ment to guard themselves against this misrepresentation. Let them give an assurance that the fueros of the nursery and the schoolroom shall be religiously respected and maintained; and let them assure that branch of the agricultural classes who are interested in the growth of birch, that, whilst it is hoped that the severities of feudal instruction may be hereafter mitigated by the force of opinion, they do not propose any direct or arbitrary interference with their vested rights. The measure itself, it is believed, will provide an adequate and a just compensation. When the history of our times comes hereafter to be written, it will appear scarcely credible to posterity how great has been the supineness and the neglect of the British Legislature with regard to Education. The foundation of schools in the earlier days of England, was considered to be a duty 'worthy kings.' At Eton, and under the magical roof of King's College chapel, Henry's pious shade' is still worshipped, with fond but excusable idolatry. Wolsey, William of Wickham, Henry the VIII. himself, his young and zealous successor, all considered the education of the young to be a work of piety and of patriotism. In Roman Catholic times, the establishment of schools was connected with the foundation of cathedrals; and even in the times of the Reformation this sacred duty was not overlooked or forgotten. Witness the foundation of the princely see of Durham, and those ancient statutes and charters, which enabled many of the godly who rejected the Irish Appropriation Clause as 'flat burglary,' to tolerate and justify in England the foundation of a new university, maintained at the expense of the chapters! Strange that a statute of Henry VIII. could find neither grace nor favour in their sight, whilst charters granted by the same monarch, mero motu et speciali gratiâ, are considered as binding and valid. The enforcement of the legislative will of the State was called spoliation; the fulfilment of the pleasure of an arbitrary monarch is lauded by bishops and archbishops as respectful piety. We presume that the same parties would prefer the orders of the Star-Chamber, or the decrees of the High Commission Court, to the judgments of Lord Denman or of Lord Cottenham. It required a most singular union of separate causes to break up this deadly calm and torpor. It required the combined efforts of three individuals, most strongly contrasted in characters, in habits, and in stations, to move the waters, and to imbue them with a healing agency. George III., Henry Brougham, and Joseph Lancaster, all espoused the cause of Education. It required the combined exertions of the monarch, the philosophical statesman and orator, and the Quaker, to rouse the people of this country from their apathy. The wish of the British King, that every child within his dominions might be enabled to read the Bible, was more enlarged and generous than the lower but somewhat analogous aspirations of Henry IV. of France. The distinction between the prayers of the two monarchs, is somewhat characteristic of the character of the two nations. The French king desired for his subjects the blessing of a good meal; the British monarch wished to procure for his free people a good and religious education. When the establishment of general schools was recommended by Joseph Lancaster, we are old enough to remember the scorn by which it was received in some quarters-the distrust and suspicions manifested in others. The offer of a serpent for a fish, or a stone for bread, was not considered more cruel, than the substitution of a school for the house of correction, and the Bible for the stocks, was thought to be speculative and Utopian. But the truth has at length prevailed; and, thanks to free discussion, to Parliamentary enquiries, and to the advancing necessities of mankind, the class on whom might safely be conferred M. Jouy's distinction of the chevaliers de l'éteignoir, are awed into silence, if they are not forced into conviction. Still, nothing practical was done by the Legislature till the year 1833, when, for the first time, a vote was proposed to the House of Commons for the encouragement of Popular Education. The Government of Lord Grey are entitled to the immortal honour of having taken the first step; and the name of Lord Spenser, who recommended the vote, should on this, as on many other grounds, be for ever looked up to in our land with reverence and with affection. It has been objected, that the vote was wholly inadequate, being for the moderate sum of L.20,000. We approve of that moderation. A new experiment was about to be tried. Caution and discretion were indispensable to ensure its success. Had the vote been lavishly made, it might have been imprudently administered. If the result of this Government effort had been to supersede, and not to stimulate individual and combined benevolence, the last state of our instruction would have been worse than the first. This evil was anticipated, and effectually guarded against by the Treasury Minute of 1833. These annual votes were contrived to be made without opposition, for six successive sessions. The funds provided by Parliament were administered by the Treasury, and were also extended to North Britain. A sum of L.150,000 has been so voted and expended, in aid of a further sum of L.293,236, raised from private sources; and school-houses, capable of containing 262,987 scholars, have been provided. Thus far, it is admitted on all hands, the mechanism of the system has worked well; and it has worked the better, because it has worked noiselessly, without exciting observation or creating opposition. These Parliamentary funds were administered by the Treasury through the agency of two societies, the National Society and the British and Foreign School Society. The schools of both profess to be open to all persons without distinction. In both, the sacred Scriptures are read as an essential part of the system; but the prelates and clergy of the Established Church are the principal directors and governors of the National Society: the catechism is taught, and attendance at church is recommended, if not enforced. However slight this distinction, its effect is to give to the National Schools a sectarian character, and to commit their direction expressly to the established clergy. On the contrary, the British and Foreign School Society enjoys the full confidence of the Dissenters; whilst it throws no obstacle in the way of the education of the children of Churchmen. The National Society is thus to a certain extent exclusive; the British and Foreign Schools are comprehensive. Under the Treasury Minutes, two essential principles were, however, left unprovided for. No inspection of the schools was enforced; no reports were made to Parliament of the practical working of the system; neither were any steps taken to ascertain the qualifications of the teachers, or the mode in which their duties were discharged. The statistics of the schools were alone consideredthe size of the school-room, the cost of the building, and the number of the scholars; but the quality of the education given, the moral improvement produced, were matters of which the Board of Treasury could scarcely take cognisance, consistently with the discharge of its multifarious duties. The inflexible rule of giving aid in a definite proportion, too, as compared with the local subscriptions, was considered by a Select Committee to act unjustly towards some of the poorest but most populous districts, where it became difficult to provide the requisite amount of local contributions. Some of the friends of the British and Foreign School Society objected to the proceedings of the Treasury, because the Parliamentary grant was not apportioned equally between the two societies. But their complaint was evidently unjust, as, had their principle been adopted, a greater amount of public aid would have been necessary for the education of a smaller number of children; and an unjust inequality would have been at once produced. So long as the distribution of the public fund is made to depend on the number of children, and the amount of private subscription, so long the schools connected with the Established Church-the most numerous as well as the most wealthy of the various Christian professions in England-must, in justice, receive the larger portion of the annual vote. In order to give full effect to the intentions of Parliament, it was proposed by Lord John Russell that the distribution of this vote should be transferred from the Treasury to a Committee of Privy Council; consisting of Lord Lansdowne, President of the Council, Lord Duncannon, Lord Privy Seal, Lord John Russell, Secretary of State for the Home Department, Mr Spring Rice, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr Labouchere, Master of the Mint. It was further proposed, that this Committee should appoint Inspectors to report upon the condition of all schools to be hereafter aided by the public; and that a Model School should be established under their direction, for the education and training of Masters, which should be open to all persons whatever. In this Model School, it was proposed that the sacred Scriptures should be read; but that Roman Catholics, if they desired it, should be allowed to read their translation. It was also proposed, agreeably to the unanimous recommendation of a Committee of the House of Commons, that the principle of one fixed rate of local contribution should not be enforced where grounds of special exception could be shown; and, further, that aid might be given to schools which were unconnected with either of the societies already adverted to. We have been thus particular in describing the plan of the Government, because it has been misconceived by some friends, as well as misrepresented by the enemy. We feel confident that hereafter, however it may be censured for not going sufficiently far, it will not be_condemned as being too bold a measure. No sooner was the proposition made to Parliament, than the Tories and their ecclesiastical friends rang out the alarm-bell-fired all the beacons --sent the burning cross through the land-and summoned all their orthodox retainers to the strife of tongues. Like vicious horses, however level was the road, and however even the fences, they started at a straw, and collected together the straws to start at. We recollect the case of a very amiable but somewhat fanciful lady, who having quitted, for a rural residence, a house where she had been disturbed by the band of the Foot Guards, declared that her sleep was still disturbed by the unbearable chirping of the sparrows. If we could believe in Tory sincerity, we should be compelled to believe that, in respect to this plan of education, their reasons were as weak as the nerves of our fair invalid were excitable. That part of the plan which was the most objected to, was the permission offered to Roman Catholics to use the Douay version of the Scriptures. We should like to know, among those who have raised this objection, how many there are who have critically compared the two versions. We have done so; and undoubtedly, from various reasons, critical and doctrinal, we prefer and abide by the version of the Protestant Church. But it is right to mention, that the Bishop of Norwich stated in the House of Lords, in a speech characterised by vigour and courage, that the Douay version is a translation from the Vulgate, ' which the University of Oxford, in 1679, pronounced to be the 'best translation of the Scriptures; and this above sixty years ' after the publication of our own Bible. The Rhemish Testa'ment was also reprinted by the same University, and distributed largely among French emigrants after the Revolution.' The Douay version was also admitted into the Irish schools in Kildare Street, established by Sir Robert Peel, and patronised by those pillars of orthodoxy, Mr Sergeant Jackson, Mr Shaw, and Mr Lefroy. Away, then, with this absurd and senseless cant, which deals with this version as if it was infected with the plague! remove the hypocritical veil which is cast over the harsh features of intolerance-accuse the minority of Oxford, if you will, of want of Christian principle-reprove the Irish Orangemen as latitudinarians-or admit that the objection you now raise is false and deceptive! But it was added, if this concession be made to the Roman Catholics, a similar sacrifice must also be made to the Unitarians; and that their 'established version' must also be admitted into the model school. We should like to know, from these cavillers, to what version they allude; and where the established Unitarian translation is to be found. They are driven to a false statement, in order to support an untenable argument. Besides which, they are resolved to be more scrupulous for the Unitarians than the Unitarians are for themselves. Not satisfied with being plus royalistes que le Roi, they are also plus Catholiques que le Pape; and knowing, as they ought and must have known, that no Unitarian ever objected to the use, in schools, of the translation of the Established Church, they suggest a scruple which does not exist, to create a difficulty which could never arise practically. That portion of the scheme, however, which contemplated the foundation of a model school, conducted under the authority of the Government, was postponed. We regret the necessity which led to this temporary abandonment of one of the most useful parts of the whole measure; and we trust that the time may not be far distant, when we may yet see such an establishment in active operation; and giving light and vitality to many places of educa |