promise, should be met with a clear and definite declaration that he cannot have our vote."

"This may lead to the breaking up of the Liberal party : When the Liberal party is false to its noblest principles, it is time that it should be broken up. The 'Liberal party,' which carried the most objectionable clauses of this Bill by Conservative votes in the House of Commons, must either be willing to retrace its steps, or else must depend for continuance of power upon Conservative votes in the country."

Mr. J. Charles Cox, of Belper, read a paper called "Blots in the Bill." In the course of his paper, Mr. Cox said, Though an ardent supporter of the Government at the last election, I refuse to see the slightest difference between this present injustice, and the old Church-rate question, which we thought had been finally stifled. The matter is beyond argument, and I for one, though a magistrate of my county, have made up my mind to refuse to pay one farthing of any such rate, in the same way that I refused to pay the old Churchrate, and I believe that the truest policy of the League would be to advise all its adherents to do the same."

The Rev. Sonley Johnstone described the working of the Act in Wales, and the excessive rancour and virulence which its introduction had caused.

The Rev. J. W. Caldicott, Head Master of the Bristol Grammar School, characterised the Act as a bundle of compromises, combining the utmost possible magnificence of promise, with the utmost possible shabbiness of performance. The Act said, "every child ought to be educated; but if the majority in any place so pleased, they might allow the children to remain ignorant. The Act said the parent who was proved to have neglected the education of his child ought to be punished; but it left the proof of the offence in the parents hands. The Act said inefficient schools ought not to be allowed to exist, but they might have as many as they

chose, and they might cram them full of children. The Act said the State ought not to intermeddle in matters of religion; but yet every ratepayer might be taxed to pay for the teaching of his neighbour's creed."

The second day of the meeting was devoted chiefly to the discussion of the Irish and Scotch systems. The Rev. David Wilson, D.D., of Limerick, a member of the Commission appointed in 1868 to enquire into the condition of primary education in Ireland, described in an elaborate paper the working of the mixed system in Ireland. He impugned the fairness and impartiality of the report presented by the Commissioners. The Rev. John Scott Porter of Belfast, a member of the deputation from the Irish League, pleaded for the maintenance in its integrity of the Irish system, as the only guarantee for the religious freedom of the minority.

Mr. Miall, Mr. Walter Morrison, and Mr. J. H. Burges took part in the discussion. Mr. Morrison cautioned the meeting against the well-known proclivities of some of the Cabinet in favour of a denominational system for Ireland.

Papers were also read by the Rev. Robert Craig, of Glasgow, and by Professor Nichol, from the Scotch Education League, on Education in Scotland; and by Sir Charles Dilke and Mr. Collings on Free Schools. The Rev. William Binns, Birkenhead, Rev. Mr. Gould, Norwich, Mr. Cremer, London, the Rev. J. Haslam, Leeds, Dr. Lunge, South Shields, and the Rev. S. A. Steinthal, continued the discussion. The Chairman announced, at the close of the meeting, a large increase of subscriptions. The proceedings were closed by a Soirée in the Town Hall, given by the Mayor, Mr. G. B. Lloyd, to the members of the League.

A full report of the meeting was widely circulated. The papers and speeches contain an admirable exposition of the lines of the controversy at the period.

The agitation was immediately followed up in all the large towns, and within the next three months a hundred and twenty meetings were held in England and Wales, which were attended by the Officers or deputations from the Executive. These meetings were almost without exception, free and open to the public, and though they were often scenes of great excitement, and sometimes of disorder, they convinced the leaders of the movement that the great preponderance of public feeling was on their side. Amongst the new adherents was Earl Rnssell, who wrote to Mr. Dixon publicly joining the League, and strongly condemning the Government policy.

The beginning of 1872 marks a new period in the growth and direction of the agitation, which may be more conveniently described in a separate chapter.

CHAPTER VII.

PERIOD. FROM THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF 1872 TO THE GENERAL ELECTION, 1874.

THE Government, in bringing in the Education Bill had professed a desire to supplement the denominational system. But the controversies of 1870-71, and a year's administration of the Act, had convinced the most sceptical that their real purpose was to perpetuate, strengthen and extend it. The large increase of annual grants, the thousands of new denominational schools endowed with building grants, the undisguised administration of the Act in the interests of Church schools, admitted of no other interpretation. There was also, in the background, a suspicion, always on the alert, that a similar system would be extended to Scotland and Ireland. These new conditions threw upon the Executive the responsibility of considering how the original scheme of the League could be adapted to the altered circumstances, in such a manner as to secure efficient local control over the public schools, to promote the observance of sound principles in public expenditure, and at the same time to afford to all denominations the fullest opportunity of giving religious instruction to their own scholars, at their own labour and cost.

The step now taken by the League was the sequence of the aggressive coalition between the Ministry, the Clergy, and the Tories. Until the Denominational system had been encouraged to claim fresh privileges, and to usurp new ground, the League had been content that it should be left pretty much alone, to merge by degrees, and as experience should suggest, in a national system. The idea of gradual

extinction was now abandoned for that of active conversion, having regard, of course for just privileges, and the interests of religion.

At a meeting of the Executive Committee held on the 18th of January, 1872, it was resolved to submit the following recommendations for the approval of the members.

"1.-The compulsory Election of School Boards in all

districts.

"2.-No schools to be recognised as public elementary schools but those under the control of elected School Boards.

3.--Existing School buildings to be placed by consent under the control of such Boards, for use during the hours of secular instruction, to be given under the direction of School Boards; the buildings to be retained for all other purposes by the denominations with which they are connected.

"4.-Any school in respect to which such control is declined, to be excluded from participation in the annual Government Grant.

"5.—In all schools provided by School Boards out of local

rates, periods entirely separate and distinct from the time allotted to ordinary school teaching may be set apart for instruction on week days. Such religious instruction to be given by denominations at their own cost, and by their own teachers appointed for that purpose, but no privilege to be given to one denomination over another. In cases of dispute appeal to be made to the Education Department."

Thus by the logic of facts, and in pursuit of elementary principles of justice, the "combined" system was once more placed before the nation. The old accusation of following "godless" and "irreligious" education was raised more