The Monthly repository (and review).

tended it to be, to the English hierarchy. In all its operation, from first to last, nothing is done without the clergy, and some of the provisions lodge a power in their hands without any responsibility, and for which I know not that there is any precedent in Protestant history.

The establishment of the new school in the beginning is to be by the order of Justices of the Peace at the Quarter Sessions, on the presentment of a Grand Jury, or the application, amongst other persons, of the rector, vicar, perpetual curate, or actual incumbent of the parish. Now when it is borne in mind how large a proportion of the country magistracy are clergymen, and how naturally they consult in their decisions their mutual accommodation, it will appear that in many instances it would depend upon the clergyman himself whether a school should be set up in his parish.

The school being established, the next step in the order of proceeding is the appointment of a master. On his character and qualifications the utility of the school absolutely depends; and one should have expected that in order to gain the fittest person for the situation, the freest competition, the widest latitude of selection, and the most popular basis of appointment, would have been provided. But here nothing is consulted in the Bill but clerical dignity and power. The candidate must be a member of the Established Church, and must produce a certificate to that effect, as well as to general character, from the parish priest. The granting of such certificate is, as far as appears, quite discretionary, and there fore the minister really nominates the candidate. As the Bill stood originally, a new sacramental test was imposed,

"He, doubtless, would here have the Church with him, but he feared that the sectaries would be against him. It did, however, appear to him, that the system of public education should be closely connected with the Church of England, as established by law. He stated this after the most mature consideration; and he was anxious to make the statement, because on a former occasion he did not go quite so far as he now did: he had abstained from going so far, because he dreaded the opposition of the sectaries."

and the candidate was required to have taken the sacrament in his parish church within one month previous to the day of election. This clause was withdrawn on the second reading, but its having been proposed is a memorable fact, as shewing to what lengths the proposer was willing to go in order to conciliate the Church. The very moment that both Protestant and Catholic Dissenters had judged favourable, from the apparent relaxation of prejudice and bigotry, for the abolition of the test as a qualification for civil office, was chosen by Mr. Brougham for introducing it in another case, in which no political reasons could be pleaded for its adoption, and in which it seemed to be a gratuitous effort of intolerance, as the office to which it had reference was to be instituted for the professed benefit of Dissenters as well as others, and was to be remunerated by them equally with other taxable inhabitants of parishes. allow the proposer the praise of good sense for erasing this part of the Bill, we may surely reason upon its introduction as a proof of a design to go as far as the spirit of the times would allow in making it subservient to sectarian interests, for sectarian all interests are that are not co-extensive with the community.-But though the test is not to be imposed, the master must have the testimonial of the clergyman of the parish that he is a bona fide Churchman. This would seem quite needless to his functions, as a teacher of reading, writing and arithmetic: and this limitation of the choice of the parishioners, lessens the probability of a fit appointment. No Dissenter, of any description, no member of the Church of Scotland, no liberal Churchman who may not have quitted the

If we

It may be here remarked by the way, that the term "sectaries," so frequently in Mr. Brougham's mouth, savours a little of hierarchical assumption. Still more objectionable is his using the term "Protestant" to designate the Church of England, in contradistinction from the Dissenters. "No conscientious Dissenter would allow his child to go to a Protestant church," &c. This narrow sense of the term is of Irish origin, and in Ireland it may admit of explanation: in the British House of Commons it is absurd.

Church, but whose opinions are more free than his priest approves, and no one scarcely who has been educated under the auspices of the British and Foreign School Society, can be even named for the office. A premium is hereby held out to conformity, and a penalty to nonconformity. The Dissenter may sit in Parliament, and may be one of his Majesty's Ministers, and, under cover of the Act of Indemnity, may fill almost any post in the state, of whatever trust or honour; but he must not think of being master of one of these schools, though his own children may be entered in the school, and the children of Dissenters may form a majority of the scholars, and the expenses of the establishment may fall principally upon Dissenters: this in the year 1820, in a bill proposed by Mr. Brougham, a bill, the professed object of which is National Educa

tion!

To shut out all suspicious Churchmen, even should the watchmen of the Church suffer them to pass without giving the watch-word, the shibboleth of the age, the Bill declares that parish clerks are eligible as masters. Nothing could have led any one to suspect that they were ineligible; the declaration therefore means that they are the persons contemplated by the Bill, and that to them a preference should be given. This Mr. Brougham explicitly avows. He confesses, moreover, that the schools are to do as much good to them as they are to do to the schools. Their condition as a class is to be improved by the new appointment. Nay, they are to become by means of it a sort of spiritual body. "That ancient but degraded order of men," he says, "were viewed in the older and better times of the Church, in the light of spiritual assistants," and, borrowing the style and tone of the Quarterly Review, he seems to long for their recovery to the rank of ecclesiastical auxiliaries, and to congratulate himself upon the probability of his

being instrumental to this pious end. The climax of his spiritual desires is, that the parson may condescend and the clerk be exalted, or, to use his own words, "that the parson may become a clerical schoolmaster, and the schoolmaster a lay parson."

To speak of the character of so obscure a body of men, requires more knowledge of them than I can pretend to possess; but, judging from what I have seen and from general opinion, I should say, that no class of men could have been selected more unfit for the duty of schoolmasters than parishclerks. Whatever may be their qua

"Their (the sectaries") argument was, You are making this a new system of tithe. You are placing a second parson in each parish, whom we must pay, though we cannot conscientiously

attend to his instruction.' He bowed to

this position."-"The clergy were the teachers of the poor, not only teachers of religion, but, in the eye of the law, they were teachers generally." [The reader is requested to compare this passage with one that will be presently extracted from the Edinburgh Review, in its better days.] « What, then, could be more natural than that they (the clergy) should have a controul over those (the schoolmasters contemplated by the Bill) who were selected to assist them?"

+ Mr. Brougham has himself drawn the picture of one member of this spiritual body:

"He recollected one of that fraternity who, to procure a livelihood, went about of the neighbourhood, if not depressing singing, or rather disturbing the slumbers the spirits of those who did not sleep. In truth, he could not say that his voice was remarkable for its sweetness, or the ditties which he poured forth remarkable for their elegance. Having refreshed the parishioners in this manner, the worthy man regularly proceeded to refresh himself-and, for the most part, it was necessary to carry him home. These were his nightly amusements-his occupation during the day was mole-catching. (A laugh.) On Sunday he appeared in church, reading-not indeed with a distinct voice, but as audible as he could, and as far as his abilities enabled him to read-that part of the divine service which was allotted to him. He (Mr. Brougham) was not very squeamish about these things; but he thought when he witnessed this exbibition, (and it was a long time ago,) that it was a very undig

lifications as to reading, writing and accounts, and of these I should require actual proof before I admitted them, their occupation in all large parishes would quite preclude that regular attention to a school, on which its success depends. But they are still more objectionable on account of their dependance upon the good-will of the clergy, though this I suspect to be the chief reason of their being pointed out by the Bill as suitable candidates. The choice of the master is vested, as it ought to be, in the parishioners, who have to pay him, and who alone are interested in his competency; but this choice is subject to the approbation of the parson of the parish, who may reject the successful candidate, though coming before him with all the suffrages of the parish, and direct the parish officers to issue notices for a new election. "The parson has here," says Mr. Brougham triumphantly, a veto, not a nominal, but a real and effectual veto." He is to assign no reasons. He is invested with a species of royalty. His sic volo is enough. By this means, the situation, says our popular senator, is prevented from becoming a matter of canvass, and the

nified mode of performing a religious service."

Of the desirableness of raising the characters of such parish-clerks as this, there can be no doubt; but whether the whole frame of national education should be bent and shaped to this object, and whe ther an act of parliament should be passed, the preamble of which asserts the necessity of teaching good morals, while one of the clauses provides for the possibility of such a creature as the clerical mole-catcher being the parish teacher, are different questions.

* In so objectionable a Bill, one is glad to discover any provision which bespeaks a regard to liberty in the mind of its framer, and therefore it must not be overlooked, that it is proposed to be enacted that the schoolmasters under the act shall not be entitled by their houses and gardens, which are to be allotted them by parishes, to vote for members of parliament. Why is this, but because it is foreseen that in the constitution of the system, they will be under the influence of the clergy? As good an argument, surely, against the whole system, as for the denial of the elective franchise.

majority are precluded from electing an improper person. This is striking a blow on the face of democracy though the worst insult is that of giving the people a voice, and then rendering it nugatory by the clerical veto.

Contemplating the two last provisions of the Bill, we might almost be justified in giving it the title of "A Bill for raising the spiritual and temporal condition of that ancient order, the parish-clerks, and for enabling the clergy to exercise an absolute power over certain of his Majesty's subjects, and to stultify the proceedings of their parishioners.

The visitation of the schools is to be all clerical. The officiating minister of the parish is to have access to them for the purposes of examination at all times. The ordinary of the diocese is ex officio visitor. By himself or the dean, or chancellor or archdeacon, he may remove the master or superannuate him on a pension after a certain term of service. The design of "uniting and knitting the schools" with the Church Establishment, is still and well kept up.

All, in short, is of a piece. The minister, but with the advice of the churchwardens, it is true, though to them is given no veto, is to fix the rate of "Quarter-pence, as it is called, for the schooling. And he again, with the same advice, may recommend any very poor child to be admitted without paying. What is this but giving him the power of granting education freely to the children of his own servants, dependants and favourites; and in reality providing a gratuitous education for the offspring of poor Churchmen, which it is not likely that poor Dissenters would ever be in sufficient favour with the parish priest, whose ministrations they desert, or shew by their absence that they disregard, to obtain for their own families?

Again, the minister is to fix the hours of teaching and the times of vacation. No book is to be used in the schools without his consent. The

By another notable provision for enabling the parson to rule in his own parish, he is to have the approval or rejection of any usher whom the master may wish to introduce into the school.

Bible is to be a school-book, but he may select what passages from it he pleases. And what more can the most eager proselytist desire than this? By a cento of unconnected texts, strung together with a little art, he may patch together a system which no Roman Catholic, no Unitarian, no Protestant Dissenter of any description, can suffer his children to learn.** And I will not

For instance, he may string passages that, in an unnatural connexion, may insinuate the worst errors or the most offensive bigotry. He may take the following, and, without note or comment," make them speak a language abhorrent to the pure Scriptures: The church that is at Babylon. 1 Pet.

v. 13.

This is no doubt very extravagant, but Church bigotry has done as extravagant things before now; and whether the thing be ever done or not, the objection is equally strong against putting the power of doing it into the hands of thousands of persons, amongst whom it is no breach of charity to imagine, that there may be

persons lacking discretion or candour.

But we may suppose another selection and framing together of texts which would be equally unjustifiable, wicked and mischievous, but which is not altogether without precedent. There are in some school, then, we will take for granted, children of Unitarian parents, with whom the parish parson may be in controversy, and to whom for this reason he may owe no good will. He wishes to mortify his antagonists, and he strikes

them through the sides of their children. He may pity the children and wish to save them from the destructive errors which they are taught at home. What has he to do, then, but to give out the following lesson, pieced out in words of scripture?

There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one. John v. 7.

say, that the proposer of this Bill means that such children shall be excluded from his schools, but this I will say, that he has shewn himself quite careless as to their being admitted on terms that will render their admission honourable and beneficial. "Very squeamish Dissenters indeed," he denominates such as object to his plan; but does he not know that honesty is always scrupulous, and that religious honesty in particular demands of a Christian, that for him and his he shall take no step that is doubtful?

In agreement with the tenor of the Bill it is provided, that the Church Catechism shall be taught in the schools one half-day in the week, and that the minister may direct that this and such parts of the Liturgy as he may select shall be also taught on the Sunday evening. Liberty is given, however, to Dissenters to withdraw their children, on a statement of their Dissent, from this part of the public tuition. They are likewise permitted to take their children, the same notification being made, to their own places of worship on the Sunday: the children not thus exempted are to be led to the parish church.

To the religious education of Churchmen, Dissenters cannot object; but though a minority, they are justified in contending that a new and expensive establishment ought not to be created with this view, until it is proved that the old establishment is inadequate. Are not the clergy numerous enough, or endowed with sufficiently ample benefices, that they cannot undertake the religious instruction of the children of their own communion, but must have an order of spiritual assistants, invidiously appointed and supported, in a considerable measure, by those that can derive no spiritual help from them, and that consider their appointment a grievance ?

He that believeth not shall be damned. Mark xvi. 16.

Here, by the help of one interpolation, two false readings, and a passage torn from its proper place, a bigot may teach the doctrines of the Trinity and the Atonement, (as commonly believed,) and may enforce them by the threat of damnation. He must have observed little of the workings of party-spirit that has not seen as gross tricks, and as palpable perversions of scripture, as this.

The introduction of catechisms into schools which ought to be open, and profess to be open to all, is sowing the seeds of animosity and discord in the breasts of the young. Exemption from the religious learning of these establishments is a distinction. The rule and the exception both tend to divide children into the orthodox and the heterodox, the favoured many and the tolerated but despised few. It had been fondly thought, that the champions of the Lancasterian Schools and Mr. Brougham, the most eminent of that class of public benefactors, had for ever settled this point, and proved not only by argument but also by experiment, that religion and civil learning may be conveniently and usefully separated, each prospering the more for being unfettered by the other.*

* Mr. Brougham's parliamentary schools, if indeed he succeed in establishing them, will not be "schools for all." There will be no form in them for the children of Jews. Few Roman Catholics will suffer their children to be taught religion by a Protestant parish-clerk out of the "authorized version" of the Scriptures. And, we believe, for the reasons that we have assigned, that the bulk of the Protestant Dissenters will refuse to put their offspring under training for the Church of England. As far as their influence extends, they will resist the institution of schools, which they know to be designed to buttress up an Establishment which they cannot as Christians approve. The Quakers, and some other sects, will feel themselves peculiarly bound to oppose the operation of a system which recognizes the spiritual character of the members of the English hierarchy. But, at the same time, they cannot hope that their opposition will in many parishes be successful, and where it is not, the parliamentary school will effectually repress all others, and thus the Dissenters will be in almost as hopeless a situation as that in which they would have been under the memorable "Schism Bill."

The Edinburgh Review, laying claim notwithstanding to the utmost candour and even friendliness towards Dissent, speaks of the opponents of Mr. Brougham's Bill in no very gentle or conciliating terms. These persons express their apprehensions strongly, and therefore they are intemperate. They wish to arouse their brethren to timely opposition to an injurious measure, and therefore they are agitators." Their voice is not agree.

In these few remarks upon the Bill, I have been actuated by no hostility to the clergy, who are so unaccountably

able to the ears of some half-dozen political speculatists, and therefore it is "clamour." With so powerful an antagonist as the Edinburgh Review it might seem presumptuous to wrestle; but it is fair to match one of this formidable corps' of reviewers with another: and nothing argument (so far as it affects the Dissenters) of No. LXVII., than the following passage from No. XXXIII.:

Llibres

The Monthly repository (and review)., Volum 16