the people who send their children to us, if our schools were to become inefficient, or other schools could teach reading and writing better, the parents, without at all thinking about the religious knowledge they get, would send them to others. Our schools depend very much upon their character, as efficient institutions, for success in those branches, and they are generally full.

The difference between the comprehension of a child and an adult is not admitted in these answers to the extent that it ought to be, in the consideration of religious questions. If the faculties of a child were like those of a man, it might be proper to attach importance to doctrinal distinctions; but they are not so, nor can a child comprehend such distinctions. Moral conduct may be taught and explained, and the great duties of religion may be expressly enforced; it is impossible to do more. The average age at which children leave the National Schools is ten years. The utility of teaching at that age the peculiar doctrines of any church cannot, in our opinion, be insisted on, nor can we believe that such teaching produces any good effect. It is, however, the fact, that most members of the Church of England, and no doubt other denominations of Christians also, do think that childhood is the proper time for fixing strongly in the belief the characteristic doctrines of their sects: and they do this be cause they fear that, if this part of religious instruction were deferred beyond the age of childhood, numerous causes, which it is unnecessary here to mention, might render the inculcation of those doctrines very difficult and uncertain. Still these feelings belong chiefly to those classes which possess a certain degree of wealth and some station in society, —those, in fact, who are elevated above the condition of the poor. But suppose all parents in the country should entertain the same opinion, this is no obstacle to a general system of education. Is there any difficulty in a hundred boys learning one set of things together, because there is another set of things which half of them prefer learning elsewhere, and which there are abundance of teachers ready to instruct them in?

But we may carry our consideration of the religious instruction in the National Schools a little farther. It is not only the defect of capacity in children which prevents the system from giving that knowledge which it professes to supply. The chief duty of a schoolmaster of a National School must be theological, if the doctrines of the Established Church are to be thoroughly taught. For this purpose a long education and great qualifications are requisite ; such qualifications indeed as other masters in general certainly do not possess. A few months are not enough to

enable a teacher of the ordinary branches of knowledge to obtain a competent knowledge of the subjects which he is to explain. It appears, however, that the master of a National School is trained to his business in five months; but that he should be qualified for his office is quite impossible. A certain number of books may be placed in his hands, and the children may, by rote, repeat their contents; but it cannot be said the children are taught. An incompetent and ill-informed master can never enable a child to comprehend the peculiar doctrines of the church of England. He may state them generally; but no general statement can convey their import. It is not by constant repetition that a proper understanding of them can be obtained; it is only by interpretation and explanation. In order that they should be felt to be important, they must be understood; and before they can produce any impression, they must be comprehended. The peculiarities of the present system, whether viewed with reference to the child or to the master, ought to convince intelligent parents that there can hardly be any important difference between it and any general and comprehensive system of religious instruction that may be proposed.

That a preference is given to the National Schools, apart from the religious teaching which they may afford, by ninetenths of the parents, is not improbable. Should a school offering greater advantages be established in any town already possessing both a National and a British school, there can be no doubt that it would attract many parents and receive a preference. The establishment of such a school might lead to an alteration in the system of instruction pursued by the other two schools. A competition for excellence in general teaching would thus arise, and the best effects would necessarily follow. Any attempt therefore to afford to the poorer population a better kind of instruction than they can now obtain would certainly succeed. The parents would be governed by the interests of their children, and the excellence of the instruction, apart from all religious considerations, would secure their support to that school which they believed to be the best. The observation of Mr. Wigram (781) is one of great importance, and offers the strongest inducement for attempting to educate the poor without the inculcation of the creed of any particular sects: it appears that the class which stands most in need of instruction is that which will present the fewest obstacles to the working of any good general plan.

There is a moral objection to the National Schools, which is a very weighty one. If they were designed to be exclu

sive, let the managers keep them exclusive; it would be far better than the course which they now pursue. The schools are only professedly exclusive, and the children of Roman Catholics and Dissenters are admitted to them, but at the same time are required to attend the service of the Established Church. The circumstances which may compel a parent to take his child to the National School, may make attendance at the Established Church a matter of peculiar hardship. If there is no school in which good instruction is given by those professing the same doctrines as the parent, surely it is his duty to seek some place in which his child may be taught well, rather than to rear it in ignorance. If, instead of the present system of the National Schools, the child were to look only to his parent or the clergyman of the church to which his parent belongs, for his religious instruction, and if the parent were thus relieved from the necessity, which now must constantly exist, of opposing the peculiar doctrines of the teacher, a better state of mind would be produced, and reciprocal respect and kindly feelings would prevail among all parties. If immoral consequences follow from the present system, it would be far better to set the rule of the school aside, than to allow a child to say or to do that which it feels to be untrue, or knows that its parent does not approve. Mr. Dunn has stated very forcibly the mode in which the practice of the so-called national schools affects those who are not the children of members of the Established Church.

395. Are you aware of any instance of dissenters sending their children to the National Schools, and allowing them the use of the Church Catechism ?-I am aware of such instances, but that has been occasioned by the impossibility of sending them to another school. Their feeling is, that it is not the best mode of teaching a child morality to require him to repeat that which is not true. A Baptist does not think it right that his child should be required to say that it was baptized; nor does any other dissenter approve of a child being required to assert that it had godfathers and godmothers, when it had not. Besides this, they do not consider the imposition of a catechism consistent with liberty of conscience. Another objection which dissenters have to the National Schools arises from children being with drawnfrom their own Sunday Schools. When they are admitted into a National School they are obliged to leave their own Sunday School, and this is felt as a very serious grievance.

What satisfaction can it be to a teacher to maintain the uniformity of his system, when it compels his pupils to state that which is untrue? Mr. Crossley, the master of the British Borough School, gives the following evidence :

1129. Do not children, whose parents belong to many dissenting sects, attend your schools?—Yes.

1130. Have they ever complained of your mode of teaching Scripture, as likely to lead to any peculiar opinion different from their own?-Never in any instance except the Jews. We have a few Roman Catholic boys, but we have never had any objection from them. They would, of course, prefer that we should use another translation.

1131. But no Christian sect, of any denomination, has made a complaint?-I never heard any instance.

1135. You are acquainted with the opinions held by Socinians. Supposing a Socinian parent enter your school-room where you are examining the children upon one of the most doctrinal chapters of John, would he hear anything which would contravene his opinions? -I think he would object to the version; he could not object, if he allows the version. The direct grammatical explanation is given, and nothing more.

1136. Do you find that the teaching of these nice points of doctrine by you is required by the different denominations of parents who send their children to your school?-I have never heard the parents express an opinion about it.

1137. Do not you in fact leave the children to the instruction of their parents and of their several ministers, as to the subjects of the doctrinal meaning of Revelation?--Yes; in disputable matters.

1138. Do you, in your instruction, omit any of the great truths of Scripture, such as that which has been referred to?-No; we never shun a passage.

1139. You never shun a passage in compliance with the special opinions of the parents?-No; while we keep to the grammatical sense of the Scriptures, and only draw inferences upon the subject of duties, we offend none.

Mr. Pillans was examined upon the same subject, and with particular reference to the practice in Germany and France :

494. Is the question you allude to religious instruction?—Yes; and even upon the extent of secular instruction there might be much difference of opinion. I conceive that the great defect in the system which the church has patronized, particularly hitherto, lies in the extremely limited nature of the information communicated; and the object being almost entirely confined to making members of the Church of England and inculcating a blind submission to her, instead of imparting along with religious instruction that general information and intelligence which alone can make a school ultimately valuable to an individual who is to be in the lower walks of life. Too narrow and unattractive is the instruction given in the schools which call themselves, by a misnomer, National, that I think it by no means unlikely that a considerable proportion of the pupils, ten years after quitting them, will be found to have lost the power of reading. So little are their minds imbued with the love of books or of know

ledge, by school business, that they have little temptation in the ordinary circumstances of a life of labour to keep up the acquirement. I conceive that by far the most important point to be considered in a national system of education, is the course of instruction that ought to be followed, and that as long as the books perused, and the instructions delivered upon them, are of an exclusively religious cast, it is vain to expect that school training will contribute materially to form a moral, religious, and intelligent population.

541. Do you not suppose that a sufficient religious education could be conveyed without the conveyance at the same time of any peculiar religious doctrine ?-I am disposed to think so as regards children; with both I think that the doctrines of our religion, as far as they have a tendency to influence the habits and practice of the young, may be separated and kept distinct from the peculiar opinions of any one sect; and because such opinions embodied in any schoolbooks I should consider as nearly ineffectual for any purpose at all, turning, as they generally do, upon points which are altogether beyond the comprehension of the young mind. And therefore it is, that I think it most of all desirable to have a system of religious instruction for schools founded upon the Scriptures, but directed only to those parts of the sacred volume which have a moral tendency, and which are likely to influence the conduct, cherish the best affections, and regulate the behaviour of the young. I am fortified in that opinion by the example of the German States, where the school instruction is founded on this principle, as well as of France, where the law on that head is very nearly a transcript of the German.

542. Has it ever suggested itself to you, in the matter of teaching religion, that teaching theology is one thing and inculcating religious habits is another?—Yes; I think that is very obvious, though certainly not sufficiently attended to in practice.

543. In the creation of religious habits do not all sects of Christians agree, so far as you have had an opportunity of considering the subject of teaching ?—I think so.

544. Supposing that we wanted to teach theology to pupils, the teaching of theology would be like the teaching of any other science? -It certainly requires a matured understanding to deal with subjects so deep and difficult; nor can it be a very profitable employment for the mind of a child to be turned to points of doctrine, of which, from its very nature, it cannot be informed.

545. So that, in fact, the business of a teacher of the people, considering the matter of national education, would be to form religious habits, and those might be formed in a National School which did not impose any dogmata upon the mind of the pupil ?—I should say so, certainly; at the same time I wish it to be understood, that by dogmata I mean the tenets of any particular sect. The leading and distinctive doctrines of Christianity ought not to be omitted. It is these only, I conceive, that are within the province of the schoolmaster, his vocation being more of a literary than of an ecclesiastical character.

546. Assuming that there is a general coincidence in all Chris