similar attempt was being made in Leeds; and that these plans held out some hope of a settlement.

Mr. Milner Gibson supported the bill of Mr. Fox. Mr. Adderley (Lord Norton) ridiculed the idea that the separation of religious and secular instruction implied hostility to religion—and Mr. Cobden showed that the local Manchester and Salford scheme had already got into difficulties. The whole body of the Roman Catholics had seceded, because the Committee made it a fundamental principle that in all schools erected at the public expense, the authorised version of the Bible should be read. Mr. Fox's bill was lost upon the first reading.

In March, 1852, Lord Derby became Prime Minister and announced that if the question of parliamentary reform was disposed of during the session, the next great measure undertaken would be the establishment of a system of public education. The statement of the Government intention was not favourable to the prospects of the Manchester and Salford Education Bill-the second reading of which was moved by Mr. Brotherton, who avowed his preference for a secular system, but which he was disposed to sink, rather than permit the continuance of street instruction. The bill was presented to the House as a private measure, and a postponement was asked for, to enable the Corporation to oppose it if they thought fit. It proposed a rate in aid of existing schools, the management of which was to be undisturbed-but subject to a conscience clause for the protection of children whose parents objected to religious instruction. In new schools the authorised version of the Bible was required to be read. The bill was supported by the Bishops, the clergy, the Wesleyans, and many dissenting ministers. It was opposed by Jews, Roman Catholics, the Society of Friends, and the teachers and superintendents of the Sunday School Union. On the second reading it appeared that the Manchester Town Council had

passed a resolution adverse to it, and that the Corporation of Salford had approved it. It was resisted in the House by Mr. Milner Gibson and Mr. Roebuck on the ground that it was a public bill, and should be proceeded with as such; and by Mr. Walpole, the Home Secretary, on the general principles it raised. It was eventually referred, together with the bill of the National Public School Association, to a Select Committee, on which with others, sat Mr. T. M. Gibson, Mr. Bright, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Fox, Lord John Russell, and Mr. Gladstone. The Committee sat for two sessions. A large mass of evidence was taken, but there was no report on the merits of the plans, and the bills disappeared. (1) In the same session the Congregationalists and the Baptist Union opposed both of the Manchester bills.

The session of 1852 was also signalised by a dispute respecting the management clauses of the Church schools, the stringency of which had been relaxed by Lord Derby's Government; giving increased powers over the schoolmaster to the Bishops and clergy, both in relation to religious and moral government. A strong opposition to this change proceeded from within the National Society itself, and a section of the members threatened an attempt to alter the charter, and to suspend the issue of the Queen's letter. A large secession from the Society seemed imminent, and was only averted by the cancelling of the Minute by Lord Aberdeen's Government in the next session.

The year 1853 witnessed some important alterations by which the cost of education, as administered by the Department, was suddenly and largely increased. The capitation grant was a conspicuous feature in the new plans of the Government, and the way in which it was adopted is a curious illustration of the manner in which the power of the Education Department was capable of extension, almost 1 Parliamentary Report, 1852, No. 499, 400.

without the exercise of parliamentary authority and supervision. Lord Aberdeen's Government, which was formed after the general election of 1852, had put the necessity of extensive changes in our education system in the van of their professions. Lord John Russell was President of the Council in the new Ministry, and his devotion, for many years, to the details of the administration of the Education Department, and his well known interest in the question had raised great expectations. Mr. Gladstone, also, was a member of the Cabinet, and it was understood that he, with others, was pledged to bring forward a liberal measure on the "comprehensive" system. Archdeacon Denison wrote, "It is their darling project; the only idea of the method and manner of education, of which their minds appear to be capable." (1)

It was on the ground of Mr. Gladstone's association with the Whig Cabinet, and especially on the suspicion of his heresy on this question, that his re-election at Oxford was opposed in the beginning of 1853. The resolution to oppose him was taken at a meeting of the National Society. Archdeacon Denison wrote from Mr. Dudley Perceval's committee room, "it should, I think, have been sufficient to ascertain and fix a Churchman's vote, to see Mr. Gladstone in the same Committee of Council with Lord John Russell and Lord Lansdowne; who, as they sit in the Cabinet, nominally without office, but in effect as joint Ministers of public instruction, will have ample leisure, and be the better enabled to devise and mature a scheme for employing the power and influence of the Coalition Government to undermine, and finally to destroy by law the parochial system of the Church of England." (2)

Under the new scheme of the Government the school population was divided into two classes, urban and rural. To provide for the former the Borough Bill was introduced. The 1 Notes of My Life, 101. 2 Ibid, 101.

parishes were dealt with by a Minute of the Committee of Council.

In explaining the Borough Bill Lord John Russell went over the well-worn history of the question, the long list of attempts and failures, and the controversies which had prevented union and effective action. The Government had concluded that they ought to strengthen and improve the voluntary system rather than set up anything in its place. Some returns of the National Society, collected in 1847, showed that the school pence in the Church schools amounted to £413,004 per annum. These figures were hardly consistent with those of the Registrar General in 1851, which gave the payments of scholars in connection with all the schools of the religious bodies as £259,134. But Lord John Russell took the higher estimate, and expressed his gratification that the poor contributed half-a-million towards education. This was evidently a sum of money which, for financial reasons, the Coalition Ministry could not afford to dispense with, and it decided them against any attempt to introduce a large measure for free schools. A liberal plan was again made subordinate to the straits of office. The principle of free education was supported, at this time, by the most enlightened politicians of the day, and was becoming increasingly popular. It was a prominent feature of the bill of the Manchester and Salford Committee, which was prepared at the Education Department. But the Government dared not face the sacrifice of even a quarter of a million per year. Therefore, instead of the great measure which Lord Derby had promised in 1852, the Whigs and Peelites offered the country another instalment of the patchwork system. The definite proposal was that in incorporated towns the Town Council might, with the assent of two-thirds of their body, levy a rate, not to establish independent schools, but in aid of those in existence, and of further voluntary efforts. The rate was to be applied

to pay twopence a week for each scholar, in respect of whom fourpence or fivepence was contributed from other sources. There was no provision for the erection of new schools. The Council was to have authority to appoint a Committee, partly of its own members, and partly of residents, to distribute sums raised by rate.

The bill was coldly received in Parliament. It was not actively opposed, but it was regarded by the friends of education as a half measure. No enthusiasm for it was shown in the country, and the Government made no effort to pass it into law. So little encouragement did the Ministry receive, that another measure for the regulation of education endowments which was promised in the House of Lords was also abandoned.

But while the Borough Bill collapsed, and the towns were left without provision, the rural districts were much surprised by an unexpected subsidy. This was effected by a Minute of the Committee of Council. Its operation was limited in the first instance to agricultural parishes and unincorporated towns, containing not more than 5,000 inhabitants. It provided, that on certain conditions as to attendance and teaching, and contributions from other sources, a capitation grant of six shillings per scholar in boys schools, and five shillings in girls schools should be paid to the managers. The intention was to create a premium on regularity of attendance, (1) and to a certain extent this was probably accomplished. A much more striking consequence was the encouragement of dishonest practices in the enumeration of attendances-which later became a scandal to public administration. The education vote rose at a bound from £160,000 to £260,000, and on the extension of the Minute in January, 1856, to the whole country, another £200,000 was required. This was a great boon to the clergy, and did 1 Shuttleworth's Public Education, 356.