost certain the Guardians would do nothing, he appealed to the Government to give £120,000 this year-one half as payment for results, and the other half as an addition to salaries.

average attendance could not be kept up. If it were proposed to give fair and permanent salaries to the teachers the scheme would be much more likely to be received with favour. Guardians would not adopt the proposed plan, except for the increase of salaries, unless it were made compulsory, and the adoption of it in isolated cases would cause great dissatisfaction in neighbouring Unions where it was not applied. The advance of education in Ireland was shown by the Census Returns of those who could not read or write; who were 52 per cent in 1841, 47 per cent in 1851, 38 per cent in 1861, and 33 per cent in 1871. The making of marks at marriages proved rather the unwillingness than the inability of persons to write their names.

MR. O'CLERY said, the question resolved itself into one of the State endeavouring to force on the people a system of education they were unwilling to receive. They would be content with nothing less than denominational education, and it was unfair to ask them to contribute towards a system they would not accept. The Christian Brothers had over and over again declined to receive State aid, because they knew what it would involve, and the schools of the Christian Brothers were used in preference to the National Schools. That proved not only that the people favoured denominationalism, but that they were

prepared to pay dearly for it. Let the Government be consistent, and deal with Ireland as it did with England-let them face the subject of denominational education, and leave its teaching to the natural leaders of the people.

interests of national teachers, whose condition all parties concurred in deeming deplorable. For his own part, he was ready to acknowledge the deep obligations which the country owed to those who introduced that system which, in the past, had effected so much for the educational improvement of the Irish people, and incidentally improved their material interests, by enabling them successfully to compete for public employ

MR. WHALLEY called upon the House to take note that the advocates of a denominational system, who described the National Schools as denominational, were mainly anxious now for the increase of the salaries of those teachers respect-ment. The important question then under ing some of whom it had been avowed consideration was whether the teachers in that House that they were not allowed were to receive increased salaries? and to live in contact with Protestants. The with regard to that point he regretted discussion plainly indicated that the con- that the Chief Secretary had not seen his spiracy of priestcraft, which in the way to do more in that direction than he O'Keeffe case asserted the supremacy of proposed to do. He did not think it the Pope in the administration of the was likely that the Boards of Guardians law, was doing the same in education, would meet the Government in regard and that this Vote of £500,000 was to the contribution of £60,000; and if being used to promote disaffection and they did not, what would be the position disloyalty. of the teachers in Ireland?

MR. PARNELL complained that the Vote was brought forward at a period of the Session when not more than onefifth of the Irish Members were able to attend. It had been stated that the results of the system of Irish education had not been very satisfactory, though it had been established 44 years ago. He did not believe that the system could be estimated by a comparison of the number of children that passed in reading and writing, nor the number that attended school. As to the feeling of the people of England or Scotland, who had a system of education of which they approved, had one been forced upon them of which they did not approve they would protest against the principle just as much as Irish Members protested to-day. The representatives of the ratepayers in Ireland should not be called upon to levy a tax for an object of which they did not approve, and he felt certain that the Poor Law Guardians would not raise the tax; and, in conclusion, he insisted that if England wanted to force a system of education on Ireland to which the people objected, England should pay it herself.

SIR PATRICK O'BRIEN reminded hon. Members that the question before the Committee was not as to the merits of denominationalism. He should be prepared to support that principle when it was presented to the House. The question had reference to the changes proposed to be made in the

Mr. O' Clery

MR. M'LAREN said, he thought the Government would have done better if they had proposed a small compulsory tax on land, such as was levied in Scotland; but he saw no objection to this rate being collected, like many others, with the poor rate, which was the law in Scotland. Substantially, the proposal was fair and reasonable; because in Ireland out of every £100 paid for education £14 only was raised by local contributions, and £86 was paid out of the taxation of the United Kingdom. In Scotland, out of every £100 paid to teachers, £73 was derived from local rates, and in England £63 per cent was paid from local sources.

MR. MELDON said there were still many important points for discussion. He moved that the Chairman should report Progress.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again.". (Mr. Meldon.)

SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH trusted the hon. Member would withdraw his Motion. There was no objection to the amount of the Vote, and he suggested that the hon. Member might on the Report take exception to any principle on which it was based.

SIR ANDREW LUSK hoped that now the House was in Committee it

MR. WHITWELL said, there were other points affecting the system of education in Ireland.

might be allowed to go on with the Votes.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Original Question again proposed. MR. MELDON moved to reduce the Vote by £2,350 for Post Office orders for the salaries of teachers. The item was a very objectionable one, the Post Office making a profit at the expense of national education. There should be some other method devised of paying the salaries.

Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That a sum," not exceeding £486,318, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1876, for the Salaries

and Expenses of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland."-(Mr. Meldon.)

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, though this item appeared to swell the cost of education, it was only a matter of account. The Post Office charged for the service it rendered to any other Department. Even if this ought to be altered, it would be inconvenient to do it now, and the only result would be that the teachers would be mulcted in the cost of the Post Office orders.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
Resolutions to be reported upon
Monday;

Committee to sit again upon Monday.

HOUSE OCCUPIERS DISQUALIFICA
TION REMOVAL BILL.-[BILL 164]
Sir Charles Russell, Mr. Callender, Mr. Ryder.)
(Sir H. Drummond Wolff, Sir Charles Legard,

THIRD READING.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."—(Sir II. Drummond Wolff.)

MR. DODDS said, the Bill proposed to make a great change, which ought not to be made unless it were accompanied by other changes. On that ground, he and others were determined to resist the further progress of the Bill; but as there was not time to discuss it now, he moved that the debate be adjourned.

MR. HAYTER seconded the Motion. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."

MR. MELDON withdrew his oppo--(Mr. Dodds.) sition for the present, but gave Notice that he would bring the matter forward next year.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Original Question again proposed. MR. WARD moved the reduction of the Vote by £30,114--the cost of the Model Schools, which the Royal Commissioners had pronounced to be a failure.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £458,554, be

granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1876, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland."-(Mr. Ward.)

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH said, the subject might be very usefully discussed on a separate Motion, for there was a difference of opinion upon it, and in the North of Ireland Model Schools were regarded as efficient; but it would be inconvenient to dispose of so large a matter on this Vote.

SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF said, the only object of the Bill was to simplify registration in boroughs. It cut both ways; it gave no advantage to either political Party; and, as the House had already expressed an opinion in its favour, he should endeavour to pass it.

MR. ONSLOW said, he hoped the progress of the Bill would not be resisted. There had been a division on a previous stage, in which it was carried by a large majority.

Question put.

The House divided:-Ayes 27; Noes 87: Majority 60.

Question again proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."

MR. DILLWYN, remarking that they met on Saturday to forward Government Business, moved the adjournment of the

House.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn." (Mr. Dillwyn.)

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, remarking that the Government had supported the Bill, advised the hon. Gentleman in charge of it, to consent to the adjournment of the debate.

MR. MONK suggested the re-committal of the Bill for the purpose of making a small Amendment, which would get rid of further opposition.

MR. DILLWYN said, he would withdraw his Motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. BATES.

MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE.

MR. BATES formally moved, without comment, in terms of the Notice he had on the Paper, for a Select Committee "to inquire into certain charges made by Mr. Plimsoll, Member for Derby, against Mr. Bates, Member for Plymouth."

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Select Committee be appointed to

Question again proposed, "That the inquire into certain charges made by Mr. PlimBill be now read the third time."

Debate adjourned till Monday.

INFANTICIDE BILL.-[BILL 43.]
(Mr. Charley, Mr. Whitwell.)

THIRD READING.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time." (Mr. Charley.)

MR. VANCE moved the adjournment of the debate.

MR. CHARLEY said, he was quite ready to meet the hon. Member in the Lobby. He suggested, however, whether these repeated Motions for Adjournment were fair fighting. The effect would be to make the Bill too late for the other House. The hon. Member was not acting fairly.

MR. VANCE desired to say, in reply to the charge of unfairness, that he had wished to oppose the Bill at an earlier stage, the passing of which was secured by stealth. [Order, order!"]

MR. SPEAKER said, the hon. Member had used an expression which was not in Order.

MR. VANCE: As that decision had been given, he would say that a former stage of this Bill was obtained inadvertently, so as to evade the opposition which he was in his place to offer; and therefore, the hon. and learned Member had no right to complain of opposition at this stage.

MR. ÖNSLOW said, he fully intended to oppose the Bill in its previous stage, but by a process which he as a new Member, did not understand he was precluded from doing so. He opposed the Bill now, disapproving of its principle, and he hoped it would not pass this

Session.

[blocks in formation]

soll, Member for Derby, against Mr. Bates, Member for Plymouth."-(Mr. Bates.)

SIR WILFRID LAWSON: I should not wish to set myself in any way against the opinion of the House if it appears that the general opinion is that this Committee ought to be granted; but I hope there is no harm in making a few observations, so that we may see really where we are going. In the first place, I should say that the terms of the Motion are very vague indeed for a Motion of this kind. There are "certain charges" made against the hon. Member for Plymouth. I think we ought to have a more detailed statement of what the Committee is to do before we decide upon appointing it. It has been said by the Prime Minister, and quite correctly, that "every man is the guardian of his own honour; " and I have no doubt that the hon. Member for Plymouth thinks it necessary for the protection of his honour that this Committee should be granted. At the same time, before we accede to his request, the House should consider whether he is taking the very best course for securing the object he has in view. As I understand, the case stands thus :-The hon. Member opposite was charged by the hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Plimsoll) with-to put it shortly-not making proper provision for the safety of the lives of those whom he sent out to sea in his ships. The hon. Member for Plymouth has already twice had an opportunity in this House of defending himself against the charge. The Prime Minister on one occasion moved that the House report Progress on an important Bill-the Agricultural Holdings (England) Bill-at an early hour in order to give the hon. Member the opportunity, and the hon. Member entered upon a full defence before this

« PrejšnjaNaprej »