affirming that they preserve the faith in more absolute purity, nay, that they correct the backslidings of the master, and are destined to be the Benthams of this chapter, for the purpose of making him throughout consistent with himself. We fear this is not precisely the destiny to which they are called; for reason seems to put them down quite as triumphantly as authority. The principle of non interference-of leaving things to themselves applies not to the case of education, unless where the thing to be taught can be learnt in private, or by a very small number of pupils; that is to say, unless the question regards only the education of the rich. The moment a numerous school is required, the principle fails; and fails more or less completely in proportion as the district is less or more populous. No man thinks that every farmer or tradesman, still less every poor labourer or mechanic, can have a private tutor for his children. To be taught at all, they must go to a school, where so many children attend, that each can be taken at a low rate of school wages, fees, or quarter-pence. In populous places, it may not be difficult to find masters who will make trade in opening such schools for profit; but in villages or country districts, where the whole neighbourhood afford no more than twenty or thirty children, how is such a thing to be expected? Sixpence a week is a high price for such a school; it is more than the original price of the High School of Edinburgh, where the persons of the highest rank in Scotland educate their children in Latin, Greek, and Geography. Yet that high rate of quarter-pence would not maintain a master of a decent description in such a situation as we are supposing. It would take twice as much. Yet thirty children of the years for going to school, exclusive of nine or ten whose parents may prefer educating them at home, and especially girls, answers to a population of above four hundred inhabitants; and it is needless to say how many districts there are in England and Wales where not above four hundred persons live. If, however, we suppose a moderate rate of quarter-pence only to be paid, then the lowest number of inhabitants who could afford to maintain a school must be above 800; and this in about the average population of the parishes all England over, including cities and towns, as well as country districts and villages. Supposing, again, that we separate the parishes into two classes, those of cities or great towns, and country ones; we can reckon the average of the latter at little more than 600-which is evidently far too thin a population to maintain a school, by trusting to the voluntary supply following the demand.

This seems to settle the matter as to country districts; but even in the towns, where the poor might more easily supply themselves with education, a difficulty occurs well deserving of attention. The supply of articles of prime necessity, in every country, may safely be left to be regulated by the demand; and there is no risk of any class of persons being long in want of them who can afford to pay a fair price for the acquisition; because all pretty nearly stand equally in need of them. But it is far otherwise with education. The poor are apt to undervalue it, or at least to postpone it to more sensible objects; and if there are many, or even several, persons in any district who seek it not, their negligence puts it out of the reach of those who desire it, because it reduces the number of scholars below that which can maintain a master. It would, indeed, be a fair position to lay down, that the whole of the poor, in any country, care considerably less for instruction than they ought; and that their wish for it is never strong and steady enough to command a regular and secure supply. Bad times come,

and the quarter-pence are grudged; the school is broke up. The distress passes away, and the poor next year are anxious for instruction: but a long time must now elapse before another school will be ventured upon in that quarter where it had so lately failed. From a consideration of this circumstance, it seems reasonable to conclude that they are right who maintain the principle of bringing education to the door as it were of the poor man, both in towns and country districts, by extraordinary encouragements to the establishment of schools, which requires a certain zeal and a certain combination to effect it, and may therefore most strictly be placed on the same footing with the erection of public works.

The evidence contained in the Digest signally confirms this view of the subject in every particular. It may be seen, no doubt, that the average number of children attending the unendowed Day schools (exclusive of Dame schools) is only thirty-one; but then the Tables also show that a considerable proportion of these are educated by charitable contributions. Indeed, of the 478,000 children educated at unendowed Day schools, 168,000 are maintained by subscription or other charity. Almost the whole of the Sunday schools, too, are free schools; and of the 165,000 educated at endowed schools, only about 20,000 pay quarter-pence. It thus appears, that nearly all the Sunday schools, and one half of the Day schools, in England are supported by charity.

But another ground is taken upon this point by the objectors. Seeing the impossibility of trusting to the poor themselves, they tell us, nevertheless, that we may trust to private beneficence. But this is a most fallacious argument, and is liable to be refuted by the very considerations to which its supporters appeal. The exertions which charitable persons have made in England for promoting education, as well as for all other benevolent purposes, are far above our praise. Nevertheless, such efforts must have their limits; and we suspect those limits have of late years been reached. The fact that the British and Foreign School Society never has, at any time, had an income of 1,5007. a-year, even on paper, speaks volumes on this head. It is equally true, that the more individuals have exerted themselves in such efforts, the more likely they are now to be exhausted; and it is a known truth, that the difficulty of obtaining subscriptions for new charities has of late become almost insurmountable. Besides, such resources are fluctuating and uncertain in their nature; and nothing can be more obvious than that such a variable supply is ill adapted to meet a demand which either is or ought to be made constant and regular. The charitable labours of good and enlightened men, for educating the poor, are necessarily confined to populous places. There only can great meetings be held, and large contributions obtained. Accordingly, we find that the two great Societies for promoting Education, the National, and the British and Foreign School Society, only plant schools upon the new plan; and this plan, from its nature, must be confined to towns of considerable size. We are aware that mere private munificence has furnished many supplies to the same good cause; but that is a still more uncertain supply. Alms may be asked; and therefore there is far better ground for trusting to individual charity for supporting the poor. But how long would it take before individuals should bethink them of planting schools for the thousands of poor children who have now no means of instruction? Let it be recollected, too, that private charity is not always very judiciously bestowed. A desire to do too much for a few children is far more prevalent among the humane than a wise dis

position to do somewhat for a greater number, and the truth is undeniable, that many well-intentioned men have founded establishments of a kind really hurtful to society, at a great cost, when a tenth of the funds would, if well applied, have proved really beneficial.

But we are desired to look at the result; and the vast progress made of late years in educating the poor is cited as a convincing proof how much may be expected from this source. We join willingly in this appeal to facts; for we know that it must at once decide the whole question. From the Digest it appears, that there are about 145,000 children taught at the new Day schools, exclusive of those taught at Sunday schools,-which ought in this question to be kept apart, both because almost all of them attend Day schools also, and because the tuition at Sunday schools, without any other, is extremely imperfect. Now, from the numbers taught at these New schools, no one can doubt that a large deduction must be made for those educated before their establishment either at the same school previous to its being new modelled, or at some neighbouring seminary, given up since the larger one was set on foot. Perhaps 100,000 is not too small a number for the whole addition made in the means of Education by those new schools during the last fifteen years; and at this rate, nearly forty years would be required to afford the means still wanting, even if we supposed private charity to make the same exertions during the next half century that it has during the last few years; whereas no man can pretend to expect such a thing; and, indeed, every one knows that those exertions are almost wholly confined to large towns.

But the Digest likewise shows how many institutions of this description are languishing for want of funds, and how many unendowed schools of all kinds have been discontinued every where from the same cause. The necessity of some less precarious supply being provided of an article of such primary necessity as elementary education is, indeed, proved in almost every page of these volumes.

The result of the Tables may now be shortly referred to, as etablishing beyond all controversy the want of education which now exists. The Endowed Schools in England teach about 165,000 children; the Unendowed Day schools 478,000. But this includes 53,000 taught at the Day schools, where infants are generally sent before they are of an age to go to school, or learn almost any thing. It includes also the lace and straw schools of the midland counties, where we much fear little that is useful is in general learnt. If, then, we deduct for these schools, we shall have about 590,000 children taught at Day schools; and we must add about 10,000 for deficient returns, several parishes having made none. To this number of 600,000 are to be added the children belonging to persons in the upper and middle classes of society who educate their children, particularly daughters, at home or at boarding-schools, not noticed in the Tables, though. frequently in the Digest. Mr. Brougham, from the population returns, considered 50,000 as a proper allowance for this class, but, if any thing, too small; and the next addition made was incontestably much too large, except that he was desirous of rather understating than overstating the deficiency. He allowed, of the 452,000 taught at Sunday schools, 100,000 as attending those institutions beyond the numbers included in the column of Day schools; the known fact being, that a greater proportion than seven-ninths of the Sunday scholars attend Week-day schools. The grand total of children educated in any way, even in the scanty measure dealt out by Sunday

schools, is thus only 750,000. Now, the lowest estimate of the means of education for any country requires that there should be schools for onetenth of the population; but from the Digest it clearly appears that a larger proportion is requisite, especially if we include the means for all classes, high as well as low. Mr. Brougham reckons rather more than one-ninth; but, taking one-tenth as the scale, it thus appears that there are only the means of educating seven millions and a half of the people in England, leaving no less than two millions without any education, and three millions without the only effectual education, namely, that obtained at Day schools. Let us shortly compare this with the state of other countries where popular education is supposed to be well attended to.

In Scotland, taking the average of twelve counties, the population of which is 636,000, and making no allowance for the education of the upper classes, or for private tuition, at all, there are schools where between oneninth and one-tenth of the population are taught. In Holland, by the Report of the Commission of 1812, at the head of which was Mr. Cuvier, it appears that there were 4,451 schools, where 190,000 children were instructed, or one-tenth of the population. In the Pays de Vaud, about one-eighth of the people attend the parish schools; and not one person in sixty is to be found who can't read. France presents a very different picture. The Report of the Commission in 1819 gave the numbers attending schools at 1,070,500, or 1-28th of the population. Yet the exertions making in that country may well excite our admiration. In two years, the numbers had increased from 866,000; the proportion in 1817 having been only 1-35th. During those well-spent, and, let us say, truly glorious years of civil triumph, 7,120 schools had been planted, capable of educating 204,500 children, and supplying the means of education to a population of two millions. The zeal of individuals being powerfully seconded by the Government, in a very few years France will be as well educated as Holland. Wales appears to be much worse off than England; there are not schools, even including Dame schools, for above one-twentieth-that is, there are only the means of educating half the people of the principality.

The inequality with which the education of which we have been speaking is diffused through the different parts of England is a very striking circumstance, and affords perhaps the strongest of all arguments against leaving matters to themselves, or relying entirely upon the charitable exertions of individuals. In the four northern counties of Westmoreland, Cumberland, Northumberland, and Durham, the average is about onetenth; in Westmoreland it is as high as one-seventh or one-eighth-being superior to the Pays de Vaud, and consequently the best educated district in Europe. In Wilts and Somersetshire the average is one-eighteenth, or one-nineteenth; in Lancaster and Middlesex one-twenty-fourth. But before the establishment of the new schools in Middlesex, it was as low as one-forty-sixth. This fact, respecting such a county, is truly deplorable. Calculating, as we before did, for the whole country, it thus appears, that at the present moment there are not the means of education for one half the people in the metropolitan county; and that, but a few years ago, there were three-fourths of that population destitute of those means.'

*

The articles in the E. Review on the Education Committee of the House of Commons, and on Mr. Brougham's System of National Instruction, contain a mass of curious information on the mementous subject of Charity Abuses. See Vol. xxx. page 486. Vol xxxi. page 497. Vol. xxxii. page 89. Vol. xxxiv. page 215. Vol. xxxv. page 214.

THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND NOT EXPOSED TO DANGER BY EDUCATING THE POOR IN SCHOOLS OPEN TO ALL SECTS.*

It surely speaks a strange language on the part of the Church of England, that her existence should be held up as inconsistent with two of the grandest objects to which the eyes of mankind can be directed-religious liberty and general education.

They who exert themselves to place her in this suspicious attitude, do no doubt deny that she is hostile to either :-and when was the time that persons in a dubious cause did not bestow a good name upon their own proceedings? But can they, who strain every nerve to hold a large portion of their fellow-citizens under unequal laws-that is, to a certain degree, to outlaw them, on account of religious opinions, be justly designated by any other name than intolerant? And can they, who rise up against the most efficient system for the instruction of the body of the people that ever was promulgated; who first endeavour to prevent entirely any such instruction; and, after that is found impracticable, exert themselves to supplant a more efficient by a less efficient system; in other words to prevent, if not all education, at least a great degree of it, be considered in any other light than that of its enemies?

We know very well, that many of the persons who oppose themselves to the best scheme of education are men of pure, and even of philanthropic intentions. It is also perfectly true, that the steps which have been taken in the name of the Church might at one time have been regarded as a national advantage; and that they are bad now only in so far as they tend to deprive the nation of a still greater good. But, in a matter like this, a difference in degree is every thing; and we entreat our readers to consider, but for a moment, the striking effects produced by a slight shade of superiority in the moral and intellectual training of a whole nation.

It is not necessary that they should compare a Turkish and a British population. Let them only reflect upon the state of the Irish, as compared with the English population,-both living under the same constitution,— both governed by the same laws, yet differing to so prodigious an extent in what they respectively contribute to the common good. Let them consider the population of Scotland, between whom and the English, though the difference is far less wide, the comparison is, perhaps, still more instructive. We desire our opponents to tell us, in what respect the circumstances of the English population have not been more favourable than those of the Scottish, except in the article of schooling alone? For we do not suppose it will be asserted, in the quarter to which we are addressing ourselves, that the religious instruction of the Scots has been better than that of the English, or its Church-establishment of a better description. Scotland was the poorest country. The lower orders in Scotland were a less regarded race. They had fewer political privileges; and the long continuance of the feudal system had left there a more marked and degrading distinction between the productive classes and those immediately above them than there is any conception of in England. All these causes of elevation to the minds of the English populace were highly favourable both to their intellectual and moral virtues ; and yet their inferiority to the Scots in both has ceased to be a matter of Pamphlets on the Madras and Lancasterian Systems of Education.-Vol. xxi. page 207. February, 1813,

.