by. No greater danger to the Church's influence with the young can be conceived than the extinction of our elementary schools, and whilst churchmen should protect them for religious reasons, the ratepayers at large will find it infinitely to their advantage to prevent the extravagance of the School Board system undermining those volunteer educational arrangements which are so valuable alike to Church and State.

The Rev. E. H. MCNEILE, Incumbent of St. Paul's,
Prince's Park, and Hon. Canon of Liverpool.

I WAS most thankful to hear the remarks which were made by Mr. Roe, the Diocesan Inspector for West Somerset, respecting unpunctuality in attending school, as punctuality on the part of the scholars is, in one respect, the key of our position. If children are unpunctual in their attendance they are not taught what we wish them to be taught on the subject of religion. The matter of attendance weighed so strongly on my mind in the few years which succeeded the Act of 1870, that I felt that something must be done. Our schools professed to be Church of England schools, but we found, by actual experience, that a considerable number of children were not receiving any religious instruction worthy of the name, because they did not go to school punctually. There was a tendency to accept the minimum of attendance required by law as the maximum, and this must be wholly devoted to other subjects. Mr. Roe said that the remedy is to close the school doors, and exclude late comers, and that it must be done I am thankful to be able to say that it has been done, and that on a large scale. In Liverpool the whole of the schools, with one or two insignificant exceptions, close the doors at a quarter-past nine every morning, and a quarter before two every afternoon, thus excluding all late comers. The consequence of this is that the teacher is not interrupted by the dropping in of children during the religious lesson. There is another distinct advantage in the punctual attendance of children at school, namely, that when you have the whole of the scholars present, you can, to some extent, adapt your time table in the way it used to be adapted before the Act of 1870, and not give the religious instruction in every class at the same hour. You must have two consecutive hours of secular teaching in each class, but it need not be given throughout the whole school at the same time. Provided you have the whole of the school present during three hours, you can give religious instruction to some classes at the beginning and to others at the end, which will enable you to employ the best teachers for religious instruction in more than one class, and afford the clergyman a better opportunity of being present when it is given. The plan of closing the school doors has been adopted in Liverpool by a great deal of mutual forbearance and agreement to work together on the part of Board schools, Church schools, and schools belonging to other denominations. The agreements which all school managers have signed are of the utmost consequence to the efficient working of the religious part of our teaching. We have agreed, not only to close the doors of the schools at a quarter-past nine, but to decline to receive children from other schools without the consent of the managers and teachers of the schools they are leaving. There has also been instituted a system of rewards for regularity of attendance, which has been found to work admirably. But these rewards only affect those scholars who are fairly regular, and so come within the possibility of obtaining them. We want something to touch the lower end of the scale and cure the irregularity of the children of careless and dissolute parents, who have no chance of reaching the standard for a prize. Accordingly, in the schools with which I am connected, we have adopted the plan of raising the fees throughout the school a penny a week, and then giving to every child who has been regular, or only absent with leave, a ticket on Friday afternoon which counts for a penny on Monday morning, By this means the regular scholars pay no more than before, while the irregular fine themselves a penny a week. And the effect has been wonderful. Another matter of importance is the religious training of pupil teachers. In our part of Liverpool there is a system by which the pupil teachers of three neighbouring schools meet weekly in two classes under the instruction of the clergy, and are regularly taught in religious subjects. An attempt has also been made to co-operate with Board schools in the matter of religious instruction. There is a public spirited body in Liverpool which has done an immense amount towards the furtherance of elementary education. I refer to the Liverpool Council of Education. That body,

by a system of rewards, stimulates regularity and efficiency of teaching to a remarkable extent; and they have endeavoured to promote religious education by offering prizes for Bible knowledge. As they extend their operations over all the schools in the city, they are obliged to limit the religious teaching to the Bible itself. What has been the result? About a dozen Church schools, anxious to help forward and to promote religious teaching generally, accepted the scheme, and submitted their children to an examination conducted by the Council, but not one of the Board schools did so. Although the Board schools did not avail themselve of the scheme, nevertheless the Liverpool School Board is one of the best for promoting religious instruction in the country. The Liverpool School Board is disposed to co-operate with the Church in a friendly spirit. In my own neighbourhood there was declared to be a deficiency of school accommodation, and the School Board was going to erect a new school. We appealed to the School Board to allow us to supply the want; and the consequence was that money was raised and a Church school was built instead of a Board school. But in addition to all this our poor Church schools need help, and there ought to be a Diocesan Sustentation Fund. The Liverpool Diocesan Board of Education makes grants to poor schools amounting to about £750 annually, and no Church school as yet has been actually transferred to the School Board. What has been done in Liverpool surely might be done in every diocese in the land.

The Right Rev. the PRESIDENT.

THIS meeting has been a most useful one, and I think that a great many of the clergy and laity will go away with some valuable and practical hints. There are one or two points upon which I should like to say a few words. Mr. Braithwaite remarked that Board schools had arisen out of the efforts which had been made by the Church to establish schools. That is perfectly true; and I emphasise the remark, because I think that in the educational controversy it is only common justice to the clergy and those who worked with them forty years ago, to recognise that if it had not been for the laborious, self-denying, uphill work of the clergy at that period, it would not have been possible for national education to have been placed on the footing which it occupies at the present time. I was secretary to a Board of Education more than forty years ago, and I remember perfectly well the atmosphere in which we worked. It was an atmosphere of discouragement throughout the whole district. Farmers and other residents in the country had not then made up their minds whether it was desirable or necessary that the people should be educated; and almost every parish school started in the part of the country with which I was connected, had to be established in the midst of great difficulties. The clergy fought the battle through in a most noble manner, and it is only common justice to acknowledge the debt which the country owes to them. Many say that the Church is an impediment to the education of the people; nothing can be more contrary to the principles of the Church, and nothing can be more contradictory to the facts of history. With regard to the special subject which has come before us this afternoon, it is one in which I take a special degree of interest. I take a great interest in the religious education that is going on in our Parish Church schools. But we have been truly told that we must accept the Education Act of 1870 as an accomplished fact. The Act was the result of a compromise, and I would ask all sensible people to bear in mind that there is very small probability of it being essentially altered. If then we cannot make the Board schools all that we desire them to be, let us bring public opinion to bear upon Boards, so that the result may be that they will work up to the maximum of religious education allowed by the Act of 1870, instead of allowing their schools to drop down to the minimum; which minimum, as you know, is absolute zero. I was rather ambitious with regard to the speakers who should bring this subject before the Congress, and I flew as high as the Right Hon. W. E. Forster himself. I wrote to Mr. Forster, asking him whether he would read a paper on the subject, on which he must be better informed than any other person in the country. I received a kind letter from him, in which he stated that his engagements would not allow him to take part in our discussions; but he kindly added, "I cannot tell you how sincerely I sympathise with you in the views you have expressed." I have it on the word of the author of the Education Act of 1870, that it is not according to his wish, but quite contrary to it, that religious education in Board schools should be so cut down as to become nothing

I

at all. I have spoken of a late Vice-President of the Privy Council, and I will add one word concerning the present Vice-President. I must speak with reserve, but I wish sincerely to impress upon your minds that the Right Hon. J. A. Mundella, like his predecessor, is sincerely anxious and earnest concerning the religious character of the Board schools. It is not his desire, and is contrary to his own principlesfor he is a good churchman-that these schools should be irreligious schools. know that these schools can be made secular and irreligious, but it is not the wish of Mr. Mundella that they should be irreligious or secular; and in expressing that view I believe that Mr. Mundella reflects the feeling of a large majority of the people of this country. The question is a great religious question. England is a wise and practical country, and knows perfectly well what religious teaching in schools means. The question is whether our young men shall become immoral and irreligious and the whole tone and character of the country dislocated, or whether England shall hold the position-the proud position-it has held hitherto amongst the nations of Europe. Sometimes we are told that we are disposed to grumble; but let us look across the channel, and see what is the condition of things in France. Can any Frenchman stand up and say of France what I have just said of England? or to put the matter to a practical test, is there any Bishop in France who could have held up his hand and could have collected and addressed such a meeting of working men as was held in this hall on Wednesday night on solemn and religious subjects? I wish that such at times could be said to be true of France, but I know that it cannot. I know that while we are discussing comparatively small irreligious educational difficulties in this country, the legislature of France are abolishing from French elementary schools every semblance of religion. Let us, therefore, be thankful for what we have got ; but do not let us be content with anything short of the best religious education that can be obtained, both in Church schools and Board schools. This is a noble, a grand, a national, a patriotic work; and I trust most sincerely that the discussion which has taken place this afternoon may, in a modest way, help to assist and press the good work forward.

DRILL HALL,

THURSDAY AFTERNOON, OCTOBER 2ND.

The Very Rev. the DEAN OF CARLISLE in the Chair.

ENGLAND'S RELIGIOUS DUTIES TOWARDS

EGYPT.

PAPERS.

MAJOR-GENERAL SIR F. J. GOLDSMID, C.B., K.C.S.I.

IN approaching a subject of so great importance as that of England's religious duties towards Egypt, I feel more than the natural diffidence arising from an unusual discussion, or departure from customary lines of speech. Such difficulty would, in a great measure, be got over by the sense that on the present occasion allowances will not only be made for an outsider in ecclesiastical and theological argument, but by the consciousness that it is a lay, or purely unprofessional and amateur view to which he is asked to give expression. There is a far weightier.

obstacle than this with which I have to contend, and that is the comprehensiveness of the subject itself; a comprehensiveness which renders it almost hopeless to separate, in the course of discussion, political from other considerations.

Rightly to form a judgment on England's duty towards Egypt in any shape, we must first suppose the existence of some definite relations between the two countries; and as it is impossible that the position which England now holds is that which she will continue to hold, it is essential to determine the situation by some kind of hypothesis. Perhaps the best is that of a quasi-Protectorate, without reservation or restriction as to time or general conduct a state of things in which the protecting Power endeavours to set an example of enlightened government in the wise, just, and enlightened administration of laws, the equitable but prudent collection of revenue, and, above all, the suitability of its measures to the character and condition of the people. It must be borne in mind that no laws can be appropriate, no fiscal or financial reforms can be satisfactory, and no measures whatever can be efficacious, if they are not based upon a thorough knowledge of the people for whom they are brought into operation. Some may infer that the starting-point chosen for the introduction of the religious question is an impossible one. I do not think so, if we consent to be guided by experience of the past, and faithfully carry out the good intentions which there is reason to suppose are entertained towards Egypt by our leading statesmen. In any case, it would be vain for me to accept any other; for withdrawal from the land with which we have had so much to do, and in which so many of us have a more real interest than that of the bondholder, is a supposition which more or less nullifies the object of the present discussion. England's duties towards Egypt, religious or secular, would then become England's duties towards Persia, Morocco, or any other country under Muhammadan rule, out of the pale of her special influence.

I must beg you to admit with me the reality of the situation just described-if you can—as a probable outcome of existing chaos, if not, for the mere sake of argument. With much the same moral power, then, over the masses in Egypt as exercised for more than a century in India, England may look around her, and ask in what way she can make that power most available for good? In addition to fulfilling the palpable duties of a Protectorate, of which the outline has been already foreshadowed, she may be trusted to do her best to relieve an oppressed peasantry of over-taxation and all undue exactions and extortion, as also to discountenance slavery, whether in its coarser form or under the name of corvée, or forced labour. But these are the mere outward and visible signs of a civilised Government, and hardly illustrate a religious duty. In this latter sense, how is England to deal with a vast community consisting of nearly seven millions of souls, to say nothing of eleven millions in the Súdán, with whom, notwithstanding her wish and declaration to the contrary, she may have a great deal yet to do?

To such a question, the answer of the majority of thinking men would, it is presumed, be, "Let her do as she has done in India, and according to British principles of Government everywhere; preach tolerance, disavow aggressive proselytism; proclaim liberty of thought,

of speech, of worship." As an humble adviser, I would venture to submit further recommendations. The religion of the Protectorate should be practically expressed by a State-supported place of worship, both in Alexandria and Cairo. There need be no fear for lack of supplementary contributions, which would be readily obtained from congregations; but a certain nucleus of State support is essential; and the clergy should be specially chosen by the head of the English Church at home. Unfortunately, we see too many shades of difference in the outward services of our own temples of religion to warrant the expectation of unanimity of opinion on the particular ritual selected; but there are good, able, conscientious men to be had, towards whom the greater number of Englishmen and Englishwomen would be attracted out of personal respect, if not in full devotion of adherence. Only let the Church of England be represented in its purest attainable form, and let our own officials of every grade do their utmost to forward her aims by precept and example, the good effects of which, in the light of individual effort, are incalculable. I have said "her aims," because these are beyond cavil or criticism. They are to serve God and do His will; to promote His honour and glory; to help forward Christ's kingdom upon earth.

These very few words seem to me to dispose generally of the question of England's duty in relation to the Muhammadans, or about nine-tenths of the population of Egypt proper, for whom, independently of wholesome secular government, example is almost everything she has to offer. Voluntary consultation, invitation to discuss doubtful points of doctrine, any sign whatever of spontaneous leaning towards Christianity on the part of the Muslims-these are matters with which the representatives of the English Church would have to deal according to their own discretion, or in communication, if necessary, with competent authorities. For obvious reasons it is here undesirable to dwell upon this delicate phase of the subject by anticipation or supposition. But example, everywhere and among all people, may be a powerful engine for good, and has an immense force when strengthened by personal influence. My own experience of human nature in a wide geographical range— roughly, the regions comprised within the Canton river on the east, and the Hudson on the west-is, that disbelief in an attainable high standard of morality is at the root of those international hatreds and hostilities which make men suspicious of their fellows; whereas a belief in that standard would be a passport through many dangers and difficulties to him who had attained it. If closely scrutinised, there will be found nothing strange in this theory. We are judged by our outward acts, not by any intuitive appreciation, or student's knowledge of our character; and it cannot be said that these will direct the crude mind of the indolent negro, any more than they will lead the comparatively civilised Asiatic to a different conclusion. The latter must remark a lack, if not of open religious profession, at least of formal religious services at diplomatic or other official European centres in Oriental countries; and the former is guided in his appreciation by the thousands of gin-cases landed on the West Coast of Africa. Respect for acknowledged piety is perhaps more strongly felt in Muhammadan than in other countries; and though fanaticism would not look for the pious man among socalled "Farangis," it would accept him, if his existence were proven, as a marvel in some way appertaining to Islam. Who can doubt that