It is a pleasure to acknowledge that the Voluntaryists did not seek to spread their opinions by words alone. They were ready to tax themselves heavily in support of their consciences. The Congregational Board of Education undertook to raise £200,000 for the purpose of building schools, and up to 1859 had collected about £180,000. (1) The Voluntary Board of Education was established for the same purpose. Homerton Training College was also the result of their generosity and energy, and up to 1851 they had erected 364 elementary schools, which were wholly supported by subscriptions and school pence. With all their efforts they were no match for the Church and the Government together. The inevitable consequence was that the clergy were acquiring a wider and a stronger grasp over the system of State schools.

The year 1847 marks the third period of Ministerial proposals in regard to education. Lord John Russell had succeeded Sir Robert Peel as Prime Minister. The engrossing question of the Corn Laws had been settled, and it was understood that the new Government would give special attention to education, and would bring forward a comprehensive national scheme. The proposals were introduced by Lord John Russell with an earnestness and mass of detail which indicated that the Whig Cabinet attached great importance to the question. (3) But the measures hardly corresponded in grasp and comprehensiveness with the speech which introduced them. The Minutes were laid before the House in April, 1847. They authorised the President of the Council to frame regulations respecting the apprenticeship of the pupil teachers. They provided for exhibitions to Normal schools, to be held by "Queen's scholars;" for payment to masters for training pupil teachers; for increased grants to Normal schools; for grants and pensions to masters trained in 1 Newcastle Commission, 6, 273. 2 Life of Peel, by Guizot.

Normal schools; and for grants to schools of industry. The pupil teachers in Church schools were placed under the instruction of the clergy in religious matters, and were required to have a certificate of moral character from a clergyman.

The discussions upon this plan show how completely education had come to be looked at as a matter of sectional interest, rather than as a national concern. The Voluntaryists, who comprised the largest section of Protestant Dissenters, magnified it into a great and elaborate scheme, calculated to strengthen the hands of the Church, to which State Education was being rapidly abandoned by the Dissenters. It was received with grief and dread, and united the bulk of the Nonconformists in a firm opposition. The Unitarians were an exception. They supported this as they have done all measures, great or small, for the advancement of education. Meetings were held in London and in many provincial towns against the scheme. In Birmingham the Mayor called a town's meeting, at which the Rev. John Angell James proposed a resolution condemning the minutes, which was carried notwithstanding the opposition of a vigorous minority led by the Rev. G. S. Bull, and the recorder Mr. M. D. Hill. (1) In London between three and four hundred delegates from congregations met at Exeter Hall and tried to overcome the Ministry by threatening to withdraw their support at the elections. This menace drew a strong protest from Lord John Russell in the House of Commons.

The Church party in Parliament, and the Conservatives gave their approval to the scheme. The High Church party had not taken alarm as yet. The management clauses about which such stormy differences arose had not been brought under the notice of Parliament. Bishop Blomfield expressed his approval in the Lords, and thought it was exceedingly

1 Langford's Modern Birmingham, 1, 127.

wise and prudent not to interfere with the existing system. (1) Lord Brougham denounced it as no plan, but the imperfect substitute of a measure promised and expected, but withheld, and warmly complained of the Church and the sects that they loved controversy more than education. Sir Robert Peel supported the Government in the Commons, and put forcibly before the House the condition of the Irish population of Manchester, on whose behalf he made an unanswerable appeal.

Before the vote was moved there were some pertinent questions put to Ministers respecting the positions of the Wesleyans and Roman Catholics. It was elicited that the Government were manoeuvering to secure the support of both parties. The existing Minutes provided that aid should only be given to schools in which the authorised version was used. The Wesleyans had been told, on authority which they regarded as sufficient, that the Catholics would not be allowed to share in the grant, and they had also been conciliated by being allowed to use their own catechisim and to nominate their own Inspectors. (2) But in the House of Commons, Lord John Russell, without pledging the Government to a promise, said enough to satisfy the Roman Catholics that a new Minute Iwould be introduced which would admit them to a share of the grant. This was actually done at an early date.

Lord John Russell, in moving the vote of £100,000, anticipated some of the objections which would be urged against the Minutes, and admitted that it would have been better if at the beginning of the century a united system had been devised. But every step taken had made it more difficult to go back. He condemned the intolerance of the National Society in insisting that all children who attended its schools should learn the catechism and go to Church. was weakly urged, on the part of the Government, that the

1 Hansard, T. S., 89, 858. 2 Ibid, 91, 818.

It

Minutes did not empower the conductors of schools to compel attendance at Church and Sunday schools-they did it on their own responsibility. The Government did not think that the making the grant entitled them to impose terms on the National schools which they would not be willing to adopt, and the Minister expressed the fear, which all experience proves to have been unwarranted—that the imposition of conditions protecting the children of Dissenters would prevent the National Society from accepting aid, and lead to the closing of its schools.

The grant was strongly opposed on behalf of the Nonconformists, and led to an animated discussion. The debate was remarkable, chiefly for the speeches of Mr. Macaulay and Mr. Bright. Mr. Macaulay, who was a member of the Committee of Council, supported the proposition of his colleagues in the Ministry. His speech, while not a strong defence of the particular Minutes, was a most able exposition of the reasons in favour of State education, and as such it gave great offence to the voluntaryists. Mr. Bright's speech was an attack on a system of education, conducted solely on Church and State principles. He showed that every step taken between 1839 and 1847 had for its tendency the aggrandizement of the Church, and that the object and result of the Minutes proposed, would be to give enormous and increased powers to the Establishment. But Mr. Bright it is clear did not share the extreme views of the voluntary party. His objections were based on the wider view of religious freedom and equality. He said,—

"Free us from the trammels of your Church-set religion apart from the interference of the State. If you will make full provision for education, let it not depend upon the doctrines of a particular creed, and then you will find the various sects in this country will be as harmonious on the question of education as are the people of the United States of America."

"Nothing tends more to impede the progress of liberty, nothing is more fatal to independence of spirit in the public, than to add to the powers of the priesthood in the matter of education. If you give them such increased power by legislative enactments, you do more than you could effect by any other means to enslave and degrade a people subject to their influence." (1)

The Government proposals were carried by an enormous majority, and subsequent motions by Sir William Molesworth to admit Roman Catholics (2) to the benefit of the grant, and by Mr. Ewart for a conscience clause to protect the children of the Dissenters, were lost. A small incident in the House of Lords increased the estrangement between the Nonconformists and the Department. A Minute was laid on the table to relieve the managers of dissenting schools from certifying as to the religious knowledge of pupil teachers. In the explanations respecting it, the Bishop of London said that the Church was not prepared to acquiesce in modifications and additions from time to time to suit the prejudices of Dissenters. "There was nothing in the compact between the Church and the Government on this subject which would allow the latter to infringe on the Minutes of the Privy Council, which were prepared with care, and which it was understood were to be fully and fairly carried out." (3) The suspicions of the Dissenters were confirmed, that all steps taken by the Government were made after consultation with, and with the approval of, the dominant sect.

The Voluntaryists were now determined to put their strength to a crucial test. It was, however, abundantly clear that they did not command the numbers or the united enthusiasm which in 1843 had enabled the Dissenting body 1 Bright's Speeches, 2, 509, 7.

2 Roman Catholic schools were admitted to grants in 1848, and Jewish schools in 1852.

3 Hansard, T. S., 94, 666.