ward, it was clear that in all these cases | given on certain conditions, and then to persons thought they had been hardly say that really meant nothing at all, treated. His hon. Friend the Member for because the Department had the discreExeter (Mr. A. Mills) seemed to suppose tion of refusal. He hoped his hon. it necessary to check the action of school Friend would not push this matter to a boards; but hon. Members must not division. It was a case which might support this Minute on the supposition fairly be left to the Government to conthat it would merely tell in favour of sider. No doubt they would fairly conschool boards. If this Minute were sider it, and perhaps he was not asking allowed to remain, it might be turned too much when he asked them to give against any fresh denominational schools some consideration to the arguments he whatever. This he should be sorry to had brought forward. He would say see, because he thought that taxpayers one word with regard to the Scotch Act. had a right to have a special denomina- New schools in Scotland were treated tional school if they fulfilled the con- differently from new schools in England. ditions, and were willing to run the very The former merely developed the rate severe risk of having to pay their share system, which was quite in accordance of the rates and subscribe to their own with the educational genius of Scotland. schools as well. He could not help The provision with regard to new schools taking a great interest in the actual work was that all new voluntary schools, or of the Department; and he did feel schools not public schools, should be rethat, in undertaking to decide whether fused a Parliamentary grant, unless the a school was wanted or not in any par- Department consented to a special grant ticular district, they imposed on them- to them, either from regard to the reliselves an amount of anxious labour of gious opinions of those who wanted which they had little conception, while them or the special necessities of the it would create heartburning and oppo- district. There was to be a special resition in almost every district in which port in every case in which a grant was they exercised this power. There might made to a new voluntary school; but be Departmental reasons for the change, there was nothing in the Scotch Act but they could not be aware of the labour about refusing a grant to any public they were undertaking. With regard school, and he felt convinced, if it had to the legal question, he thought, quite been stated that in passing the Scotch unintentionally, his noble Friend had Act power had been taken to give to somewhat strained the law. When he the Education Department the discre(Mr. W. E. Forster) was bringing in the tion to refuse grants to any new school Education Bill, he was of opinion that board school, such a provision would the Department had no power to refuse not have been passed. In the Scotch the annual grant to schools, and, there- Code of this year, however, the Departfore, thinking it necessary, in very ex- ment had inserted a Minute in which they treme cases, that they should take that had taken the words in the Scotch Act, power, he put in the special section so omitting only these words, "not being often alluded to; but the very fact that a public school;" and thus, by a stroke the House passed it, was, to him, a very of the pen, the Department had taken strong argument, if not a proof, that on themselves the power to refuse grants there was power to go beyond to every new public school. The Departthat section. In Section 9, the Act laid ment might have thought it advisable down the conditions to be fulfilled by to make this change to prevent the mulelementary schools, in order to obtain an tiplication of small schools. He did not annual Parliamentary grant. Surely, think this change necessary for that purwhen they had decided by law that cer- pose. He thought it better for the Detain conditions should be fulfilled-which partment to rely on the obstacles to the conditions were to be contained in the erection of unnecessary schools arising Minutes of the Education Department- from the expense involved in building it was stretching that section to say that and maintaining them than on the reports the Education Department should have of its own officers. He believed that not the power in their discretion to say what one school in 1,000 would be started if not schools should be wanted or not. Surely, wanted. If, however, the Government, it was almost a mockery to say by Act on a re-consideration of the whole of Parliament, that grants should be question, thought it their duty to claim Mr. W. E. Forster LORD FRANCIS HERVEY approved of the Resolution brought forward by the hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Pease), especially as there was no desire manifested to interfere with the 90th section of the Education Act. He trusted the Government would see that it had gone further than was necessary either to guard the public purse or in the interests of education. If they wished to avoid heartburnings, discontent, and dissatisfaction, they would have the law amended. If the hon. Member pressed his Motion to a division he should support him. this power, in his opinion, the proper | W. E. Forster) and the hon. Member for Parliamentary course incumbent upon Exeter (Mr. A. Mills) on the distinction them would be to propose an Amend- which they drew between the 98th clause ment of the Act, giving them the addi- of the Act and the 7th section of the tional power which they thought they Code. He thought the difference conought to possess. sisted in this-that the Act of Parliament was directory and the Code was affirmative. There was no essential difference between the two. He thought the principle of religious liberty should be the guide in matters of this sort, and he trusted that the Act of Parliament would be so interpreted by the Education Department as to enable them to give the necessary assistance to denominational schools, no matter what their religious character might be. There was one particular which should be kept in view--namely, that the principle of confidence which they extended in this respect to denominational schools, for which persons actuated by religious zeal and charitable motives made large sacrifices and considerable efforts, did not apply to board schools, which were not the offspring of religious earnestness, which involved no sacrifice on the part of the managers, but were institutions worked by means of the money of the ratepayers. MR. RAMSAY thanked the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster)—and he thought the people of Scotland would be equally grateful to the right hon. Gentleman-for the remarks he had made with reference to Scotland. He hoped that, so far as Scotland was concerned, the Education Department would re-consider the matter, for the change made in the Scotch Code had set aside the provisions of the Act of Parliament. He understood that the Code should be framed in such terms as to carry out the express provisions of the Statute; but the omission of the words "not being a public school" virtually repealed one of these provisions, and, if so, involved such a change of the law as he thought it was not competent for the Department to make. He suggested that the hon. Member for Durham should not insist on a division, and hoped that the noble Lord (Lord George Hamilton) would admit that this subject deserved consideration, and that he would see that the Code should be altered so as to make it conform with the terms of the Act of Parliament. LORD GEORGE HAMILTON said, he wished very briefly to undertake the defence of this sub-section which had been called in question to-night. Having only recently acceded to his present Office, he would have been quite willing to leave its defence to his Predecessors who framed it; but he thought it right to state why, in his opinion, the House ought not to assent to this Motion. In doing that, he must acknowledge the temperate character of the speeches of hon. Members opposite who had addressed themselves to this question. The subject under discussion was somewhat larger than would appear at first sight. The sub-section had been placed in the Act for the purpose of asserting that a discretion was placed in the hands of the Privy Council in this matter. He was MR. J. G. HUBBARD said, he en- glad to find that all the great voluntary tirely concurred in the views expressed associations interested in the promotion by the hon. Member for Durham (Mr. of religious education had acknowledged Pease), and in the object which he aimed that the past action of the Department at by his Resolution. The Government had given satisfaction. Therefore, unshould find no difficulty at all in steering less this sub-section indicated some dea clear way between the different courses parture from the principle upon which which had been suggested. He, how- the Education Department had admiever, differed from the right hon. Gen-nistered the grants, he did not see how tleman the Member for Bradford (Mr. it could give offence to any religious community. The two points upon which | had the power of refusing any loan for the hon. Member had dwelt the most a school which was deemed unnecessary. were-first, was this sub-section legal? In nearly all the cases to which the hon. and secondly, if legal, was it wise and Member for Durham had referred the expedient? Upon the first point, the Education Department were bound to Education Department contended that refuse the grant. An application was they ought to have the same discretion made for a grant for a school board as to making these annual grants as school in the Stanhope district, and it they possessed before the passing of the was refused by the Department because Act of 1870, and which was merely they thought the school unnecessary. strengthened by that Act. By that Act, It was not, therefore, competent to the the Education Department was made Education Department to give subsethe instrument by which educational quently to a voluntary school what deficiencies of different localities were they had denied to a school board pointed out, and discretion was given school. The cases to which attento the Department to call upon the tion had been called were cases in different localities to make good those which the Department had acted in strict deficiencies. The sub-section in ques- accordance with the sections in the Act tion was inserted for the purpose of of 1870 which were applicable to them, making it known that the Education and no other course would be possible Department would permit rivalry and unless that Act was altered. He thought competition among schools in all parts the House would agree with the opinion of the Kingdom, but within certain of the hon. Member for Exeter (Mr. A. limits. Hon. Members who had spoken Mills) that it was not possible, at any on this subject had made no suggestion rate, at present, to make any alteration as to the alternative action that should in the Elementary Education Acts which supply the place of that pointed out by had recently been passed. There might, this sub-section. In his opinion, the perhaps, be found some means of reonly other alternative action that could be lieving the managers of schools of a adopted was that of free trade in schools. part of the difficulty of which they now As regarded school board districts, the complained, and he would undertake to school boards were bound to supply re-consider that part of the section which the deficiencies of school accommodation, referred to non-school board districts, and in that case the Education Depart- with the view of defining, to a certain ment could not consent to the establish- extent, what, in the opinion of the ment of denominational schools after- Department, would or would not constiwards; but in non-school board districts tute an unnecessary school. The only the Department was willing, within object of the Department in endeavouring certain limits, to allow competition be- to curtail the number of schools in any tween all classes of schools. If, how-way was to promote efficiency. No one, ever, free trade in schools were to be established as a general principle, essential changes must be introduced in the Act of 1870. By the Act of 1870, school boards were established for the purpose of exercising the primary duty of providing for educational deficiencies in the localities over which they had authority, and of even providing for prospective deficiencies in those districts; and, therefore, if it were not for the control of the Education Department over the school boards in the way of expenditure, the latter would have the power of establishing ad libitum as many schools as they chose. Under the Act, the Education Department had the right to refuse a grant to any school which, in their opinion, was unnecessary, and by the Act of 1873, the Department Lord George Hamilton he thought, who had the interests of education and of the schools at heart, would desire to see abolished the discretion entrusted to the Department in reference to the making of grants; but many who had studied the question might think that there should be some modification of the existing rules, and it was with a view to this that he would take the matter in hand, without, however, pledging himself to any particular course. He saw no insuperable difficulty in the way of making grants to bona fide schools which had been in existence for some little time, and which had a sufficiently large attendance, and he therefore hoped the hon. Member for Durham would not think it necessary to press his Motion to a division; if he did, he (Lord George Hamilton) would move the Previous Question, as he agreed with many of the arguments of the hon. Gentleman, but not with his conclusions. MR. PEASE said, he was satisfied with the assurance of the noble Lord, and would ask the House for leave to withdraw the Motion, which he had put upon the Paper in no spirit of hostility to the general scope of the Education Acts or the manner in which the Department had administered them. MR. SAMPSON LLOYD said, he regretted that this wholly unnecessary Minute was not to be withdrawn, for it was likely to cause great dissatisfaction. The Education Department would do wisely to recognize the absolute necessity of free trade in schools in all districts. As an advocate of denominational education, and at the same time of fair play, he believed that if they were to continue the denominational system, the law should be made equal in its operation to all forms of religious belief, and that no hard-and-fast line should be held by the Education Department in dealing with these schools. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. PARLIAMENTARY REPORTING. MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE. attain them all completely; because we desire to have correct reports, we desire to have full reports, we desire to have reports which shall not be unnecessarily or very long delayed in their publication, and we desire not to be burdened with a great mass of unnecessary matter. It is obviously very difficult to draw the line so as to attain the maximum good with the minimum of inconvenience; but I believe a well-selected Committee-one that will attend to the subject, and will receive evidence-may be able to do a very good service to the House. Without further remark, therefore, I will move for the appointment of a Select Committee to consider the question of Parliamentary Reporting. MAJOR NOLAN: I hope the Chancellor of the Exchequer will make this Committee a large Committee, and for this reason. There are two or three Irish Members who are very anxious to serve upon it. My hon. Colleague the Member for the county of Galway (Mr. Mitchell Henry) was the first to draw attention to this subject. Then, there is the hon. Member for New Ross (Mr. Dunbar), who is, I believe, the only Member of this House who has been in the Reporters' Gallery; and there is also the hon. and learned Member for Louth (Mr. Sullivan), who has been a good deal connected with newspapers and reporting matters. These three hon. Gentlemen would be very competent to serve on such a Committee, and, therefore, I hope the Chancellor of the Exchequer will make it sufficiently large to include them. Motion agreed to. question of Parliamentary Reporting.”—(Mr. Select Committee appointed, "to consider the Chancellor of the Exchequer.) THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Sir, I beg to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to consider the question of Parliamentary Reporting. I do not know whether the House will think it desirable that I should occupy their time by any discussion upon this question. I should rather apprehend that it would be more convenient not to do so, and I will simply say that the object I have in view in moving the appointment of this Committee is not simply to consider the question which is involved in the recent new arrangement with Mr. Hansard, but I also propose that the Committee should consider any other arrangements, or the propriety of entering into any other arrangements, which may be thought desirable. I believe there are several hon. Gentlemen in this House who have paid a good deal of attention to this subject, and some have expressed a desire to bring before us their various views. No doubt, the matter is rather a complex one, and the objects are of a SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON, character which render it impossible to in rising to move for leave to bring in And, on June 17, Committee nominated as follows:-Mr. WILLIAM HENRY SMITH, Mr. WILLIAM EDWARD FORSTER, Viscount CRICHTON, Mr. LYON PLAYFAIR, Sir ALEXANDER GORDON, Mr. WALTER, Lord FRANCIS HERVEY, Mr. DUNBAR, Mr. HALL, Mr. MITCHELL HENRY, Sir HENRY WOLFF, Mr. BARCLAY, and Mr. MILLS :Power to send for persons, papers, and records; Five to be the quorum.-(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.) : HUTCHINSON, Mr. CowEN, and Major ARBUTH- EPPING FOREST BILL. LEAVE. a Bill for the disafforestation of Epping | ment at the commencement of the SesForest, and the preservation and ma- sion, and it then became a question with nagement of the uninclosed parts thereof the Government how that scheme should as an open space for the recreation and be dealt with-whether it should be enjoyment of the public, and for other dealt with in the form of a Provisional purposes, said, the House had had, on Order, or in some other form. There more than one occasion, the subject of were certain technical difficulties in the Epping Forest before it. The old argu- way of bringing the scheme forward in ment had been that inclosures were bene- the ordinary form, and the Government ficial to the public; and, in consequence had to consider what steps should be of an opinion of the Law Officers of 1853, taken, anxious as it was that a final the rights of the Crown over 3,000 or settlement should be made. The Act 4,000 acres had been sold, and the lords of 1871 contemplated a final settlement, of manors had made a great number of and the Government thought that by ininclosures. But, in the year 1860, an Ad- troducing a Bill, without re-opening dress to the Crown was carried, express- again the old difficulties, they might ing a hope that the sale of Crown rights carry out the original intention. The over the Forest would be prevented. In Bill was drawn, and it handed over to 1865, the right hon. Gentleman the the City the Forest to be preserved as an Member for Greenwich (Mr. Gladstone) open space for the public for ever. Great had a Bill passed, transferring the Crown care had been taken, and litigation rights from the Office of Woods and would, it was hoped, be avoided. The Forests to that of the First Commissioner Bill set up an arbitration to decide what of Works. Subsequent inclosures kept were "gardens" and "curtilages," and public attention alive to the subject; and what should be paid to the lords of in 1870 the hon. Member for Hackney manors. The case was one for agree(Mr. Fawcett) carried an Address to the ment between the parties interested. He Crown, to the effect that the Common believed that the Government scheme should be preserved as an open space had met with considerable favour by all for the enjoyment of the public-the who had interest in the suit before the first time that principle had been recog- Master of the Rolls. The Bill, he hoped, nized in the House of Commons. As a would prove a permanent settlement of a result of that Address, the then Chan- long-vexed question. When it was cellor of the Exchequer, the right hon. printed, it would be found that the meaGentleman the Member for the Univer- sure would carry out the principal resity of London (Mr. Lowe), brought in commendations of the scheme suggested a Bill which he said would, by a com- by the Commissioners. The hon. Mempromise, secure the just rights of the ber concluded by moving for leave to public. The Bill was brought in late in the introduce the Bill. Session and did not pass, and, in the following Session, a Resolution adverse to the proposal of the Bill, which would, it was said, only secure 600 acres to the public, was moved by his right hon. Friend the Member for South Hampshire, and carried by a large majority. This was followed by a Bill appointing a Commission to inquire into the question, and the next year another Bill was passed, under which certain suits which had been instituted were stayed, save one called the City suit, in which the Master of the Rolls made a decree with respect to the right of the commoners in 1874. The matter was argued at considerable length before the Commissioners, and a preliminary Report was made in 1875. In 1877, a final Report was presented in the shape of a scheme which was before the Govern Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson MR. SHAW LEFEVRE expressed his satisfaction that the Government had brought in this Bill, and hoped it might be a final solution of this most important question, and would permanently secure to the public this great open Forest, and an end put to one of the most gigantic systems of land robbery that there had ever been in this country. Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members being found present, MR. LOCKE said, that there had been great difficulty at first in approving the measure, and it might still be necessary to wait and consider what were its provisions. Motion agreed to. |