important thing is not so much that every child should be taught, as that every child should have the opportunity of teaching itself. What does it matter whether a child of 12 knows a little more or a little less? That is not the point; the question is whether we are pursuing a course which makes intellectual exercise a pleasure or the reverse. Under the present system our schools will become more and more places of mere instruction; instead of developing intellectual tastes, they will make all mental effort irksome. We have now, or soon shall have, the control of the vast majority of children up the age of 12, and we ought in that time not only to teach them to read, but to enjoy what they read. We should educate them so that every country walk may be a pleasure; that the discoveries of science may be a living interest; that our national history and poetry may be sources of legitimate pride and rational enjoyment; in short, our schools, if they are to be worthy of the name-if they are in any measure to fulfil their high function, must be something more than mere places of dry study; must train the children educated in them, so that they may be able to appreciate and enjoy those intellectual gifts which might be, and ought to be, a source of interest and of happiness alike to the high and to the low, to the rich and to the poor. The hon. Baronet concluded by moving his Resolution. Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "in the opinion of this House, it is desirable to modify the new code of regulations issued by the Committee of the Privy Council, in such a manner as to give more encouragement to the teaching of history, geography, elementary social economy, and the other so-called extra subjects, in the Elementary Schools of the Country,”—(Sir John Lubbock,) at it in exactly the same light as his hon. Friend did, and to feel that he had an opportunity of carrying into practice the various and delightful expectations which his hon. Friend had so eloquently descanted on. He would be very glad, indeed, if it were possible that the schools he had to do with could make instruction as pleasant as ordinary food; but he was afraid that that would be making them much more pleasant than he himself had experience of in his youth, and if his hon. Friend had that delightful pabulum in his youth his experience must have been remarkably exceptional. His hon. Friend had stated that they ought not to be contented with mere book learning, and he complained against book learning of itself. He said it did not much matter whether there was more or less of it. Well, it was very much the case in the experience of life that a great deal of book learning was of very little use to a great number of men; but was that a guide with respect to children? What was book learning? Book learning was giving children merely a tool with which they could fight the battle of life, and the moral his hon. Friend drew was, that too much stress was laid upon mere reading, writing, and arithmetic. His hon. Friend, however, knew this-that a man or woman who had to fight the battle of life in England at this time and earn a livelihood without a knowledge of reading and writing was scarcely able to earn it. It was the one important thing which they must get. It was not a question of book learning against practical learning; it was absolutely necessary that they should have that key to unlock other means of instruction. If they were not taught to read and write, then the result was absolute failure. His hon. Friend said they would be better taught if other things were attended to. Now, would any hon. Member teach his child poliread? Would he teach him science betical economy before he taught him to fore he taught him to read? It was quite admitted that an intelligent teacher in teaching children to read and write would put such questions as would give them a great deal of information. So far, however, as he had seen in such schools, that was more encouraged and better done for the children of the poor than in some richer families. But the fact was, they must condescend to what they had to do, and he asked again, | that they had to be presented in Standcould they begin to teach political eco- ard 1. His hon. Friend was right in nomy before they had taught the chil-putting pressure on the Department to dren to read? He thought they were give as high an education as possible; doing a great deal more than his hon. but he ought to remember that they had Friend supposed. The experience of the to deal with children in a most ignorant last four months of which they had any state, and he did not believe that it was account, ending 31st August, 1871, told by setting them to learn political ecothem that under the new system 34,000 nomy, geography, and other such matchildren had been presented in the three ters, that the children could be best upper standards, 4, 5, 6, of whom nearly taught to read. His hon. Friend said 20,000 had been presented in the extra there was no encouragement for teaching subjects. His hon. Friend was mis- the extra subjects in the way the grant taken, therefore, in supposing that the was given. His (Mr. W. E. Forster's) Code did not encourage teaching those reply was that there was encouragesubjects. How many of these 20,000 ment, or else 20,000 out of 34,000 would had passed? Some 3,500 had passed in not have been presented in those subtwo subjects, and 9,000 in one. [Sirjects, and teachers would not have JOHN LUBBOCK: What are those sub- troubled themselves to give instruction jects?] They were geography, history, in them. Now, 15s. for the average algebra; language including English grammar or literature, and the elements of Latin, French, or German, physical geography, and animal physiology. But the real difficulty of the Department was this-his hon. Friend said that 34,000 was a small number. So it was. That was where the difficulty lay, and that difficulty could not be got over by driving classes into political economy. The difficulty was, that the children of the poor were badly educated to begin with, and the Department had to educate them better. He would give some particulars of the examinations under the New Code during the same four months, the four months ending August 31, 1871. During that time 2,851 day schools, having room for 625,000 children, and an average attendance of 372,000, were examined by the Inspectors. Deducting infants and those not qualified by attendance, 227,000 children above seven years could have been presented, of whom the managers ventured to present 184,000. Of these 184,000 children, 150,000 were presented only in the three low standards 1, 2, and 3, and of those more than 70,000 in Standard 1, more than 56,000 of whom were above 10 years of age, showing how neglected they were up to that time. Well, it was not the fault of the managers, nor of the Department, nor of the House, that the children were so backward, though it might be said to be their fault so far as they did not set to work to make attendance compulsory. But they must take the fact as they found it-namely, that 70,000 children were in such a state of comparative ignorance attendance was the limit, but this might be increased to 18s. Six shillings was paid upon the average attendance; but the 128. that might possibly be earned was not paid upon the same conditions as the average attendance, but only to children who had fulfilled these three conditions. In the first place, they should have attended 250 times; secondly, they should be present on the day of the examination; and thirdly, they should be offered for examination; or, in other words, they should not be absolutely ignorant, as if they had been swept off the streets. That was the explanation of the great number of children whom the teachers could not present for the average attendance. Nor would they be able to do so until the time should come when the children would be better prepared by means of infant schools, and there should be a better attendance than hitherto. Under these circumstances, he thought the House would agree with him that, in the first place, for some time to come we must make it our great point to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic; and, secondly, that our Code had not been a failure in the extra subjects, seeing that a very large proportion of those at all capable had been presented in them. At the same time, he was as auxious as his hon. Friend that the money which the country generously voted from year to year should get the best possible return in quality, as well as quantity, and he was determined, as long as he had to do with it, that the higher instruction should be given as long as it could be done without dimi nishing elementary education; but, of course, elementary education must be first and foremost. MR. RATHBONE ventured to answer the challenge of the right hon. Gentleman, and to say that reading, writing, and arithmetic could be taught better by teaching the higher branches. It was an unceasing complaint with the managers of schools that there was increasing difficulty in providing pupil teachers and masters, and he believed that was attributable to the decreased attention which was given to those higher subjects, compared with the three points of reading, writing, and arithmetic, which were the subjects that paid. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would impress strongly on the Inspectors the importance of giving more time than at present to the examination of the schools in general intelligence and in the higher subjects. MR. MUNDELLA said, he believed a good deal of the higher class of teaching was already being done in the country, as was evidenced by the fact that the valuable works of Spence and Major were sold in thousands. He did not take so desponding a view of the work now going on as was taken by the hon. Baronet (Sir John Lubbock); but he was rather astonished at the small progress which had been made since the passing of the Education Act. There were 34,000 children who had been presented in the three upper standards, but we should have 500,000. [Mr. W. E. FORSTER Not for four months.] No; for a year. He believed, however, that his right hon. Friend was doing all that he could to improve the present state of things, and he believed that by giving premiums, say 28. or 3s. beyond the 158. limit to the grant, for passing in extra subjects, they would get many more children to pass. MR. CORRY said, that when he became a Member of the Committee of Council for Education some years ago, he found that the Parliamentary Grants for the support of education were such as to give only the merest possible educational means of fighting the battle of life to the scholars in the schools receiving these grants, and with the view of improving the standard of education, he proposed a Minute for the purpose of giving a higher rate of grant for extra subjects. The Chancellor of the Exchequer opposed his Minute, and argued that it Mr. W. E. Forster was entirely repugnant to the principles of political economy; but he (Mr. Corry) thought it entirely consistent with the principles of common sense, and he had the satisfaction of beating the Chancellor of the Exchequer by a very considerable majority on that occasion. In the first one or two years he knew that his Minute produced very satisfactory results, and he should like to know how many of the 34,000 children who had passed in the three upper standards, and of the 20,000 who had passed in extra subjects, had passed in consequence of the money allowance made under that Minute. MR. W. E. FORSTER said, the right hon. Gentleman was perfectly correct in stating that the Minute which he proposed had produced a most beneficial change, and the Committee of Council were endeavouring by the New Code to develop the system of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to extra subjects. It was owing to that development that the grants to the 34,000 and the 20,000 children had been made. MR. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH said, that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Corry) deserved great credit and honour for his Minute. It was the first step taken by the Privy Council out of the Slough of Despond" into which the Revised Code had led them. He would suggest that the Vice President of the Committee of Council, before he proposed the Code for next year, should seriously consider whether in schools where extra subjects were efficiently taught, and where a larger number of pupil or assistant teachers were employed, a limit of 178. should not be substituted for the limit of 158. per child in average attendance, for the purpose of encouraging schoolmasters to teach extra subjects. LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE said, that last year he went to Germany, and studied some of the educational establishments there. He made "surprise visits," to schools in Dresden, and was surprised to see children who had neither boots nor shoes regular in attendance at schools in which the education given was equal to the highest education given in the State-supported schools of this country. He attended a whole day in each of three schools, and he had long and intimate conversations with the masters engaged. He found that the Revised Code was in Germany MR. W. E. FORSTER explained that many children in the fourth standard were under 10, and that a child who had been well taught in an infant school, where object lessons were encouraged, might be presented at ten, nine, or eight years of age in that standard. MR. BAINES said, he had not been aware of that. It might be inferred from the New Code that children would not reach the fourth standard till they were 11 years of age. He was anxious that the faculties of children should be developed by the early study of extra subjects. He hoped, however, the Resolution would not be pressed, feeling that the right hon. Gentleman was sensible of the value of extra subjects, and trusting that he would do all he could to promote them. universally a laughing stock, and they | W. E. FORSTER said, these were given in were astonished that a country like Eng- some schools.] He was glad to hear it, land could be content in teaching the but he thought extra subjects should be mere elements of reading, writing, and begun at an earlier age than 11. arithmetic. [Mr. FORSTER said, that he was not content.] But we remained simply teaching them. German teachers were convinced that in proportion as ordinary and extra subjects were mixed together the standard of education was raised, the one class of subjects helping the other. He had also taken the opinion of English masters, and had found that they were anxious for an alteration of the Code, some of them regretting the abolition of the old system, recollecting, perhaps, only what was good in it. Under that system, however, he knew the children of agricultural labourers rise to comparatively high positions, which would be almost impossible now. [Mr. W. E. FORSTER said, it was still more likely to happen now.] He agreed with the hon. Baronet (Sir John Lubbock) that if extra subjects were encouraged a higher modicum of reading and writing would be obtained, so that the low standards might, perhaps, be abolished. In two primary schools in which he took an interest he recently offered a prize to every child who passed in an extra subject, whether above or below the fourth standard, and in one of the schools, out of 30 who thus passed, 7 were below the standard. Something more might be done in this direction, even without materially raising the present standards. MR. BAINES said, he had witnessed last year in Switzerland what the noble Lord had seen in Germany. In the elementary schools children at a very early age were taught something of geography, history, and natural science, and he (Mr. Baines) had been very much struck with the utility of the system of object lessons, by which the children were introduced to the study of higher subjects. Moreover, 40 years ago, at New Lanark, in the first infant school established in the country, he saw young children with maps and diagrams of plants and animals, learning something of botany, natural history, astronomy, geography, and elementary science. Such instruction stimulated the faculties, and instead of mere reading and writing, which taught by themselves were dry and difficult, there should be object lessons, as in the Kindergarten system. [Mr. MR. B. SAMUELSON asked if the right hon. Gentleman would tell him what portion of the 20,000 children who passed in the "extra subjects" earned in consequence an increased grant from the schools; and, also, he should like to know in what manner the Revised Code, or the instructions to Inspectors, encouraged these object lessons, which were rightly considered to be of so much importance? MR. W. E. FORSTER said, he could not answer the first question without inquiry. The New Code clearly did not discourage extra subjects, for of all the children in the three upper standardsscarcely any in the lower being capable of presentation--20 out of 35 were presented, and 124 passed. As to the second question, lessons leading up to extra subjects were encouraged by the whole system. He scarcely ever went into a school without seeing an intelligent teaching of reading which gave more information than the mere learning to read. MR. WHALLEY said, that under the denominational system it was clear that reading, writing, and arithmetic would be the principal objects of study, and that the extra subjects would be neglected. The truth was, that the denominational system was intended to shackle the mind and to keep it in subjection to those who superintended that system. He denied that reading, writing, and PARLIAMENT-COUNTS OUT. RESOLUTION. MR. BOWRING, after some prefatory observations upon the inconvenience that resulted from counting out, moved"That every Member taking notice that 40 Members are not present shall do so from his place." MR. R. N. FOWLER seconded the Motion. Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the proposed to be left out stand part of the Question proposed, "That the words arithmetic were the first elements of education; they might rather be called the end of it, and indeed many of the most competent and practical persons were wholly ignorant of them-were wholly free from the unhappy effects of reading, writing, and arithmetic. In a colliery with which he was connected, he knew instances in which men who could not read or write were found to be more reliable than those who possessed those accomplishments. In the case of an illregulated mind, reading became a most unhappy faculty; and hon. Members had only to go to the back streets of London end of the Question, in order to add the words every Member taking notice that 40 Members to see the kind of literary trash that was are not present shall do so from his place,”—(Mr. bought by those whose tastes and passions Bouring,) were totally undisciplined. Further, every-instead thereof. housekeeper in London was aware that the accomplishment of reading was not always exercised by domestic servants for their own benefit. There was a time when the Principality with which he was connected was pre-eminently the seat of learning. He spoke of ancient British times-about the time of Julius Cæsarwhen the Eistedfodds were annually celebrated. At that time reading and writing were absolutely prohibited, until the children or the people could show that they had such tastes and knowledge as would enable them to be relied upon to use those accomplishments to their own advantage. Believing, therefore, that it was absolutely necessary that the tastes and passions of children should be brought under control before they were taught to read and write, he heartily supported the proposal of the hon. Baronet the Member for Maidstone. MR. WHITWELL remarked that until we had a new class of masters we must not expect any sudden change in the tasks of the children in the elementary schools. It might be worth while to mention to the House a plan that was adopted in the town he represented, by those who interested themselves in the cause of elementary education. It was this-that prizes were offered to the children in the elementary schools-irrespective of religious denomination-for such as showed themselves most competent in geography, algebra, and similar subjects. The results had been of a most beneficial character. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Mr. Whalley Question." MR. GLADSTONE said, that no doubt the practice was formerly such as the hon. Gentleman now proposed it should be. He would, however, point out that every discussion of a needless character was really a prolongation of the Session. That subject could not be entertained with advantage under the present circumstances of pressure on their time, and the sense of exhaustion which was, he thought, creeping more or less over them all. If considered at all, it should be considered as part of that wide question-the procedure of the House. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman would not press his Motion. MR. BOWRING said he would withdraw his Motion. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. ARMY-CONTROL DEPARTMENT. MAJOR ARBUTHNOT, in rising to move "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that She will be pleased to cause full inquiry by means of a Royal Commission into the working of the Control Department of the Army, and that the said Commission may be required to frame a Report embodying suggestions, if found necessary, for such alterations, both of principle and detail, as may conduce to efficiency and economy in the Civil and Administrative Departments of Her Majesty's Army." said, at that late hour, and at the late period of the Session at which they had arrived, he would be as brief as |