quired into by two previous Commissions,—the one, presided over by the Duke of Newcastle, to consider elementary schools assisted by votes of Parliament, and the other, presided over by Lord Clarendon, which was appointed to inquire into public schools, respecting which a Bill was passed last year by the member for the University of Cambridge, Mr. Walpole. Not only was the present Bill brought forward in consequence of the Report of the Commission, but to a very great extent the Bill carried out its recommendations. Its principal object was the reform and reorganization of the Endowed Schools of England and Wales. But there was one important difference between the Bill and the Report of the Commission. The Report recommended not merely that the Endowed Schools should be put on an improved footing, but that a power should be taken of inspecting, and, he might say, of managing, them; not merely that there should be power given to make fresh trusts, but that there should be power given to see that the trustees did their duty. For this purpose the Commission recommended the appointment of provincial boards throughout the country, under the control of the central authority. He was still of the opinion that very much might be said in favour of this machinery, but on full consideration the Government had come to the conclusion of not recommending the House to adopt it at present, but to confine the scope of their Bill to the reform and reorganization of Endowed Schools, not taking any power for their inspection and management beyond the power which was at present in the hands of the Charity Commissioners. Therefore they proposed that the Bill should be a temporary Bill. They asked for power for three or four years, to make fresh trust-deeds for Endowed Schools, which should after approval by Government be laid before Parliament, but should not become law if objected to by either House of Parliament. They had, however, seen no difficulty in providing a plan for the examination of schools and for giving certificates of competence to schoolmasters, and in this they had followed the recommendations of the Commissioners. The Commissioners recommended an examining council, which would consist of twelve members, and as it was thought there would be more confidence in this body if it were not nominated entirely by Government, six of the members would be appointed by the universities of Cambridge, Oxford, and London, and six by the Crown. This Educational Council would have power to examine the scholars of all endowed schools, and to give certificates. There was no wish to interfere with schoolmasters who carried on schools of their own, but he believed it would not be considered any interference, but a boon, by private schoolmasters, if the examination, which was compulsory on the endowed schools, might be taken advantage of by the private schoolmasters on their fulfilling the same conditions that were fulfilled by the endowed schools. The Bill also made provision for offering to some extent exhibitions to scholars of private schools. It was desirable that the Bill should pass this Session, and, as impor

tant business of another character would come on soon, he would ask the House to allow him to take the second reading on an early day; but as there might be some difference of opinion with regard to the special provisions of the Bill, full time would be given for consideration of them before going into Committee. The Bill provided for the appointment of a small Commission, which would prepare the schemes and give notice to all the parties interested, and, after the schemes were settled, would submit them to the Educational Department of the Privy Council, and that department would, on its own responsibility, after approval, lay them before Parliament.

Little discussion took place on the first stage of the Bill. The members who spoke on it desired to have further time to consider its details. In answer to various inquiries, Mr. Forster said he did not propose inspection, but only examination of schools and masters; and it was not intended that the Bill should apply to any school which already received a Government grant. As to the representations which had been made, that it would be better to allow more time before taking the second reading, he thought it right to yield to the wishes that had been expressed. To be sure, if the effect of the Bill should be to improve the character of the people, it would be desirable to pass it as soon as possible. There was, however, no desire to press the Bill with undue haste.

After the lapse of a month, Mr. Forster moved the second reading of the Bill, and then fully explained its provisions. The Commissioners had reported that the worst education in this country was that provided in the schools between the upper and middle class, the elementary schools inspected by Government. The Bill dealt with 3000 schools, viz. 782 grammar schools and 2175 foundations, mostly elementary, with a gross income of 592,000, and a net income for education of 340,0007., a sum which, if well applied, would have done much; but these sums were to a great extent wasted. Mr. Forster gave startling instances of this fact. His object was now chiefly to open the benefits of these endowments, not only to the lower middle classes, on whose claims Mr. Forster strongly insisted, but also to the working classes, carrying out in this, he contended, the intentions of the founders; and he explained how he would do this, by making the admissions to the endowed schools depend, not on favour, but on competitive examination. He also shadowed out a scheme by which the clever child of a working man might rise step by step from the lowest elementary school to the highest education in the country. To prevent the rich seizing on the fruits of these reforms, the Bill would give power to classify these schools, and to fix the age at which the boys should leave. Among other objects of the Bill he mentioned the promotion of girls' education, and the multiplication of day schools. The powers of the Court of Chancery and the Charity Commissioners would not suffice for these objects, and a special Commission would be necessary. The Commissioners would have

no power of themselves to alter the foundation of a school; they would prepare schemes, and after due inquiry and consultation with the school authorities they would submit them to the Committee of Council. The Government of the day would then become responsible for the schemes thus framed, and if they approved them would lay them before Parliament, when they would become law, if not objected to by either House within forty days. The establishment of a system of inspection would be postponed until the reorganization of the schools was complete, but a Council of Education would be appointed at once, half nominated by the Universities and half by the Government, which would examine both scholars and all masters appointed hereafter. The same privilege would be given to private schools and schoolmasters on putting themselves under similar conditions. He would consent to refer the Bill to a Select Committee, and he concluded with a vigorous defence of his principle as virtually carrying out the ideas of the founders, and making the ideas of the past minister to the ideas of the future.

Mr. B. Hope said the Bill should be fully considered by the Select Committee. The absolute power of the "Anonymous Triumvirate" would excite strong opposition. They should be named. He objected to the want of securities against Church schools drifting into Nonconformist, and vice versa. An opportunity ought to be given to the schools to prepare schemes for themselves. A University degree ought to be sufficient qualification for a master, and he pointed out that by examining all the schools there was a risk of fostering 66 cram."

Mr. Gathorne Hardy, who offered his assistance to make the Bill efficient and satisfactory, urged that the Commissioners ought to be named in the Bill, and Mr. Goldney thought that the principles on which they were to act in reconstructing the schools ought to be prescribed by it. Mr. Locke and Mr. Whitbread recommended that an opportunity should be given to schools with which no fault could be found, to frame schemes of their own.

Mr. Walter objected to the short interval of forty days allowed for the consideration of the schemes by Parliament, and suggested, as a point for the Select Committee, whether such schools as Repton, Tunbridge, and Uppingham might not be excepted from the Bill. He mentioned, too, that the head masters of some most important schools objected to being limited in their choice of assistants to certificated masters, and he held examination to be a delusive test.

The Bill, after some further discussion, was read a second time, and was then referred to a Select Committee. It there underwent considerable alteration, the clauses which proposed to constitute an Examining Council being, with some others, struck out of the Bill. In Committee various questions were raised, though not affecting the principle of the measure, the most important of which were:First, an amendment, moved by Mr. Winterbotham, proposing that the Commissioners in their schemes should make provision for girls' education equally with boys'. Much sympathy was expressed with

the object of the amendment, and it was admitted on all hands that the Commissioners should, as much as possible, add to the endowments for girls' education; but it was urged that the amendment went too far, and on this plea Mr. Winterbotham withdrew it.

Another discussion arose on amendments proposed to the clause which empowered the Commissioners to apply to education charitable endowments which had become obsolete, or had outgrown their original objects. The clause was, however, passed, subject to the modification which had been made in it by the Select Committee, by which the consent of the managers of the charities was made necessary. The Bill was read a third time without opposition, the names of the intended Commissioners being announced by Mr. Forster; viz. Lord Lyttelton, Mr. Arthur Hobhouse, and Canon Robinson.

The Bill was read a second time in the Lords without division, and with little debate, but on its committal it underwent considerable criticism.

The Duke of Richmond claimed the exemption of Christ's Hospital from the Bill, on account as well of the excessive powers which the Bill conferred on the Commissioners, as of the recentlyexpressed disrespect of one of the nominated Commissioners, Lord Lyttelton, for founders' intentions, and his prejudice in favour of free competition.

The Duke of Cambridge felt perfect faith in Lord Lyttelton's following out his convictions in a straightforward way, but the knowledge of what his convictions were made that very faith a cause for greater alarm. As President of Christ's Hospital, his Royal Highness intimated an opinion that the security which the Governors had originally felt respecting the interests of their foundation being properly protected by the Bill, had been seriously affected by the recent observations of Lord Lyttelton which had been referred to.

Lord Lyttelton admitted that the sentiments he had formerly and which he still held on the subject of the deficiencies of Christ's Hospital, and similar foundations, might be a reasonable objection to his appointment on the Commission, but he denied that there was any thing in the particular speech in question to terrify the friends of Christ's Hospital.

Earl De Grey remarked that Christ's Hospital had no reason to be alarmed by the Bill, which gave it, indeed, larger privileges than the schools affected by the Public Schools Bill had received. He saw no ground for special apprehension on account of Lord Lyttelton's expression of opinion. Lord Lyttelton would, of course, be ready to deal with each case on its own merits.

Upon clause 14 a very important question was raised. By that section the power of revising the schemes of educational endowments was limited to those which had been created more than fifty

years.

The Marquis of Salisbury desired to restrict the area over which the destructive action of the Commissioners was to range. Settlements were daily made which extended over the fifty years provided in this clause, and he believed the action of benevolent founders would be seriously discouraged if it were understood that their bequests might be diverted from the objects for which they were made within fifty years of their death. He moved to substitute a hundred years for fifty.

Earl De Grey said that the proposed amendment would seriously impair the working of the Bill. He believed that in many instances persons who had witnessed the evil results of a too strict adherence to the intentions of testators, would be deterred from leaving their money for benevolent purposes if they knew that under no circumstances whatever could the mode of employing the money be altered for at least a century. Fifty years was the period fixed in the Oxford University Act, and no complaint had been made against the working of that Act. The effect of the amendment would be not only to exclude from the operation of this Bill all the schools founded between fifty and a hundred years ago, but to withdraw from the more ancient institutions all those endowments which had been made during these fifty years. His noble friend, in his desire to maintain the inviolability of the rights of founders, had, he feared, overlooked the importance of making these foundations useful for the purposes of education in the present day. A bad, lazily, and ill-conducted endowed school was not only an evil in itself, but too frequently had the effect of preventing the foundation of an efficient private school in the neighbourhood.

Lord Cairns remarked that the arguments of the noble earl, based upon the importance of interfering in cases where endowed schools were ill-conducted, was just as applicable to cases. where the schools had been founded within the last fifty years, as it was in the case of schools founded at an earlier period. It should be remembered, too, that if founders desired that their intentions should be subjected to parliamentary inquiry or action, nothing could be easier than to state the wish distinctly in the bequest. He quite concurred in the soundness of the principle of laying down certain rules by which founders might know for certain how long their intentions would be respected, but in ex post facto legislation of the kind they were now adopting, they ought to exercise great care, and to offer no interference without grave and sufficient cause.

The Lord Chancellor reminded the Committee that in the course of fifty years two generations in the way of education passed away, and those connected with the management of these schools rarely kept pace with the times. It was, for instance, fifty years since he left a public school, and until within the last five years the course of study had remained unaltered. A change, however, was then made, greatly against the wish of the master, but the advantage was so great and so generally recognized, that the number of