having it imposed upon them." ciling the consciences of the clergy to the now | hindered by Religious differences; nor should the famous clause introduced into the deeds of early Employment of the Young in Labour be management of certain schools has not been felt allowed to deprive them of Education." by the majority of the clergy in my district. Most The noble Earl has, I think, fallen into of the schools-indeed, nearly all in the large towns-are worked according to the principle of considerable error in the statement which the clause, and I have never heard of any real he has made on this subject, because he difficulty in the working of it. Neither have I has spoken as if Parliament had not alheard of any clergy in my district being debarred from applying for a building grant from fear of ready done a great deal in requiring a certain amount of education to be given antecedent to the employment of children in labour. He says that it would be a very great advantage if Parliament would extend the action of the Factory Acts to other trades. That, I would remind him, has been already done. An Act was passed last Session, of the passing of which he does not seem to be aware, extending the operation of the Factory Acts to all workshops. Under that Act no child, after the year 1870, under eight years of age, can be employed at all, and no child between eight and thirteen, unless he can produce I find, too, that the sums voted by the Committee of Council for building purposes being in 1865 £18,882, and in 1866 £24,222, the sum granted in 1865 for building purposes for Church of England schools was only £15,458, while it amounted in 1866 to £20,445. It must be borne in mind that the principle on which the Conscience Clause is based is acted upon in almost every school. There are very few schools which are not conducted exactly on that principle. The instances in boroughs are now, I believe, very rare in which a clergyman thinks it to be his duty to compel a child to receive any religious instruction to which its parents object, and Mr. Hadley stated that most of the schools in his district are worked upon that principle. What the clergy have an objection to, however, I understand is what they are disposed to look upon as the onesidedness of the clause as it works. If the Conscience Clause is to be just in its application it must operate equally in giving security, not only to the parents of the children but to the managers of schools. While it allows the parent every possible latitude in withdrawing his child from the influence of any religious teaching to which he may object, it ought also to provide that the schools should not be obliged to lose their distinctive character, and that denominational teaching in them should not be interfered with. As far as I can learn, one of the strongest objections of the clergy to the Conscience Clause is that it is thought to tend to destroy the denominational character of the school, and that a parent might under its operation interfere so far as practically to do away with religious teaching altogether. The clause therefore, in my opinion, if it is to be rendered generally applicable, must bear equally in the two directions which I have indicated-it must give protection and liberty to the child, and secure the denominational character of the school. The noble Earl, in his first Resolution, says "The Diffusion of Knowledge ought not to be a certificate from the master of a certifi- to inquire into and report on the employment of "We do hereby enjoin you, or either of you, Under those circumstances it would, I think, be highly inexpedient that your Lordships should come to any conclusion on this subject of the employment of children in agricultural labour until you have the Report of the Commission before you. I now pass to the other Resolutions of the noble Earl. On the second he does not lay much stress. Then the noble Earl drew attention to the subject of certificated teachers, and, indeed, I interrupted him with the object of eliciting his views upon that subject. With regard to certificated teachers I quite agree with the opinion frequently expressed by the noble Earl, and still, I believe, entertained by him, as to the great advantage of that system. It is, I think, the basis on which Parliamentary grants ought to be made. I perfectly agree, too, with the noble Earl that it is necessary to give not only a certain kind of education, but the best kind-of such a quality as will repay the expense and outlay incurred by the State in giving it. But it is, no doubt, equally true that the Revised Code has introduced to a certain extent a new principle in regard to the mode of payment, and that payment is now made according to results; and though I do not think the State ought to depart from the principle on which grants have hitherto been given that is, principally and essentially, for the promotion of education imparted by certificated teachers -I am, nevertheless, of opinion that it may be a question worthy of the consideration of the Government whether, without impugning the principle of certificated teachers, some modified assistance might not be given to schools which come up in all other respects to the requirements of the Privy Council - not with a view of enabling them to substitute a system of teaching different from that which has received the sanction of Parliament, and been recommended by practice and experience, but in order to aid them in struggling through their preliminary difficulties, and in bringing them up ultimately to such a state that they can employ a certificated teacher. I desire it to be understood, however, that I state this as my own individual opinion, without pledging the Government to any particular course. It has been said, with a great deal of justice and truth, that if some latitude were given in this direction it would lead to the employ ment of more certificated teachers than are employed at present, because the very fact of a certain amount of grant being given to a school which had not a certificated teacher, and which was consequently open to inspection, would render so apparent the deficiencies arising from the want of a certificated teacher, that the managers would be induced by the failures in the examinations to employ such a teacher in order to raise the standard of the education. This subject has not been lost sight of by Her Majesty's Government I can assure the noble Earl, and though I am not prepared to state their views upon it, I am bound to admit that it is a subject in regard to which a fair and impartial inquiry may be instituted. With respect to the third Resolution of the noble Earl namely "That it is the opinion of this House that the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge may be made more useful to the nation by the removal of restrictions," I have only to remark that, as the noble Earl has himself stated, a Committee of the House of Commons is considering this question. But the noble Earl, in the first instance, told your Lordships that a Royal Commission ought to be appointed to consider it. Now, as a Royal Commission was appointed about thirteen years ago to investigate the condition of the Universities, nothing could be more indiscreet at the present time than to appoint another Commission to revise the work then done, and to declare the reforms effected by the previous Commission inadequate to the wants of the times, and inefficient for the proper education of the country. I, for one, will never agree to such a proposal. I believe that the changes which have been made in the University staff, and which are from time to time being introduced in consequence of the Report of the Commis. sioners appointed about thirteen years ago, have been productive of great benefit. Th my opinion it will be far better to leave Oxford and Cambridge to their own action, and to wait until changes are effected in consequence of public opinion and the enlarged views of the persons connected with those Universities, than to endeavour to bring about changes by means of legislative enactments. Indeed, nothing can be more prejudicial to the Universities than constantly pressing changes upon them. With regard to the third Resolution of the noble Earl, respecting the appointment of a Minister of Education by the Crown, I confess that is a subject far too wide for me to express any opinion upon. I suppose, however, that the noble Earl, by placing this Resolution at the end of the others, intended it to be a logical sequence that a Minister of the Crown should undertake all the various duties which the previous Resolutions shadow forth. That may or may not be a politic and wise proposition; but, my Lords, I, for one, am certainly not prepared to advocate it. I cannot but think, for instance, that with regard to the Universities it would be a change in the wrong direction if they were to be ruled in any other manner than that now sanctioned by their statutes. There are very great advantages in the arrangement under which any change in the statutes of the Universities comes under the notice of the Committee of the Privy Council; and I do not see how, even if a Minister of Education were appointed to control matters of this kind by his sole Ministerial authority, many of the advantages accruing under the present system could be maintained. No doubt this question is one of great importance, and one which every Government ought to take into consideration; but in replying to the noble Earl on the present occasion, I must say that I myself have very great objections to the appointment of a Minister of Education. There is another reason which occurs to me against the proposal of the noble Earl. In the year 1856 the industrial and reformatory schools under the control of the Home Office, and the schools under the Poor Law Board and the War Office, were all placed under the direction and supervision of the Committee of Council on Education; but in practice it was found impossible to carry out the arrangement, and the result showed that schools relating to particular departments were best administered under the supervision of those departments. I do not think it is necessary for me to detain your Lordships longer. I can only assure your Lordships that the question of education, important as it is, and connected as it is, and must continue to be with the highest interests of the country, is one which Her Majesty's Government have not lost sight of. Indeed, the noble Earl opposite might have learnt that from a sentence which occurred in Her Majesty's Speech at the opening of the Session. Her Majesty's Government have the question of public elementary education under their consideration, and as long as I am connected with the office which I now have the honour to hold, I shall feel it my duty to bestow on this subject my best and most earnest attention. I cannot say how deeply I feel it to be a question on which the most vital interests of the nation depend; but in addressing myself to its consideration, I shall never deem it my duty to do anything which would disturb the denominational system, which I believe to be the keystone of the education of this country, which I believe to be intimately associated with the religious feelings, with the habits, and with the sympathies of the people, and conducive to their best interests in promoting a sound and healthy education, and in making this country-as I hope it ever will make it great and glorious and happy. I trust your Lordships will not pass these Resolutions; but as I do not altogether dissent from many of the propositions contained in them, I will ask your Lordships to agree to the Previous Question. Then a Question being stated, the previous Question was proposed, "Whether the said Question shall be now put?" EARL RUSSELL, in reply, said, that in introducing the Resolutions, he was actuated solely by a sense of public duty, and the sole object he sought by them was to obtain a declaration of opinion that the time had arrived when the education of the country ought to be extended so as to embrace every child in it, and that religious questions ought not to stand in the way of such extension. His statements as to assisted and unassisted schools were founded upon those of Mr. Bruce. He could not say that the speech of the noble Duke (the Duke of Marlborough) afforded much reason to hope that the Government would act on the propositions he had submitted; but he hoped that if any measure were introduced by the Government in the House of Commons, it would be sent up to this House in time to allow their Lordships ample opportunity to discuss it. He would not divide the House on his Motion. Question put. Resolved in the Negative. House adjourned at a quarter past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Monday, December 2, 1867. MINUTES.]-NEW MEMBER SWORN-Thomas Tertius Paget, esquire, for Leicester County (Southern Division). PUBLIC BILLS-Ordered-Totnes, &c. Writs. First Reading-Totnes, &c. Writs [20]. CHURCH RATES.-QUESTION. MR. HADFIELD said, that as it seemed to be understood that the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House was not likely to be in his place again before Christmas, he begged to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who was perfectly competent to answer the Question, Whether, as there were two Bills before the House on the subject of Church Rates, and two others were promised, the Government intended themselves to intro duce a measure for settling this most vexa- | myself, is not a man to raise difficulties or tious question? LORD STANLEY said, that the hon. Member had not given notice of his intention to put the Question. Till a very short time ago he had fully expected that his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have been in his place that evening. In the absence of his right hon. Friend, he (Lord Stanley) was not prepared to answer Questions with regard to the business of the House. THE WRECK REGISTERS. QUESTION. MR. NORWOOD asked the Vice President of the Board of Trade, Whether he will state the reasons why the British and Foreign Wreck Registers for 1866 have not yet been printed and delivered to the Members of this House; and, whether the version of the British Wreck Register that has appeared in the newspapers has been communicated to the press by the authority of the Board of Trade; and, if not, whether he will state by whom it was communicated, or by what means it got into the papers? MR. STEPHEN CAVE: The Wreck Registers have usually been delivered to Members much earlier in the year. This year much additional work has been thrown upon the Marine Department of the Board of Trade, to which the task of compiling the Register is committed, in connection with the preparation and passing through Parliament of the Merchant Shipping Acts Amendment Bill, as well as in framing regulations for carrying its provisions into effect after it had become law. There has been an unhealthy time in the office, temporarily depriving it of some valuable services; and lastly, the Foreign Wreck Register, which was first added to the British Wreck Register last year, has been made more complete at the expense of much additional labour. These are the causes of the Register being issued later than usual. It is in the printer's hands, and will, I hope, be delivered to Members this week. But in truth the postponement even to the autumn of the publication of the Wreck Register of the year before very much impairs its value, and it is very desirable that it should appear by March at the latest. Mr. Gray, the Assistant Secretary of the Marine Department, who, as the hon. Member knows almost as well as to shrink from work, informs me that this cannot be done without additional hands, and it is absolutely impossible, owing to the way in which the Board of Trade is cramped for room, much to the detriment of the public service and of the health of the clerks, to obtain the required assistance. No version of the Wreck Register has been communicated to the press by authority of the Board of Trade. It would, in my opinion, be irregular and hardly respectful to send for publication Returns ordered by the House before they are ready for delivery to Members. The early publication of the substance of many of these Returns in the papers is a great public convenience, but the communication of imperfect information is obviously calculated to mislead. I believe that in this instance blame has been cast upon the Office by a portion of the press for carelessness in issuing incomplete Returns, when, in point of fact, one of the causes of delay has been anxiety to make the Register as complete as possible. The Secretary of the Lifeboat Institution has been in the habit of obtaining assistance from the Board of Trade in the preparation of a portion of his Report. This is derived from a crude and imperfect version of what appears in a complete form in the Register. This communication, the strict propriety of which may, perhaps, be questioned, and which costs no little time and labour, is made to him for one purpose only. The use of it for any other would be a breach of confidence. But, of course, when the report of the Institution comes out, as it has done this year, before the issue of the Wreck Register, that information becomes public property, and a fresh complication arises owing to the Register being referred to in the Report, as if it had been already published. Arrangements have been made in the Office to prevent for the future the premature and unauthorized publication of Returns ordered by the House. In this particular instance, provided we can obtain space equal to our rapidly expanding work, I hope that an earlier issue of our own Register will be the solution of the difficulty. POST OFFICE-THE ISLAND OF ST. THOMAS.-QUESTION. MR. GILPIN asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether, considering the effects of the recent destructive storm in the Is land of St. Thomas, in which the wharf of the Royal Steam Company is stated to have been destroyed, and the deplorable loss of life both from this cause and the pernicious effects of the climate of the Is. land, it is the intention of the Post Office authorities to continue to sanction the Island of St. Thomas as the chief Postal Station of the West India Mails? MR. HUNT said, that private communications between the Government and the Royal Mail Steamship Company on this question were in progress, and he could not give any further answer at present. HOUSE OF COMMONS' ARRANGEMENTS COMMITTEE.-QUESTION. MR. BAZLEY asked the right hon. Member for Newcastle-on-Tyne, Whether it is his intention to move for the re-appointment of "The House of Commons' Arrangements Committee" during the present Session; and whether, since the termination of the labours of that Committee in the last Session, he has obtained any information which he could communicate to the House? MR. HEADLAM said, of course he had no intention to move the re-appointment of the Committee for the short period that Parliament would sit now; but immediately after the Christmas recess he would certainly do so; and he would also take an opportunity of calling the attention of the House to the evidence given last Session. He supposed the last part of the hon. Gentleman's Question alluded to a wish expressed by himself and others that information should be obtained as to the size of other Houses of Legislature on the Continent. He had not himself been able to make inquiries; but he had communicated with the Board of Works, suggesting that the desired information should be obtained through diplomatic agency, and that it should be available on the re-assembling of Parliament after the holydays. He understood that that suggestion had been entertained and acted upon. LORD JOHN MANNERS was understood to intimate that this was correct. SUEZ AND INDIA SUBMARINE TELE RAPH.-QUESTION. MR. O'BEIRNE asked the Secretary of State for India, Whether he will place upon the table of the House a Copy of the Memorial lately presented by Bankers and Merchants of the City of London, recom METROPOLIS-HACKNEY CARRIAGES LAMPS REGULATION.-QUESTION. MR. DARBY GRIFFITH wished to put a Question to the Secretary of State for the Home Department on a domestic subject. He wished to know whether his attention had been called to a placard which had been placed on Hansom as well as ugly cabs, threatening a strike at four o'clock to-morrow. He begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman, Whether he had any power of revoking the licence or otherwise to prevent such an occurrence? MR. GATHORNE HARDY said, he had no information as to any threatened strike of cabmen more than the hon. Member himself. He was not aware of any new power which had been granted to the Home Secretary or any Member of the Government to control them. ARMY-CONVEYANCE OF TROOPSTHE 40TH REGIMENT.-QUESTION. SIR ROBERT COLLIER asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether a statement which appeared in the Western Morning News is correct, to the effect that on the removal of the 40th Regiment from Plymouth to Aldershot the troops were kept on board Her Majesty's troop ship Simoon for three days, without bedding |