MR. ELLIS GRIFFITH (Anglesey): I congratulate the hon. and learned Member for North Louth on his alliance with the Government. MR. T. M. HEALY: The Catholics are not ashamed of that, anyhow. point we take is that these words in the Clause can do no harm, and they may do some good. Then, why in the world should they not be inserted to call attention at the very start of the Bill to one of the most important duties of the education authority? MR. ELLIS GRIFFITH: I am sure the Government are. This is not a Clause for the training of Irish Members, but for the training of teachers. The 88. Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.) Balfour, Rt. Hon. A.J. (Manch'r Boscawen, Arthur Griffith- Ball, William James AYES. (3.48) Question put. The House divided:-Ayes, 235; Noes, (Division List, No. 636.) Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- Dyke, Rt. Hon.Sir William Hart Flynn, James Christopher Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F. Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H.A. E. Hammond, John Cohen, Benjamin Louis Crossley, Sir Savile Cubitt, Hon. Henry Cullinan, J. Dalrymple, Sir Charles Harrington, Timothy Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H. Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow) Macartney, RtHnW.G. Ellison M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire) O'Connor, James(Wicklow, W.) O'Doherty, William O'Kelly, James(Roscommon, N. Rattigan, Sir William Henry Allen, Charles P. (Glouc. Stroud Cremer, William Randal Thompson, Dr.EC(Monagh'n, N Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester) NOES. | Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D. Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. | Markham, Arthur Basil Rickett, J. Compton Welby,Lt-Col. A. C. E(Taunton TELLERS FOR THE AYES—- | Schwann, Charles E. Walton, Joseph (Barnsley) TELLERS FOR THE NOES-Mr. Alfred Hutton and Mr. Ellis Griffith. MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.) said although he objected to the Amendment as a whole, and hoped the House would disagree with it, he would, before discussing the Amendment itself, move an Amendment to it, which was to leave out the words "on other grounds." This Amendment had a very curious history. An Amendment was introduced, in conformity with what was shewn to be the general feeling of the Amendment proposed to the Lords Amendment House, by the hon. Gentleman the it might mean that in the view of the Secretary to the Board of Education local authority itself it was better to set before he became a Member of the up separate schools for the children of Government last July. Now, in the each denomination than to create one other House at the instance of school for all denominations. This the other House-this provision had Amendment seemed to him to be a been inserted, and it seriously im- direct appeal to the local authorities to paired the value of the Amendment do the former. Nothing could be more moved by the hon. Gentleman the unfortunate than that the local authorSecretary to the Board of Education ities should be persuaded into a policy of and accepted by the House in creating sectarian schools, and be enJuly. There were many objections to couraged to abolish the Cowper-Temple this Amendment altogether. In the Clause. Nothing could be imagined first place, it introduced what had been better calculated to throw the apple of objected to by this House-namely, the discord into our schools. We should right to allow the different denominations soon see the growth of sectarian parties to come into the schools and disturb the in our Councils, whose whole aim would instruction given in them, and complicate be to set up sectarian rather than untheir arrangements by each giving his sectarian schools. Whether or not the own religious teaching. The compli- House accepted the Amendment as a cation of such an arrangement had been whole, he submitted that these words so conclusively shown that, when this ought to be left out, and that this Amendment was sought to be introduced, power should only be granted after a dethis House had rejected it by a large sire for it had been expressed by the majority. But a very much stronger parents. objection was that the Amendment in its present form suggested to the local authority the policy of creating distinct sectarian secondary schools, instead of suggesting to them that the proper policy for them to pursue was to create schools equally available for all members of the community, which would represent the general desire of the community to have religious instruction given to their children in common. The meaning of this Amendment was that they should create and endow, establish and maintain, separate schools, in which distinct denominational teaching could be given. That would be the natural result of it. And that was especially the case if these words, "on other grounds," were left in. If it had been suggested that there was a case for allowing distinctive religious instruction to be given at the request of the parents, that was one thing, and it might well be that such a case could be made out. But these words carried the Amendment a great deal further. "On other grounds" might mean one of two things. They might mean the offer of a sum of money from a particular denomination towards the cost of building a school on the understanding that the local authority would allow them to use chat school for sectarian instruction, or Mr. Bryce. "To leave out the words or on other grounds.'" (Mr. Bryce.) Question proposed, "That the words. proposed to be left out stand part of the Lords Amendment." SIR WILLIAM ANSON said that as the right hon. Gentleman had intimated that he was going to oppose the Clause in its entirety later, he would confine himself to the particular Amendment which the right hon. Gentleman had introduced to the Lords Amendment. He would point out to the right hon. Gentleman, however, that the local authorities could not establish sectarian schools, and it was not proposed by this Clause that they should, and, if it were, words already accepted by the House had put it out of their power to do so. All that was proposed in this Amendment was that where the local authority were informed, either by the request of the parents or scholars, or from their knowledge of the require ments of the neighbourhood, that specia! religious teaching was wanted in the case of certain scholars, then, not at the expense of the ratepayers, but of those who required the teaching, such teaching might be given. Of course, the needs of the parents seemed to cover most of the occasions out of which the necessity for special religious teaching might arise; but there might be cases where there was a disinclination on the part of parents to express their wants, or, from the fact that the pupils in these secondary schools would be drawn from a wide area, the parents might not be present in collective form to make their application to the local authority, but the local authority might become aware of the need from communications addressed to them. On those grounds, believing that the words "on other grounds" would somewhat improve the Clause, and feeling sure that the local authority was excluded from the power of establishing sectarian schools, he hoped the House would not accept the Amendment. 1 this Amendment asked, because what was likely to occur under this Amendment if it was passed as it stood? There had been an Amendment inserted by this House giving the Voluntary Schools Associations representation on the education committees, and naturally those representatives would attend solely to the interests of their own particular faith. There would be every possible. argument that these schools should have a Church of England tinge, and if they wanted to avoid any quarrels with regard to this matter, other denominations would have to have an equal opportunity. MR. A. J. BALFOUR said he thought there was much force in the objections which had been urged by his hon. friend to the Amendment to the Amendment the Secretary to the Board of Education. But he was not sure it was not pro He MR. TREVELYAN (Yorkshire, W.R., longing discussion in the House to retain Elland) said he did not think the the words proposed to be left out. speech of the hon. Gentleman had eluci- had been impressed by the argument dated very greatly what the words "on that possibly if the words were retained other grounds" meant. The hon. Gentleman had said that these words allowed tion committees, and perhaps to the they would give excuses to the educapersons of all denominations to come in education authorities themselves, to inand give sectarian teaching in the dulge in these ecclesiastical controversies secondary schools, and it might be a of which the House had heard so much reasonable thing to permit them to come in where there was a real and done his best so to frame the Bill as to during the past eight months. He had genuine desire that they should be admitted. The only other reason given by deal with these most difficult and insave the local authorities from having to the hon. Gentleman was that there vidious questions; and it was possible might be a disinclination on the part of that if the words were left in they would the parents to state their desire. That give excuses for the raising at meetings was the argument of the Church. of the local authorities of the very kind The Church knew what the parents of discussions which it was most desirwanted, "because there were so many able should be avoided. On the other Church people in the district." But hand, under the alteration proposed in there was really no way of ascertaining the Amendment, the County Council the wishes of the parents except by a could only act upon the application of statement by the parents themselves of their wishes. He would appeal to those hon. Members opposite who had said they were in favour of the parents having a word upon this matter, but who had opposed every concrete case put by the Opposition in which which they said the parents were the people who ought really to decide as to what religion their children should be brought up in-he would appeal to them on this occasion, which was the last chance they would have of voting on this question, to vote in favour of the parents. That was all parents, which, as it would be a definite request for a definite thing, could hardly the Clause in that form would, he hoped, lead to any religious differences; and work quite smoothly. Under the circumhon. friend the Secretary to the Board stances, after having consulted with his of Education, he was ready to accept, on behalf of the Government, the Amendment proposed by the right hon. Gentle man opposite. LORD HUGH CECIL (Greenwich) regretted that his right hon. friend should have accepted the Amendment. It was which it is not proposed to extend equally inconsistent with his right hon. friend's to any other denomination, when so attitude of approval towards the Scottish desired by parents of scholars." What system. All the arguments to which he desired to provide against was that his right hon. friend had assented in one favoured denomination should have reference to this Amendment could be facilities extended to it which would urged against any system which allowed be denied to other denominations. If a popularly-elected body to control this experiment was to be made in this religious education. Hon. Members matter, it should, he thought, be an opposite had declared from time to time experiment on fair and equal conditions. that, if popular control were once adopted, He was sure the Government would they would have no objection to a de- admit that this was a fair Amendment. nominational system. What was pro- It was not a proposal to allow a school to posed in the Lords Amendment was a be converted into a sectarian school; it controlled denominational system. Each simply gave to those parents who desired body would be left to judge for itself. it the opportunity of securing for their The only conceivable ground upon which children the religious instruction that it could be opposed was that denomina they preferred. The matter was tional religious instruction was a sort obvious that he would not elaborate it. of vice which could hardly be repressed by law, but of which everyone should be heartily ashamed, and to which the State could give no countenance whatever. He was surprised that the Opposition had not moved, and that the Government had not assented to, an Amendment declaring that contracts for the giving of denominational religious instruction should be treated as contracts for the committal of vice. He and his friends were unable to accept the Amendment because it was against the fundamental principles of their views of denominational instruction, and they must therefore divide the House. SO Amendment- "At the end, to add the words 'provided that no Council shall afford facilities to one denominaother denomination, when so desired by parents tion which it is not prepared to extend to any of scholars.””—(Mr. Lloyd-George.) Question proposed, "That those words. be added to the Lords Amendment." THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (SIR ROBERT FINLAY, thought the words, as moved, would tend Inverness, Burghs) unduly to prevent an authority making use of the power intended to be conferred upon them by the Amendment. By providing in favour of one denomination, unless it that no authority should exercise this power was prepared to exercise it in favour of other denomination in respect of which there was a demand; the House would leave out of sight the fact that the circumstances might be extremely different. There might be a very large any MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have no number of children in the case of one objection to those words. denomination, while there were only a very small number belonging to a variety Amendment made to the Lords Amend- of other sects, and the Council might not ment think it desirable to exercise its power in regard to the latter. What the hon. Member really intended was that the Council should not in exercising this power show any unfair discrimination as between different denominations. That was not the way in which the words of the proposal would work, as they might exclude the consideration of all the circum |