vided gratis with books, papers, and unquestionably, the result of the salaries stationery. The result, again, was then paid by the London School Board had that the average fee paid by all the been to raise teachers' salaries all over children was less than 1d. per week, England; and one of the great difficulties and that no fee whatever was paid in the small School Boards and districts had many schools. Of course, he knew certain had to encounter in the rural districts hon. Gentlemen in that House were in during the last two years had been the favour of free education. It must be getting teachers to accept the salaries remembered, however, that such was they could afford to pay. Therefore, not the intention of the Act. Its inten- this paying more than the market value tion was to place within reach of the in London affected very hardly the rateparent a sound and cheap education; payers elsewhere, besides affecting the but it was not the intention of the rate- managers of the voluntary schools. payers to give free education. What That was another point which would would naturally occur to many hon. account for the very high expenditure Gentlemen was, whether it was neces- in the London School Board schools. He sary to impose such very low fees? did not think that a system of low fees Were the conditions of life so excep- with very highly-trained teachers, whose tional as to necessitate these very low salaries depended on the results of the fees? A School Board alluded to by examinations, were in any way incomthe right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. patible. But what was the result in W. E. Forster)-that of West Ham these schools? The teacher knew he afforded a good answer to the question. was dependent upon the result. The It was a large urban district, and what better-dressed child; the child which was necessary in London they might as- was higher in the social scale, the better sume would be necessary there. Yet educated, the more intelligent, the better there the cost, in 1877, was £2 3s. 3d. for his purpose; and, therefore, this per child; and in 1878, £1 19s. 11d.; system made the teacher eager to get the amount obtained from the Govern- hold of the very class of children for ment being quite equal to that obtained whom these schools were not intended. by the London School Board. Not only, It was only fair to the School Board to then, was that system quite as efficient, say that they were endeavouring to alter but it was much cheaper. One cause of this, and so to fix the salaries that a less this greater expense was the number portion of the teacher's remuneration and the salaries of the teachers em- might be dependent on the results of the ployed. Nobody objected to the teachers examination. The question naturally being adequately remunerated; but cer- asked, then, was-Is the cause of this tain figures laid on the Table seemed very high rate of maintenance in the to show that the average salaries of London schools entirely the fault of the teachers in London were considerably School Board; or is it the natural conhigher than those paid elsewhere. Thus, sequence of the legislation of nine years there were 42 teachers whose salary was ago? It must be remembered, also, between £250 and £300; 26 under that the annual grant was not given £300; 16 between £300 and £325; 7 under the same conditions, and for the at £325; 2 at £350; and 1 at £467. same purposes, as it was 10 or 12 years The question at once arose, was it ne- ago. Then it was given, according to the cessary to pay these very high salaries; or was it to be considered whether parents could not afford to pay more than 1d.? A very able letter on that subject appeared in The Times from Mr. Rodgers, the Vice Chairman of the Board. He said "It is urged by some that we ought not to pay a teacher more than his market price. But we want the best teachers for London, and we ought to have them, and we should, therefore, pay them above the market price." He did not wish to put too severe an interpretation on that expression; but, Code "To promote local voluntary effort, and in order to extend education among the working classes.' When the Act of 1870 was first introduced, the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. W. E. Forster) made a proposal which would have obviated many of the difficulties which subsequently occurred, and it was that each district should be responsible for its school supply, and that no School Board should have the power of contributing to voluntary schools without the rates. That proposition was not palatable to the Party with which he was associated; it was withdrawn, and the right hon. Gentleman substituted a proposal by which an increase of 50 per cent was given both to voluntary as well as Board schools. The effect of the Acts of 1870 and 1876 was that compulsion extended throughout the greater part of England, and the children who were at the schools were not exclusively the children of the working classes. On the contrary, the Inspectors of the Education Department estimated that only one-seventh of the children of England had education provided for them otherwise than by elementary schools. The right hon. Gentleman opposite never attempted to define what was meant by elementary education; but, of course, the education of all children must be elementary, and the definition attached to an elementary school was a school where the fee did not exceed 9d. per week. Therefore, they had now drifted from a position in which the grant was given to promote local voluntary effort in extending education among the working classes, to a position where any person could send his child to an elementary school in which, provided the fees charged were not more than 9d. per week, a portion of the cost of that education would be defrayed by the State. That partly depended, of course, on the amount realized by the examinations. Power was given to the School Boards to raise rates for the purpose of extending education, the intention being that the rates were to be used in order to bring cheap education within the reach of those who could not afford to pay high fees. By cheap education was not meant education which should be very cheap to the child, but exceedingly dear to the ratepayer. Under the voluntary system, it was not necessary for the Education Department to place any limit on the expenditure of voluntary schools, because the balance came from private sources, and the managers knew that the larger the expenditure the better was the result of the examination; and, consequently, when the managers of the Board schools found out that by expending more money out of the rates upon the Board schools they could obtain a larger proportion of the Government grant, many of them felt justified in doing so, until, undoubtedly, the result of the system at the present moment Lord George Hamilton wasthis-that certain School Boards-he did not say they did it intentionallydid dip their hands very deeply into the ratepayers' pockets, and so obtained a very large proportion of this grant from the Consolidated Fund. Now, he ventured to say, that was never the intention of the Legislature. The intention of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. W. E. Forster) and of the late Prime Minister was that in proportion as they increased the grant they should reduce the amount levied from the rates. If hon. Gentleman thought he was in any way exaggerating, let him just tell them what the results of the examination, compared with the rate of expenditure of the Loudon School Board, had been during the last year. It was perfectly true that the results had been, in one sense, very creditable to the London School Board, because they had succeeded in reaching 15s. 44d. in London, against 15s. 1ąd. in other schools in England-that was to say, they had got 23d. more than had been obtained for the children in other schools. But at what cost did they obtain this? Every one of those children had cost 178. 8d. more to obtain that return; and, in order to get 23d. more out of the grant, the rates had had to contribute 16s. 4d. to produce that result. The question was, whether it was necessary that they should bring the Board schools back to apply the rates in accordance with the intentions of Parliament? There were certain objects very clearly in view in this matter. In the first place, it would be most inexpedient if the House were to do anything which would in the slightest degree affect the efficiency of elementary education in this country. It must, again, be remembered that whoever was at the head of the Education Department had to exercise discretion between the Board schools and the voluntary schools; and although it might be possible to make such an exercise of that discretion as to favour a system to which he was personally favourable, yet he believed that such a course would not only be very improper, but very unwise. It would counteract against the system which it was supposed to favour, and must, undoubtedly, lead to zig-zag legislation that would be detrimental to the cause of education. Therefore, the Government had invariably endeavoured to lay down such lines of action as were consistent with justice and propriety, and which could be maintained by themselves, and with difficulty reversed by those who came after them. Now, keeping those objects fairly in view, let the House see whether they could possibly suggest any proposal to meet the undoubted evil which existed. There were some who suggested that the amount of the school fees should be reduced from 9d. to 6d. ; and, further, that no school should be considered an elementary school which exceeded 6d., because there was no doubt whatever that, at the present moment, a very large number of children belonging to the middle classes were educated in Board and voluntary schools with Government assistance, while their parents could perfectly afford to pay for them without any assistance. But it must be remembered that they could not prevent these children from attending these elementary schools, because everybody had a right to do so; and, therefore, the only result of that plan would be that whilst the scholars would continue to attend the fees payable by them would diminish. He could not but feel, himself, that in all large Board districts they must ultimately arrive at a system of graded schools, which would, he thought, tend to efficiency and economy. They could then apportion the teaching staff to the children who had to be instructed, and there were many other obvious advantages. Still, the time had not yet arrived when it would be justifiable for the Education Office to suggest that a general system of graded schools should take place throughout the country. In the first place, one great difference was very obvious. In many parishes and school districts in England there was only one school; and, therefore, it would not be possible to have graded schools. Then, he thought, before the House attempted to do anything in that direction, they should see what could be done by secondary schools in England; and there was no doubt whatever that year by year, under the scheme of the Endowed Schools Commissioners, an excellent system of secondary schools was being established. Well, if the House should reject those two proposals, there was another which he would suggest, and which seemed to him to exactly meet the difficulty. Suppose the House were to say that, in the opinion of the Edu cation Department, the maintenance of schools, as elementary schools, should not exceed a certain sum, the Return showed that, with the single exceptions of London and Liverpool, the cost of the maintenance of all elementary schools in England was under £2 28. per child per annum. Well, supposing it was provided that if the cost of the maintenance per child exceeded £2 2s., the excess should be deducted from the grants given to the school, the result would be to show the managers of the schools the necessity of enforcing economy; and if they did not do so, it would be a question for the ratepayers to decide whether or not a limit should be imposed. This proposal had been under the consideration of the Education Department; and, without pledging himself in any way to the details, because the matter required most careful consideration, he thought he might say that the Government might act in that direction. This would effectually tend, he thought, to prevent managers from putting their hands too deeply into the rates in order to get the extra grants. It was perfectly ridiculous to say that the managers of schools had the option of spending as much as they chose of the taxes which were not collected by them. If this proposal were shortly put into practice, what would be the result as regarded London? Of course, it would be very difficult for a School Board at once to reduce its expenditure, and a certain time must be given; but if the first cost and maintenance of the London schools were reduced to £2 2s., there would be an immediate saving of £100,000. That was the suggestion which, on behalf of the Government, he was ready to make. He hoped his hon. Friend, after this statement, would not consider it necessary to press his Motion to a Division. He (Lord George Hamilton) had indicated-and he thought the figures he had quoted showed--that there had been an expenditure on the part of the London School Board which did not seem to be altogether necessary; and, such being the case, he should not, therefore, vote against the Motion; but, on the other hand, it was equally impossible for him. to vote for it. It must be remembered that the London School Board was by far the most important School Board in existence; and if the Education Department had any reason to find fault with the expenditure of the London School | subject was discussed the better for the Board, the proper course would be to future of education. But to take a write to them, and not by a side wind, Division on the adjournment would be by a Motion of this sort, to inflict upon thereby to decide what would, practhem censure. There were a variety of tically, be a vote of censure on the most circumstances which made it undesirable, important local representative body in he thought, for his hon. Friend to push the country, without its own representahis Motion to a Division. He (Lord tives having been heard. As a matter George Hamilton) was sorry that he of fact, at I o'clock they had had but should have detained the House at some four speeches, no member of the Board, length; and if they could so shape their or representing the Metropolis, having proposal as to make it applicable to the spoken. Under such circumstances, it whole of England, he did not think any- would be taking the House at a disone would have cause to complain that advantage to force a Division. it would, in the smallest degree, affect either the sufficiency or the efficiency of national education; but it would show the managers of schools that it never was, and was not now, the intention of Parliament that a great and unlimited use should be made of the rates in order to obtain a larger measure of money raised by taxation. He thought it would also be a distinct intimation to any manager or any Board who took a different view, and who believed that unlimited expenditure was advantageous to the cause of education, that no greater hindrance to the cause of national education could be devised than to make the progress of primary education dependent upon excessive dipping into the pockets of the ratepayers. MR. MUNDELLA said, they had now arrived at a very late hour, yet not a single Metropolitan Member had had an opportunity of addressing the House, nor had any of the members of the School Board, who were also Members of that House, spoken. The statement of the noble Lord certainly, also, ought not to go without discussion and unchallenged. Therefore, he begged to move the adjournment of the debate. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."(Mr. Mundella.) MR. J. R. YORKE said, he must distinctly oppose the Motion, unless it was understood that the adjournment was not to be sine die. If, however, the Government could not give him a day, he must take a Division on the question of the adjournment, in order to obtain an expression of opinion from the House as to the conduct of the School Board. MR. FAWCETT would be heartily glad if the Government could give the hon. Member a day, for the more this Lord George Hamilton MR. PELL said, he should vote for the Motion, not because he wished to condemn the conduct of individual members of the Board, who were the creatures of circumstances, but because he objected to the circumstances which placed them where they were. MR. W. E. FORSTER thought the Motion for adjournment very reasonable. It would be most unwise to attempt to get a decision on the Main Question by dividing on the Motion for adjournment, because the case had not been nearly sufficiently debated. He should be very glad if the Government could give a day; but he feared that was not very likely at this period of the Session. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, the Government were fully conscious of the importance of the issue raised, and the ability with which it had been debated; but, at the same time, he feared it was a debate which, at that period of the Session, they could not hope to bring to a satisfactory conclusion. The case brought forward not only raised the question as to the conduct of a particular School Board, but introduced the whole question of our educational system; while the statement by his noble Friend of the views of the Government ought itself to be the subject of further debate. It was, therefore, most reasonable that the debate should be adjourned. The Government would give a day with the greatest pleasure if they felt they could redeem their promise, but that was quite out of their power; and he could only express a hope that an opportunity would be found to resume the debate. The proposition intimated by his noble Friend must come under the attention of the House in another form, when there might be further opportunities for discussion. He did not think the Govern ment could possibly resist the Motion | for an adjournment. SIR JOHN LUBBOCK hoped the hon. Member (Mr. J. R. Yorke) would not go to a Division, which would really indicate nothing, as those who voted for it could not be supposed to intend the condemnation of a body which had not even been heard in its own defence. MR. PAGET considered it very unsatisfactory that the debate should be closed in this way; and, therefore, hoped the Government would give them an opportunity of considering the proposals brought forward for the first time by the noble Lord that day. MR. RITCHIE hoped his hon. Friend would not go to a Division, for it would be most unsatisfactory to give a decision when the full case had not been heard, and when his hon. Friend himself had not had an opportunity of replying to the statements of the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. W. E. Forster). SIR CHARLES RUSSELL also agreed that a Division at that time would be liable to grave misconstruction; but still he thought they ought to have some sort of assurance from the Government that the subject would not be absolutely dropped. LORD GEORGE HAMILTON replied, that, so far from the subject being either dropped or forgotten, he proposed to lay Papers on the subject on the Table of the House. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Wednesday, 11th June, 1879. MINUTES.]-SELECT COMMITTEE Contagious Diseases Acts, appointed and nominated. PUBLIC BILLS-Second Reading-Hours of Polling (Boroughs) [11], put off. * Select Committee-Report--Wormwood Scrubs Regulation [No. 223]. Third Reading-Metropolis (Little Coram Street, Bloomsbury, Wells Street, Poplar, and Great Peter Street, Westminster,) Improvement Provisional Orders Confirmation [175]; Local Government (Highways) Provisional Orders (Dorset, &c.) [186]; Local Government (Highways) Provisional Orders (Gloucester and Hereford)* [185]; Local Government Provisional Orders (Aspull, &c.) * [151], and passed. * Withdrawn-Bankruptcy (Scotland) * [59]. ORDER OF THE DAY. HOURS OF POLLING (BOROUGHS) BILL. (Mr. Chamberlain, Sir Charles W. Dilke, Di. Cameron, Major Nolan, Mr. Mundella, Mr. Rathbone, Mr. Henry Samuelson.) [BILL 11.] SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. MR. CHAMBERLAIN: The Bill I beg to ask the House to read a second time proposes to extend the hours of polling to 12-from 8 A.M. to 8 P.M.in all boroughs. It extends to all boroughs in England and in Ireland, and applies to all elections-Parliamentary, municipal, and School Board. At the same time, I admit there may very well be established a distinction between large boroughs and small boroughs, where the circumstances are altogether different; and if it should be the opinion of the Government or of the House that that distinction should be made in the Bill, the promoters will be happy to accept any Amendment to that effect. Either a Schedule might be attached to the Bill in which the names might be placed of all boroughs in which the Bill should apply, or it might be provided that the Bill should only apply to boroughs having a certain population, or a discretion might be allowed, and the local officials might be permitted to arrange the hours of polling according to the circumstances and necessities of |