Hide Articles List

1 article on this Page

EDUCATION CONFERENCE AT ABERYSTWYTH.

News
Cite
Share

EDUCATION CONFERENCE AT ABERYSTWYTH. A conference, representative of the whole of Wales, opened at the University College, Aberystwyth, on Tues- day, the object of the conference being to consider the state of education in the Principality, with a special view to its peculiar requirements, in connection with the establishment of a national system of education for the United Kingdom." The conference had its origin in a meeting held at Cardiff on Dec. 17th, at which certain resolutions were passed, and delegates invited from cor- porations, churches or congregations, school committees, as well as mayors and ministers of religion of all denom- inations, the latter being admitted as ex-officio delegates. The first sitting commenced at eleven o'clock in the large room originally the coffee-room of the hotel There was a a very large attendance of delegates and representatives from all parts of the Principality. On the motion of the Rev. D. CHARLES, B.A., the hon. secretary of the conference, Mr Lore Jones-Parry, M.P. for Carnarvonshire, was elected to the chair. Mr JONES-PARRY thanked the meeting for the honour they had paid him in electing him as the chairman of such an important meetingâthe importance of which was best marked by the numerous attendance of friends of educa- tion from all parts of the country. It was unnecessary that he should detain them with any preliminary remarks in favour of the object of the meeting. Were he betrayed into indulgence in enunciatory platitudes or truisms it would be like gilding refined gold, or painting the lily." There were many papers bearing upon the great subject of national education to be read to the meeting, and he would at once proceed to the business of the meeting. The Rev. J. Thomas, the Rev. J. Davies, of Cardiff, the Rev. David Charles, B.A., Aberystwyth, and Goheb- ydd were appointed secretaries to the conference. The regulations of the conference were read by the Rev. J. DAVIES, it being advised that the papers to be read should not occupy more than half an hour in reading, and if less the better. No speaker was to occupy more than ten minutes at the evening meeting,, or to speak twice upon the subject, except the mover of a proposition. A com- mittee of reference was appointed with power to change the resolutions if requisite, or make any other alterations in the conduct of the business of the conference. The committee was composed of the Revs. J. Lumley and J. Thomas, of Liverpool, the Mayor of Aberystwyth, Mr Evans, Newport, and Dr Jones, Aberstwyth. A finance committee was also elected. The Rev. D. CHARLES, B.A., gave a short history of the conference, andsaid that he had received letters from many gentlemen who had the cause of education at heart, regretting their absence and sympathizing heartily with the object of the conference. The Birmingham Education League and the Manchester Union had been communi- cated with. The former body had sent a deputation to explain the principles of the League the latter had for- warded a letter which, upon consideration, he thought it was not advisable to make public. The following letters were read:â Brooklands, Swansea, Jan. 24,1870. Dear Mr Charles,-I am unable to be with you to-morrow, but I hope my friends will excuse me. I am reaily unfit to leave home. I took cold in December, on my return from Manches- ter, and I cannot shake it off. You will, I am sure, not think me indifferent to the question of education, but attribute my ab- sence to the cause I have named. With my best wishes for a successful meeting, believe me yours very truly, Rev. D. Charles, B.A. EVAS M. RICHARDS. Mr G. Osborne Morgan, M.P., wrote- I much regret that while fully approving of the programme of your proposed educational conference, and its objects, I am quite unable to attend it, as it falls during Hilary Term, when I am quite sure to be engaged in the courts here. Wishing you every success, &c. Mr Henry Richard, M.P., wroteâ 164, Clapham Road, London, Jan. 22. I have read the circular announcing the intended conference at Aberystwyth on the 26th and 26th inst. I am sorry that I cannot be with you on that occasion, and especially so since I have seen the names of the gentlemen who have promised to read papers at your meeting. Ihave so much work before me between this and the meeting of Parliament, that I find it impossible to spare the four days which coming to the conference would in- volve. But, if this difficulty did not exist, I do not see well how I could have attended; for, if I understand a right, yon re- quire of those who attend adhesion to the programme of the conference." Now I am not quite prepared at present to adopt the whole of your programme, and, as it is so authoritatively announced that the Government intend to introduce an educa- cational measure in the ensuing session, I should like as a mem- ber of Parliament to be free to consider such a measure unfettered by any foregone conclusions. On two points, how- ever, my mind is quite made up. First, that in so far as legal authority, whether imperial or local, has to do with education, it can only be a secular education, for the moment you admit the principle of applying money raised by general taxation to religious teaching you are involved in a maze of inconsistencies and embarrassments from which there is no escape. Secondly, a conscience clause, so far from being a satisfactory solution of the difficulty, is for Wales, at least, a mockery, a delusion, and a snare. May I venture to make one practical suggestion? Would it not be possible for the conference to collect facts bearing upon the present condition of popular education in Wales ? They might direct their attention to such points as I have dotted down on the enclosed paper. The possession of such facts would be of the greatest use to the representatives of Wales in the coming session. Mr Watkin Williams, M.P., wrote- I regret to say that I shall not be able to leave Westminster either on Tuesday or Wednesday next, as I have two important -cases appointed for argument on those days, and I am not able to leave them or alter the days. I sincerely hope that you will have a great meeting, and that you may, with perfect unanimity, approve of the scheme of the Birmingham Education League. I am, and for many years have been, strongly and decidedly in favour of a national system of free and unsectarian education. I think it is necessary to the well-being of the community that the State should provide for and insist upon the education of those children whose parents are either too poor or too apathetic to provide an education for them. I urged this view in a speech at Wrexham on September 28th, 1867, and also at Ruthin in 1866, and there was no mistake at all as to the people being in favour of a scheme of unaectarian, free, and compulsory education. I do not, however, believe myself that this great subject, involving as it does the question of secondary and technical education, can ever be dealt with in a manner entirely satisfactory to the nation, apart from the subject of the total abolition of religious tests at the universities, and also the abolition of State religions. A complete and satisfactory system cannot, I believe, be worked practically until all religions monopolies and inequalities are swept away, and it shall not be my fault if this subject does not obtain a discussion at the very next session of Parliament. Sir John Hanmer, M.P., wrote- It is well known that I desire to support public education on such principles as will make it most accessible to the great mass -of the people, and I am very well aware of the peculiar circum- stances of Wales. If, however, a member of Parliament commits himself unnecessarily to formulas and programmes, either what he says in this way goes for nothing, or else he takes away from himself that subsequent power of deliberation and judgment which alone, after a debate, can give real value to his vote. In a very long parliamentary service I have always abstained from everything of the kind. Speaking generally, however, I have not the least doubt but that the Bill of the Government witi carefully provide for what you most desire; and also that I shall be one of its heartiest supporters. The Rev. Llewelyn D. Bevan, minister of Tottenham Court chapel, London, also addressed a letter of apology to the hon. secretary, and other letters were read from gentlemen who had not been able to attend the con- ference. At the morning sitting the first paper, THB GROUNDS UPON WHICH NONCONFORMISTS CAN ACCEPT A GENERAL SYSTEM OF NATIONAL EDUCATION, was read by the Rev. L. Edwards, D.D., principal of the Calvinistic Methodist College, Bala. The paper was as follows:â One of the signs of the times in the present day, as may be seen, not only in publications that are read by those who depend for their livelihood on manual labour, amongst whom views bordering on what is called socialism' might be expected to prevail, but also in those journals which address themselves more specially to the educated classes, is a tendency to extend indefinitely the functions of the State, so as by degrees to bring all questions, social and religious, under its cognizance and control. This will not appear strange when we recollect what difference there is, and always must be, between thinking and working, and how culture is calculated to make men disgusted with the low drudgery that is inseparable from all practical bene- volence. It may also arise in part from a higher and better motive, an ardent zeal for the good and beautiful that brooks no delay, a kind of restless impatience, tempting them to cut the knot which requires such a length of time, and such endless trouble to unravel. On the other hand, it is possible that the Nonconformists gene- rally may have been too jealous of all interference on the part of the State, and that their views, especially of late, may have been too low and materialistic. But, however that may be, it now seems that there can be no material variety of opinion amongst us, as regards the expediency at least, if not the duty, of entrusting the great question of education, in some shape or other, to the care and juris- diction of the State. What we have therefore to consider is, what are the right limits of that jurisdiction, and whether it is wise and just that religion should be part of a State-paid system of education. It appears to me, I must at once confess, that whatever arguments there may be against a State Church, they apply with still greater force to all interference on the part of Government with the religious instruction of the young. Having succeeded, after a hard and long struggle, in emancipating commerce, and having made some progress in the great work of emancipating the Church, shall we allow a religious estab- lishment to be introduced in another form, and a form that will be found to be far more insidious and enervating? It may be said that all denominations will have the same chance, as they will receive assistance in proportion to their success but this is simply analogous to subsidising all the ministers of various denominations indifferently, the most immoral of all theories of State Churchism. Or it may be proposed that Government should pay for secular education only, on the understanding that this is to be supplemented by unpaid-for religious instruction. But then we ought to know whether this supplementary instruction is to be connected with the schools or not. If it is, the scheme bears on the face of it the appearance of something very like deception and with equal reason it might be contended that the State at present does not force us to pay for the teaching of any religious dogma by the Established Church, but that it merely supports a body of ciergy as a police to keep the people in order, permitting them at the same time to add a little supplementary instruction on Sunday. If religion must be taught in our schools, it would be only honest that the State, instead of consigning it-to a corner, or hidinsr it under a bushel, should recog- nise and pay for it openly, as the first and foremost of all the suojects to which the minds of our children ought to Ik directed. And if the State should not interfere with 7 f. I religion, it is not less important that our clergy and dis- senting ministers should be kept from interfering with our schools. Let them by all means gather as many of the children as they can, and as often as they can, for religious instruction in their own churches or chapels, or in any rooms they may build for the purpose, but there is no reason why they should interfere with our schools, any more than with our shops or our farms. But here comes the question, must the education given in these schools be irreligious! Islnot the State responsible to God for the religious instruction of the people ? Here lies the main difficulty, but here, also, if we search for it sincerely, may be found the key to unlock the difficulty. The State, as such, is undoubtedly responsible to God, and for myself I have no objection to the idea of a State conscience. But the State is only responsible for the right performance of its own proper duties. If we wish to know what those duties are, and how far they extend, we must bear in mind another truth, still more fundamental, the responsibility, that is, of the individual conscience. The State may labour in various ways to promote the well-being of the community, provided always that it does not trench on the rights of the personal conscience, for here it comes in contact with another, and a mightier kingdom, where God has set bars and doors, and said "hitherto shall these come, and no further." But within these limits, if it does its work in a religious spirit, its legislation will be also religious. And, if it transgresses these limits, its legis- lation will be an irreligious legislation, and the education given by it will be an irreligious education. It is possible to legislate religiously without teaching religious dogma. Many years ago there appeared in one of the Reviews, an article on Christianity and Candle Making," describing the philanthropic efforts of a certain company to impart religious education to their workmen. Far be it from me to speak of such men except with unfeigned respect. But it is not disrespectful or irrelevant to say that a-man may do much to prove himself a good Christian, by simply making good candles. And S3 may a schoolmaster act religiously and serve the interests of religion by diligence and kindness in the work of teaching common arithmetic. But again it will be asked, is it necessary to exclude the Bible from these schools ? This question has been vir- tually answered already, but perhaps it ought to receive a more distinct reply. Taking then the very lowest ground, leaving out of consideration altogether the divine origin of the Bible, it is difficult to see why it should not be placed on an equality with other books. In Wales, at least, we shall never be able to understand why the his- tories of Herodotus, Livy, and Hume, or the moral lessons of Aristotle and Bacon, or extracts from them, should be read in our schools, whilst the Bible must be carefully excluded. But I cannot rest here, for, believing as I do that the Bible is the word of God, I am compelled to take higher ground, and to say that permission ought to be given to read it in all our schools, not only for the sake of the history and morality contained in it, but as an act of worship. Fully admitting that the State should confine itself to secular education, by which I meau that it should exclude all religious doctrine, I still hold, in con- formity with the words of the Apostle, that this secular education ought to be "sanctified by the Word of God and prayer." If anyone thinks that this is inconsistent with our principles as Nonconformists, let me ask him what is implied in the liberation of the Church from the State, and what would be the necessary consequence if we succeeded in our efforts to make the Church in Eng- land as it is in Irelandâa free church ? Would it follow that in both Houses of Parliament there should be no act of worship, no recognition of God, and no reading of His holy Word? The views already advocated in this paper afford a sufficient answer to the question; for, granting that the State has no right to legislate on religion, I contend that this does not mean that it should legislate irreligiously, which it would be doing, as it appears to me, if we were to enact that God and His book should be ignored in all our schools. Of course I conclude that the reading of the Bible must not be imposed in any case on those who object to it. But whilst this liberty is granted to the State, that it may not exceed the limits of its duties by interfering with the religious convictions of the subject, the State itself ought not to be deprived of its liberty to act religiously in its own province. The dis- tinction is obvious, for it is nothing more than the dis- tinction between the State on the one hand attempting to do a work that does not belong to it, and its being allowed on the other hand to do its own work in a religious spirit. But however great the difficulties may be, there is reason to believe that they will prove themselves to be more theoretical than practical, and that, as with the old ques- tion of the possibility of motion, the problem will be solved by walking. If, as was lately stated by Mr Bright, there are some mountains more difficult to climb than we thought, there are others that seem to separate as we approach, opening a way for us to pass, without incurring any danger, and without turning either to the right or to the left. The second paper was read by the Rev. JOSIAH JONES, Independent minister, Machynlleth, the subject being- THE SYSTEM OF NATIONAL EDUCATION THAT WILL FAIRLY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PRINCIPALITY. Now that the franchise has been extended to the work- ing classes, and that such an amount of political power has been entrusted to them, it is a very cheering sign that the subject of primary education is attracting such wide- spread consideration. Sad, indeed, would have been the case, and gloomy the prospect, if apathy had continued on such a subject-important as it is in itself, and now doubly so from the peaceful political revolution which has taken place in our midst. It is also very gratifying to see, this very conference being evidence, that the subject of educa- cation is now rousing the Principality. It is well known that two rival organizations have recently been formed, in order to solicit our adhesion to two very different systems of education. The one is known as the Birmingham National Education League, and is intended to secure public support for a national, compul- sory, free, and unsectarian system-fiv st of all to supple- ment the deficiencies of the present system, and with the hope of ultimately superseding it. This hope is not openly expressed on the programme, but it is more or less openly avowed by its supporters. The other association is known as the Manchester National Education Union and is set up to perpetuate, with certain modifications, the present denominational system, and to extend its operation com- mensurately with the need of the nation. Thus both systems agree in the wish to be national, and in the principle of being subsidized from the public purse and to a more or less extent, too, both have an eye to some kind of compulsion. Even if Government proposed another system of education it is difficult to conceive how it could radically differ from either of these, however important its modifications of it might be. A denominational, or an unsectarian system, only can be possible. Therefore, without pledging ourselves to either of these systems as a whole, it is desirable that we should enquire which, taking everything into account, is most deserving of our adhesion and support ? Or, in the words of the programme, which is the system of education that will fairly mset the re- quirements of the Principality ? In order to answer this question satisfactorily it is neces- sary that we should further ask ourselves-What are the special requirements of the Principality ? Db we find in the Principality any special conditions requiring a totally different system of education from what would be suitable to England or some other part of the kingdom ? To this we decidedly answer, No;" for no system would meet the requirements of England but a fair, just, and impartial one to all the people, independently of their political or religious opinions; and we maintain that such a system would also meet the requirements of the Principality. We have, nevertheless, some special conditions existing amongst us; and although they are not such as to demand a dis- tinct system for ourselves, yet they are intensified reasons that any general system that may be proposed should be fair and impartial. Not to multiply our points of difference unneccessarily, it seems to me that, in relation to the question of educa- tion, the following are the most deserving of considera- tion :âFirst of all, the comparative sparseness of the population. While in England the average of the population to the acreage of the country is as four to one; in the Principality it is only one to one. In England we have immense masses of people attracted to certain districts and localities, either by manufacturing operations or the facilities of commerce. But in Wales, with but few exceptions, such as Cardiff, Merthyr Tydfil, and Swansea, even our town population is small. Hence it is important that any system of national education should be such as would not split up our scanty population into sections. The denominational system, as its very name might suggest, has been guilty of this. Owing to it we have educational divisions; each party strong enough, perhaps, to start a school of its own, but too weak to support it with efficiency. In mo3t rural districts of our thinly-populated country, one good school would be amply sufficient; and even in most of our towns, two or three good schools would be very much pre- ferable to a number of small, and, therefore, inefficient ones. But instead of this, we find even in small villages two rival schools wrangling with one another, while other neighbourhoods are utterly destitute. As instances we might mention Trecastle, Towyn, and especially Cemmaes. The result of such a thing as this is inefficiency of teaching, much quarreling and illwill, and a positive waste of mraey derived from private and public sources. We argue, then, on this ground, against the present denomi- national system. Another point of difference in the Principality is the preponderating strength of dissent as compared with the church. It is supposed that the purely church portion is only about one-eighth of the population. In very few localities, therefore, can the purely church population require a school of its own. In England the population is about equally divided between church and dissent; and even in this case it i3 very unreasonable to set up a system, supported by public taxation, which even beforehand might be known as likely to throw the major part of the education of the country into the hands of the church and which, as the result of past years shows, has actually been the case. The sum obtained by the church from Government in the year 1866 was about 75 per cent. of the entire grants. No doubt our church friends might say that all this money was given in accordance with a general system. No doubt it was but we feel that there is a serious objection to the system itself which even in England takes dissenters at a disadvantage, and thus practically throws the education of the country into the hands of the church. The wealthier classes of the I -i -J -V ⢠Ji <-1; â¢: community are confessedly adherents of the church; and it would require, therefore, much less effort on its part to multiply schools than on the part of dissenters. And to add to the disadvantages of dissenters, it is well known that many of them, especially the independents, had very decided objections to Government grants towards religious instruction; and although, as the less of two evils, our leaders have waived these objections of late, the system having been somewhat modified, yet the objections them- selves are acutely felt by not a few. This increases our disadvantages. And in addition to this, it must be borne in mind that the voluntary principle was already heavily taxed on the part of dissenters for the support of their different institutions but on the part of the church, its institutions are being cared for by the State with lavish liberality. The church, therefore, with little else to depend on its voluntary contributions, was enabled to set about establishing primary schools with decided advantages. And a system which takes dissenters at all these disad- vantages cannot be a very fair one and no wonder that much dissatisfaction prevails amongst them with respect to it. To compare great things to small, it is much the same as if a small horse heavily weighted, and having already been running for a long while, with its rider more- over perplexed by conscientious scruples, were set to run an additional race against a horse much larger than itself, fresh, and unweighted, with its rider entering into the contest heart and soul. I suppose that that could hardly be thought fair on the turf; and can it be in politics ? As dissenters were required to run against churchmen in the race of voluntaryim, for the prize of Government grants and the education of the people, it would be fair if churchmen had first been placed on terms of perfect equality with them throughout. The apparent impartiality of the denominational system is neutralized by the antecedent partiality of the State towards the Church. And we may rest satisfied that the operation of this system can never be practically fair, ex- cept when churchmen and dissenters shall have been placed on perfect equality with regard to the State. Even in this case, it would be liable to objection. But as the church in the! Principality, although by far the most wealthy, as embracing the aristocracy of the land and most of the landed proprietors, is notwithstanding but a small fraction of the population, the unsuitableness of the system which practically throws the education of the country into the hands of the church must be very evident. Dissenters in the Principality must have been very pa- tient indeed to have borne with the denominational system so long. But another' characteristic of the Principality is the brisk competition of the different denominations of dis- senters. You may find, indeed, even a greater number of denominations in England; but there, especially in the larger towns, there is a vast outlying population affording to each denomination a sufficient field of operations with- out encroaching on its fellows. In the Principality on the other hand, except in districts where the English and Irish elements have set in, the outlying population has been long ago exhausted. Hence denominations run into the same localities. And in North Wales, especially, we find even in small villages three, and perhaps even four, denominations in apparent antagonism; although I am happy to say that much friendly feeling prevails amongst them. They have long ago learnt the Christian lesson of forbearing one another in love." But the question arises-is each of these sections to have a denominational school as well as a denominational chapel ? Is our origin- ally scanty population to be divided educationally as well as religiously ? To many of us it is deplorable enough that we have so many religious divisions; for, to say the least, it involves much loss of means and of power. But shall we repeat our divisions in the province of education ? Our church friends often fling at us the taunt of inex- cusable sectarianism; but will they cling to a system which would perpetuate and extend our divisions? Rather will they not give it up peacefully in order to limit our schisms ? If not, who but they will be respon- sible for educational sectarianism ? On the denominational system, either every denomination that can muster a suf- ficient amount of money must have Government grants for a school of its own, or some will be favoured and petted more than others. If Government were impartial, there would be waste and divisions, if not, there would be grumbling. Having thus glanced, in reference to the subject of education, at some of the destinctive peculiarities of the Principality, does it not appear evident that the present denominational system is net at all suitable to the actual conditions which our country presents ? We might in- deed, from a knowledge of these conditions, have foreseen the inapplicability of the system; but, by this time, what might have been clearly foreseen has been practically de- monstrated by experience. But to have thrown one system overboard is not to have recommended another-at best it can only have been a clearing of the ground for it. We come to the question, then, whether the system advocated by the Birmingham League be likely to meet our requirements ? It seems to me that in its main features it is. This system is proposed to be national, compulsory, free, and unsectarian. It is intended to be national It is not set up for the special benefit of a sect, or of a class, be it ever so large. And in this it differs materially from the present de- nominational system. This is intended directly for the benefit of the denomination; and only indirectly for the benefit of the nation from whose purse it derives such a large portion of its support. Before he can get education at all, a child must submit to be taught the shibboleth of the denomination, or, where parents exceptionally object under a conscience clause, the control of the school, and therefore of the education of the child will be still in the hands of denominational officials. The Manchester Union, indeed, proposes to be national, but how? By absorbing the nation in the denominations. The Birming- ham League, on the other hand, aims at a really national syptem-directly national in its officers as well as in its benefits. And in order to be really national, the League claims for its system the power of compulsion. And, first of all, local authorities are to be compelled by law to see that sufficient school accommodation is provided for every child in their district. This compulsory power is to be lodged in the hands of the central Government. And in order to in the hands of the central Government. And in order to perform their duties, local authorities are to be invested with power "to levy rates for education, to be collected by overseers with the poor rate, on precept of School Board." They are also to have compulsory power for the purchase of school sites, so that a refractory landlord may no longer have the power to obstruct the education of a whole district. To all this I suppose that Welshmen would not be likely to demur. But in addition to this, all children are to be required to attend school, if not privately instructed, from six to fourteen years of age, subject to provisions of Factory Acts, the number of attendances to be fixed by committee of council, but not to be less than 200 yearly, of two hours and a half each, for full-timers, and of 100, of two hours a half each, for half-timers. Compulsion, it must be confessed, is a disagreeable thing; and nothing but the direst necessity would justify its introduction into a system of education. It seems, however, that such a necessity exists. School accommo- dation already vastly exceeds the actual number of scholars, although it is supposed that there are yet a mil- lion of children not at school. And if local authorities are to be compelled to provide more accommodation, it seems right that they should have power to prevent that such accommodation should be unused by those for whom it was provided. In fact, if we commit the education of the country into the hands of Government, it would seem that we must allow Government to perform its work in its own way, which is by force of law. Government, as Government, knows of no other way. And, judging from the reports of her Majesty's inspectors, the power of com- pelling a more or less regular attendance, seems to be imperatively necessary. And although the Manchester Union seizes upon direct compulsion as being a very ry objectionable feature in the system of the League, yet the Union itself admits the necessity of compulsion of some kind. And of the two, the indirect compulsion which it proposes is the most objectionable, as it would operate only on the poorer classes, thus making an odious distinc- tion between the poor and the well-to-do. And especially is it objectionable on the ground that it would operate most strongly on working children, whose attendance at school it would compel on alternate days, or weeks, or for a given number of days in the year; a certificate of attendance to be a condition for work under thirteen years of age." Now, we say that this kind of compul- sion is most objectionable, as it would operate with greatest force on the working child while the lazy, good- for-nothing fellows would be allowed to mope away their time in idleness. Of the two, compel the boy that will not work to be at his books, and excuse the other rather than he. But, on the whole, it seems to me that this power of com- pulsion would not be much objected to in the Principality, more than the present power of vaccination, and so on. Welshmen have, by this time, thoroughly awakened to the need of education. However passionately fond of their own Welsh they may be, yet they are deeply con- scious of the great importance of an English education. And, therefore, with unobjectionable schools, and free education, I don't anticipate much opposition to this power of compulsory attendance. As in Saxony, in a district of 50,000 inhabitants, the cases of contumacy amounted only to about four in a year, so also in Wales, I expect that the cases requiring the exercise of this power of compulsion would be very rare. We would say, then, if this power of compulsion be deemed absolutely neces- sary for a really national system of education, of course, let us have it; only let its application be as considerate as possible. If the birch rod is necessary, let us get one, but let its application be attempered with love. But if this power of compulsion over us and our children i be granted, we too must have our conditions. And on no consideration will Welshmen willingly submit to this power of compulsion unless our conditions, and especially one of them, be complied with. Our terms are important, and one of them especially i3 of vital consequence to us, and must, therefore, on no consideration be set aside. First of all, we require that the schools shall be free. Free schools would not involve injustice to any, but pay schools might, owing to the difficulty of drawing a correct line of demarkation between different classes. Frequently payment might be demanded from the really poor, while ths really able might be exempted; for people are not what they seem. And with rate-supported schools, some would ..1. :M .4 ( ) _L' local rate, and of the general taxation of the country, and c then in school fees. But with rate-supported schools all would have to pay, and all would have the opportunity of deriving benefit. We say, then, let the schools be free, but not eleemosy- nary. In denominational schools children of the very poor can be admitted only as objects of charity. Now, charity is a very excellent thing to show, and we ought to feel really grateful to those who practise it; but it is, nevertheless, not the very best thing to receive. On this point we ought to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to re- ceive," Acts xx. 35. Distinctions are always odious if they can be avoided, and especially so in the case of children. To relegate a child to a pauper class impresses him with a sense of inferiority, and engenders in him a slavish spirit, perhaps, for life. Whereas, on the other hand, the fencing off of the children of the better classes into the paying class tends to foster in them a haughty, Pharisaic spirit, as if they had been formed of superior clay. If we wish to see a manly and straightforward race of children growing up around us, we must preserve them from the evil influences of a system which tends to nip all manliness in the bud and, if we wish also to unite all classes by means of a wholesome brotherly feeling, we must not perpetuate the unnecessary school distinctions of the past. Let our schools be free to all, but eleemosynary to none. In the system proposed by the League, the poorest will have the satisfaction to think that he, too, has his schooling on exactly the same terms as the rich-on the grounds of taxation. Free schools, no doubt, would add considerably to the public expenditure but it is probable that by doing away with the unnecessary multiplication of schools, and the double staff of inspectors, the education of the children would not cost more per head than under the present system. And as to the objection of sacrificing the present voluntary subscriptions and children's pence, it does not seem to me to have much force for these would still con- tribute by way of rate and taxation. The difference be- tween the system of the Union and of the League, in this respect, is about the same as if the Union proposed that a man should give with both hands, while the League pro- Eoses that he should give the same, or even less, with one and only. In both cases the money would be given by the same individual. But it is indispensable that any system of schools for the Principality should be unsectarian. As all are to pay under compulsion, no class of her Majesty's subjects should have grounis to complain of unfairness. With dissenters it is a fundamental principle that no one should be compelled by law to pay for either the support or the teaching of religion, much less of denominationalism. Our schools ought, therefore, to be free from every taint of sectarianism. As far as the law is concerned, let us have only what all of us requireâa good secular education. But out of school hours, and with due arrangement, let the school premises be equally at the service of all who might desire to superadd for their children religious in- struction. Let not even the Bible be introduced under compulsion, as a religious book, by either the central Government or School Boards. But let there be "power to permit" the reading of it out of school hours, just as any other religious book which parents or their friends might wish to use in giving religious instruction. We say this, with reference to the Bible as the text-book of religion; but you will allow me to add, with due deference, that there is indeed a sense in which its introduction might be justified even by resolution of a School Board; namely, on account of the secular information which it contains. No one can understand even the secular history of this world, if ignorant of the great facts of Scripture History. In what other book can we get the history of the early distri- bution and settlements of mankind; the political history of the Jews; and, especially, of the foundation and the propagation of Christianity ? These are facts which enter largely even into the secular history of this world, and, on on secular grounds, it seems to me that the Bible would be admissible by resolution of the Board to explain them. If gentlemen differ from me on this point, no doubt they will allow me, also, to differ from them. After all, it is not likely that many of its friends would be disposed to contend for its introduction on purely secular grounds. But we repeat the schools must be strictly unsectarian. We would sympathize, indeed, with those good and earnest men who shudder at the idea of giving up religious in- struction, or as they wrongly express it, the religious element, in our schools. But the actual sacrifice would be very little; and it would not necessarily involve the reli- gious element at all. It appears great only in the erroneous view which our friends are taking of it. Scho)ls are not to be "godless" or "irreligious" because they are secular. Though religion may not be theoretically taught, yet, practically, it may per- vade the whole school, in the religious conduct of the teacher and other officials; for, though religious instruction in school hours be forbidden, yet the practice of it no doubt would be highly esteemed in a teacher. And it is generally confessed that the direct religious instruc- tion of our present denominational school is of little worth for religious instruction becomes inane and power- less of good, if it becomes a matter of routine. So it might have been expected to be and so, with great unanimity, it has been described by her Majesty's Inspectors. Asa sample of many more, hear the Rev. E. T. Watts, Church of England Inspector in Anglesea, Carnarvon, Denbigh, Flint, and Merioneth; "A large amount of comparatively useless information," says he, "is often accumulated at the expense of real knowledge. I fear very many of the children leave school ill prepared to fight the battle of life. The religious knowlege acquired by them, if the term may be used, is often but ill digested, and therefore soon for- gotten." Hear again the words of Mr Buckmaster, of Wands- worth: As to the practical result of the religious instruc- tion given in our parish schools," says he, of 120 pupils married, 'with children passing through the same course of religious instructon, only nine were in the habit of attending any place of worship regularly, and two of these were paid singers. Ninety, so far as I could learn, had never been either to church or chapel, since they earned their own living, except to a wedding or a baptism." Let this show the worthlessness of the so-called religious in- struction given. Why should we, therefore, on the ground of religion, cling to a system, with all its disadvantages, which produces such indifferent religious results. And, as every denomination, especially in Wales, has provisions of its own for imparting religious instruction, why in the world should the jaded schoolmaster be charged with the work? In Wales, the facilities for religious instruction are amply sufficient, independently of day schools. A system of secular education would fairly meet the require- ments of the Principality. And, to be outspoken, this system of denominational teaching has been very oppressive on dissenting com- h ng munities. Oftenhave parents, in small localities, been placed in the sad predicament of either suffering their children to grow up without any education whatever, or to allow them to be managed, religiously, at the absolute discretion of the clergyman and his friends. In addition to having church principles forced on them during the week, they have also been compelled, in too many instances, to attend church on Sundays. And woe be to any one that had the impudence to object. Thus, without being benefited by their church attendance, dissenting children have been deprived of the supervision of their parents, and of the teaching of their chapel friends, on the plea of religious instruction being given them elsewhere. True, our church friends are now very compliant; and are spontaneously proposing a "carefully worded" conscience clause for the protection of the children of objecting parents; but the evil of it is, that these parents are required to object. The state of society, particularly in the Principality, is frequently such that by the very act of objecting the parent would involve himself in so many disadvantages that, rather than object, he would prefer the humiliation of having his children taken from under his care on Sun- days, and from the place of worship which he loves, in order to attend, under compulsion, a place of worship which neither he nor themselves are in love with. The days of a conscience clause, in order to restrain the tyranny of a denominational system, are irretrievably passed. In the wprds of the Nonconformist for January 12th, What passes under the designation of the conscience clause in reference to this question is well understood to be "a delusion, a mockery, and a snare. In all our rural districts in which there is but a single school, and that school managed by the clergyman, the notion of any village tradesman or labourer expressing in writing a con- scientious objection to allow his children to be spiritually manipulated by the State-authorized and supported pastor of the parish, is perfectly ridiculous; or, if in any case Hodge and his wife should dare to face the clergyman and the squire in any such matter, and demand exemption for their child from catechism or creed, who is not well aware that the child will have to live the life of a boy-martyr, and that he will earnestly desire, after a very short trial, to be put upon a footing with his schoolmates in all manner of instruction given at school." And, on account of another reason, of irresistible force with Welsh dissenters, they must demand a perfectly un- sectarian system of education, namely, that the present denominational system would inevitably lead to the adop- tion of a similar system in Ireland. However the advo- cates of the denominational system may declare, as Dr Rigg, at the Manchester Union Conference, that the question of education for this country must not be mixed up with that of Ireland, but must be settled on indepen- dent grounds, yet nothing can be more certain, from the spirit of the present day, than the fact that the denominational system, if perse vered in in England, must, sooner or later, be extended to Ireland. The thing ad- mits not of a doubt. The time is past for the Irishman and the Catholic to be governed differently from the Englishman and the Protestant; and we are glad that it is so. Will Welshmen, therefore, not oppose a system which would inevitably lead, if persisted in, to the com- mission of the main portion of the education of Ireland into the hands of the Roman Catholic Church ? To have asked such a question is sufficient. Welshmen are too great Protestants for such a thing as that; and in view of the inevitable, we would earnestly appeal to our church friends, and those of the Wesleyans who are undecided, to discard the present system with all their might. We allow that this is not a reason for statesmen to act upon; but it is for Protestant bodies. And even statesmen ought not to set up a system of religious endowment in schools which they have negatived in churches. Now I have done and in summing up, may I not say, '⢠Q â-w1- âj â .v-â- i" â v â â j the denominational system of the Union and with re- spect to the system proposed by the League, that we are in love with it as national that we are willing to it as compulsory that we are zealous for it as free; but that we regard its unsettarianism as indispensably necessary. We believe that, in its main features, this system would fairly meet the requirements of the Principality. Most decidedly Government ought, as quickly as possible, to cease interfering with the education of the people, or to conduct it on purely unsectarian principles. The"next paper was read by the Rev. D. ROWLANDS, principal of the Normal College, Bangor, upon How BEST MAY A NATIONAL SYSTEM OF EDUCATION BE MADE TO EMBRACE THE YOUNG OF ALL CLASSES IN THE COMMUNITY. It is a matter for profound gratitude that the question of education is at the present time commanding through- out the kingdom such a large amount of earnest atten- tion. It is devoutly to be hoped that the outcome of all this thought and all this discussion will be the passing through Parliament of such a measure of national educa- tion as will put an end to our barren controversies on the subject, and inaugurate for the future of our country a much happier and more prosperous order of things. I feel much obliged to the gentlemen who have invited us together to attend this conference at Aberystwyth; for most certainly the circumstances of Wales, as regards edu- cation, are such as to demand our serious consideration and in the interest of our native land we ought to take good care that, in whatever measure of education may be forthcoming, the special requirements of the Principality may not be overlooked. The question which the preliminary committee assigned for discussion in this paper seems to take it for granted that our present system of education is not the best that could be thought of to meet the educational wants of the country. And indeed it would not be very easy to con- ceive of a system that could be worse. It is cumbrous, wasteful, and inefficient. And moreover it is fertile in all manner of unpleasantness. Instead of being contrived on the principle of wasting in friction the least possible amount of available force, it seems to have been inge- niously devised to consume in angry jealousies and fierce sectarian bigotries as much working power as could con- veniently be disposed of, and leave as its result the least possible modicum of real education. We have heard so much of the progress of education, and of the enlighten- ment of the nineteenth century, that one feels it very pleasant to yield to the delusion, and believe that the millennium of wisdom and intelligence is come, and that the darkness has been chased out of existence for ever. Yet after all the panegyrics on our advancement, we are exposed to the moitification of having to confront a set of ugly facts that show, after all, that we have not so much to boast of. It is true that a million and a half was spent last year in the support of elementary schools under in- spection that the number of such schools in England and Wales is now some 15,000; and they are able to accommo- date srme '76 of the population; yet the names on the books did not amount to more than *67 of the population, whereas the average attendance was only '46. We have school accommodation for about two million children; but we have in our schools some 700,000 vacant seats. Although we have about 15,000 aided schools, yet so un- equally are they distributed that we have 10,000 parishes in England and Wales where there no schools receiving Government aid. In many places, on the other hand, so thickly are Government schools clustered together that they cannot possibly be but very inadequately filled, and hence they kindle among their managers an unextinguish- able feud. In spite of our school attendance and school accommodation of every kind, we have no less than some 1,280,000 children in the kingdom that receive no school- ing at all, and that grow up in the midst of our boasted civilisation in a state of terrible barbarism and all this ignorance fails not to bring about its own fearful results in misery and crime. We do not dream for a moment that education is competent to regenerate mankind; but there is an alliance between ignorance and vice in all ages that never fails to curse society, and which is generally dissolved when the people have had the privilege of the healthy training involved in the discipline of schools. I find that a stipendiary magistrate in Birmingham has lately been saying a good word for ignorance, shielding it from the calumny which wise men generally deem it their duty to disgrace it with. You tell me," said he, that ignorance is a moral evil-that it leads to vicious habits, and vicious habits to robbery and murder, and insecurity of life and property. But I answer that ignorance is not necessarily an evil to any but the person himself. Ignor- ance is not by any means incompatible with honesty, and truthfulness, and industry, the kindest nature and the warmest affections, nor is learning incompatible with idle- ness, and profligacy, and brutality, and habitual fraud and dishonesty. Look at the revelations from bankruptcy courts, where every one is more or less educated." Surely if ignorance were only an evil to the individual himself, it is our duty, as our brother's keepers, to save him from his enemy. But it is also an incalculable evil to society it inflicts its curses upon it in a thousand ways directly, and indirectly it tends to extend and perpetuate indefinitely the evils of which it is the prolific source. Are we to look upon Mr Kynnersley as another instance of the strange incapacity evinced bv men of special training to estimate the specific value of evidence as bearing upon general questions ? His own experience as a Birmingham magis- trate ought to have taught him a different lesson for we find that in the year 1868, 2,850 persons were committed'to the Birmigham gaol, and of these only fifty-one were able to read and write well. Out of the 2,850, nearly ninety- eight per cent. were uneducated, and of these nearly one- half were totally unable to read or write. And out of all the persons committed to gaol during 1868, in the whole of England and Wales, those that could read and write well were only 2'9 per cent.; those who could read only, or read and write imperfectly, were 61-0 per cent. and those that could neither read nor write were 35'2 per cent. And as reading and writing imperfectly is, practically speak- ing, and for all mental and moral influence, tantamount to Deing unable to read and write at all, we may say that the proportion of the committals for 1868 involved 96*2 Ser cent, that were destitute of education. And as to ankruptcy cases, it is startling to read the statement made by another stipendiary magistrate, Mr E. J. Davis, at Burslem, that from June, 1865, to June, 1866, out of 3,444 signatures to promissory notes executed in connection with the loan societies of the district, as many as 1,678 were affixed by crosses or marks. Whatever we lack in this kingdom of ours we have an abundant supply of ignor- ance, and terrible are the penalties which it inflicts upon us. The police returns of 1866 show that we have some 22,806 known thieves, and it is computed that every adult thief is a loss to the country of 2100 per annum, besides the cost of prosecution. In addition to that we have 64,846 vagrants, suspected persons, and receivers of stolen goods. We are also burdened with more than a million of paupers in England and Wales, not to mention the enor- mous mass of those that are but very little above the level of pauperism. Indeed out of the twenty million popula- tion in England and Wales it is admitted that no less than four millions are in a state of crime, ignorance, misery, vice, and pauperism. It is true that great efforts have been put forth by many friends of education to let in some healthful light upon the benighted masses of our country, and the good people who have worked so hard for this object are de- serving of all gratitude and praise. The Government has also of late been doing something by way of furthering their efforts. But yet the work to be achieved is so enormously great, and our present system of com- bined voluntary effort and Government aid is so utterly inadequate to overtake it, that we cannot but deeply rejoice at the conviction which seems to possess the kingdom more and more that it is high time for us to have a measure of education that will be competent to meet the requirements of the country. There are two great faults in our present educational efforts. First, they are inadequate. On all hands we meet with evi- dence of their utter insufficiency. After ten years and a half's experience of the present system of education," said Mr Brodie, one of her Majesty's Inspectors of Schools, I have quite come to the conclusion that the poor both are not and never will be reached by it, except very par- tially, especially in our large towns, so fruitful of the criminal class." Unfortunately, we are not unanimous in our religious views, and people generally feel that no re- ligious education ought to be given their children except what they can approve of themselves. Hence, in self- defence, they must set up their denominational machinery of education also, in order to secure their children against the power of those that are hungry for proselytes. But, as it happens, all the nonconformists of the kingdom have to build their own places of worship, support those that minister unto them in holy things, set up their various schemes and organizations in order to alleviate the miseries of the poor, and administer religious instruction and con- solation to the neglected masses around them, who "are destroyed for lack of knowledge." And, in addition to all this, they have to make very large sacrifices in order to carry out the injunctions of the Master, by way of sending the light of salvation to the heathen world. Surely they have enough to do without burdening themselves with the education of the children that are around themâa work that so justly falls into the hands of the State. I speak from a nonconformist's point of view. And as our friends of the Church of England, who, in addition to their State support, have also within their pale such a very large pro- portion of the greatest wealth of the country, are deter- mined, generally, to have nothing to do with education, except in so far as it is denominational and professes to "educate the children of the poor in the principles of the Church of England," it is not to be expected that the non- conformists of the kingdom, who have now for such a length of time being carrying their burdens and cherishing their convictionsâit is not to be expected, I say, that they will submit to a system of education- that ignores them and their convictions. Hence, however able and willing the Church of England may be to educate all the children, the nonconformists cannot, for a moment, enter- tain the idea of complying with the terms on which that education is offered-terms that involve the surrender of their children to a system of things which both they and their fathers have sustained all manner of sacrifices rather than submit to. And as the denominational system drove all the nonconformists' children from the church schools, so the same system keeps the various bodies to which the I nonconformity of the kingdom is unfortunately divided apart from one another; and as there are also deep strata in our population that no religious or denominational in- i- their schools, it is no wonder that we have among us a teeming mass of population that perish continually in ignorance. I cannot see that there is any hope whatever âand such seems to be the conviction of almost all earnest observers --thtt our present system of education can ever overtake the work which demands to be done, and to be done quickly. The second great fault I was going to specify in our present system is. that it is misdirected and exceedingly wasteful. The idea that our Government schools are so heaped together in many quarters that there is accommodation in them for 700,000 more children than can be got to attend them, and at the same time that there are in England and Wales 10,000 parishes without any such schools There are many excellent persons, no. doubt, that contribute, and contribute very liberally, to- wards the support of denominational schools in many neighbourhoods where school accommodation is ridiculously disproportionate to the children that can be induced to attend; and yet they can claim the Government grant. And what a pity that so much generous benevolence on the part of individuals, and so much of the public money, should be wasted upon empty benches, and that for no purpose whatever except for the maintenance of useless crotchets It is too late in the day for the State, at all events, to be allowed to countenance such profligacy in squandering the resources of the country. We squander recklessly upon crotchets, and in order to be able to do so we stint upon the strength that is to bring about the re- generation of our countrymen. What enormous sums have been spent in building and supporting schools-sums that were mainly demanded by the religious differences of neighbourhoods And what large sums are spent by the Government in supporting different sets of inspectors, without answering any purpose whatever, except pro- ducing endless jealousies, and perpetuating differences that ought to be allowed to die On the other hand we have schools languishing for the want of more teaching power, and committees cannot see their way to engage pupil teachers. We have many good men and excellent teachers that work most conscientiously with their schools, and yet their salary is so small and their prospects so cheerless that it is a terrible shame for our kingdom to leave them in such a plight. Indeed, we find a large number of teachers giving up the profession in despair, and turning to some other avocations that the market may offer them, in order to secure their own and their children's bread. And that is a deplorable waste. The money paid by the Government on their account to the training collegesâa very considerable sum-is lost; and what is worse, their training, their experience, their skill, and their zeal be- come lost to a profession that cannot afford to lose a par- ticle of such valuable commodities. Far be it from m-e to advocate a system that would pamper inefficiency in teachers. He that will not work in this, as well as in every other calling, let the apostle's inexorable law be ap- plied to him- Let him not eat." But every thoughtful man will deem it a very wise economy to keep this most useful class of public servants from starving, and even to give them all encouragement to do their very best in their arduous and important profession. Our present system is very far from doing this. And I may instance one other very gross misappropriation of public money which is chargeable on the present system, namely, that it helps bountifully those that are able to help themselves, the large towns' schools, &c., whereas it leaves the poor and thinly-populated neighbourhoods entirely outside its sphere and hence those are either not educated at all, or the education they receive leaves them very much in the same state as if they were entirely uneducated. The Government should, in the matter of education, economize the public money in such a way as not to spend a penny that does not produce the greatest amount of utility and in order not to make the money it spends now a deplorable waste, it is obvious that it must spend a good deal more. We seem to have got thus far, then, with the discussion of our question, that our present system, as regards pri- mary education, could not well be worse than it is. And it is very little better that can be said of our higher schools and our collegiate education. It is notorious that the edu- cation administered in many of our endowed grammar schools, and other seminaries,is exceedingly worthless. It should not be forgotten that our Government has no con* trivance whatever to enable clever, but poor children, to rise from the primary to enjoy the advantages of higher schools; and in the light which was cast on the question by the late commission of enquiry into the state of en- dowed schools, it is most humiliating to think how the benefactions made to the cause of education by the piius zeal of former days have been so badly managed, and so grossly abused. As to our universities, although they belong to the nation, yet they have been monopolised by a class. The question how all these mistakes may be rectified, and a system of national education that would benefit all classes of the community be established, is confessedly a very important and a very difficult question. The Na- tional Educational Union offers us an answer as regards primary education, which is warranted to be infallible. The thing is to be done by judiciously supplementing the present denominational system of national education." I cannot think of this plan for a moment but with invin« cible repugnance, and I a«i convinced that all the people of Wales, and I trust all the people of the kingdom would regard such a measure with horror. Has not the present denominational system wasted the public money and tormented the consciences of the people long enough ? It has, most assuredly. Let it therefore rest from its labours and may the remembrance of it soon be obliterated from the memory of mankind. With the measure proposed by the National Education League, in most things I most cordially agree. It aims at the establishment of a system which shall secure the edu- cation of every child in the country." It proposes to pro- vide, in the first place, a sufficient school accommodation for every child in every district. And it proposes that the cost of founding and maintaining such schools as may be required shall be provided out of local rates, supple. mented by government grants. All school fees to be abolished; and the subscriptions, that always necessarily made such a heavy drain upon those who "to their power, yea, and beyond their power," were willing to aid every good cause, whereas many of the rich and well-to-do that buckled themselves up in their selfishness, escaped scot free. These also are to be done with, or rather to be trans- formed into an equable rate, that will, according to his ability, touch alike every member of the community. It can say with Mr Dawson, of Birmingham, I like rates, because they touch everybody, because I can get hold of the fat and selfish manufacturer and touch him up,because I lay hold of the man that visits no church and visits no chapel, and make him pay; and I advocate not only local rates, but national taxation for educational purposes." All I ask," said Canon Kingsley, is, that the generous should not be overtasked to save the pockets of the un- generous that the noble-hearted should not, as now, be forced to pay for the mean; the enlightened for the unen- lightened; the patriotic for the selfish; but that all, what. ever their private fancies or characters may be, should be forced by law to acknowledge this primary duty, and so to fulfil it." It is objected that the abolition of fees will be prejudicial to the people's self-respect, and will alienate the more respectable from the schools. That I woul 1 be little afraid of. I find mankind generally so fond of their money, that they are not likely to quarrel either with the individual or the government that considerately doeg away with the necessity of their parting with it. And what a blessing to the children of the poor that have not the means to pay fees, that they have to receive their education as they enjoy the light of the street gas, or indeed, as they enjoy the light of heaven with. out paying a penny for it, and without having to remem. ber that their education, which of all things developea most effectively their self-reliance, has been paid for from a pauper fund. And if the more respectable choose to re- fuse such schools, because they are not to pay fees in them, so much the worse for the more respectable. The chance ill that they will pay for a school. which, with all its respecta. bility and its fees, will turn their children out into the world infinitely less qualified to fight the great battle than many of the street Arabs that have been made men of by the free government school. Besides will not all the people when the school rate is being collected, have to feel that they are, every one of them, contributing their quota to- wards the support of the school? An additional rate may, for some time, be felt a little heavy; but this rate would, prove highly economical, inasmuch, as it would, in a very short time, very considerably lessen our burdens with regard to all other rates. The League also proposes to make attendance at some school or other compulsory. There is something that at first sight strikes us as being somewhat objectionable in this. We are so proud of. our liberty, and deal out such rhodomontades about every Briton's house being his castle, &c., that it does not seem to comport with our dignity at all that our family arrangements should in any manner be subjected to the surveillance of the police. And as, to thfr tune of Britons never will be slaves," we are eloquently assured that the people of this kingdom would never brook compulsion as regards the school attendance of their children. But in addition to thp braggadocia element, there is also deeply imbedded in the Briton's character a strong substratum of good com- mon sense. This enables him to understand that society must protect itself against the ignorance or malice of those that would hurt it, and that such an arrangement must be submitted to even "upon compulsion." And when such arrangements are made known, they at once so commend themselves to his practical reason, and good sense, and love of order, that he at once complies with them, and lends the Government all the strength of his loyalty, in order to enforce the same regulations on others also. Practically speaking, the entire constitution of human society is based upon compulsion. A. must respect the rights of B., and B. must conduct himself in like manner with regard to A. and his rights. In the same fashion each individual citizen or subject must deal fairly with the rights of the community. And the com munity-that is all the individuals together, or in their representatives-has a right to enforce upon every man the conduct as regards certain things that may prove least injurious or most beneficial to the community as such. We have many regulations imposed upon us in this kingdom, interfering even with personal liberty and right. that are based upon no other principle. Our Sanitary Laws, Vaccination Bill, Reformatory and Industrial Schools Act, Factory and Workshop Bills, &c., are aU compulsory measures formed by the community in self- defence, and we do not complain of them. The laws I .4:0 -<f;: A