Page images



vast change is due to England's withdrawal from the Europas

system, I know not what can be alleged to the contrary. ... Her The real Europe, Mr. Greenwood evidently thinks, can

great endeavour now should be restoration to the European be better understood from the Darwinian standpoint: the national rivalry which prevents an ideal Europe, and system on safe and honourable terms.

THE FUTURE OWNER OF CONSTANTINOPLE. which is worse than any conflict of individualism between men and men is but "part of the universal scheme that

Mr. Spenser Wilkinson writes in the National Rerieur makes Nature red in tooth and claw with rapine."

The Value of Constantinople.” He lays stress on its

focal position : Matter in the wrong place is dirt. Idealism and sentiment in the wrong place are exemplified in such agitations

Constantinople lies upon a route which must needs te as we have just had about Armenia. As a consequence,

followed by the whole trade of a vast region. The Black Sea

has a coast-line of more than two thousand miles, to bieb England is not the commanding power that it was

the Sea of Azov adds six hundreil more. To the Black Sea at so recent a date as the fiftieth birthday of Mr.

goes all the trade of the great navigable rivers, the Danube, Gladstone. British policy has been ruled by Radical

the Dniester, the Dnieper, and the Don, with some portion of sentiment, which is marked by “an impatience to the trade of the Volga, transhipped to the Don. All this escape from the more brutal necessities of national

great trading area communicates by sea with the outside competition," and insists on

government by the world only through the Bosphorus. . . . If we take a larger view, popular will.” The latter leads to the people being and look at the natural directions of traffic between East and kept in ignorance by their leaders of the facts of West, and betwe North and South, we find that Constantiinternational rivalry, and to their refusing to feel the con

nople is the centre of a circle, of which radii run along the sequent necessities. It is not want of heart, or want of

Euphrates and the Persian Gulf, along the Suez Canal an]

the Red Sea, and along the Nile. All these arc natural and thonght, but want of knowledge.

necessary directions of trade. Mr. Greenwood goes on to supply the knowledge, albeit

The three Powers most interested in these routes are in a muffled, semi-diplomatic tone, as though to break his views gently to the unaccustomed ear of Demos.

Russia and Austria on ground of nearness, and Britain The fact is, “in short, England has a position to regain,

on ground of her carrying trade.

The Dardanelles, fortified so as to make the passage of or an empire to lose. That is the exact situation when cleared of the illusions which .... have brought it

a hostile fleet impossible, would enable Russia, if Conabout. It is not a situation that can endure a pause."

stantinople became hers, to exclude from the Black Sca

all ships of war but her own. Her armies could be WHOM SHALL WE COPY ?

moved across it without fear of molestation : and as an How, then, shall we re-molel our machinery for the army carried in steamers moves many times faster than management of foreign affairs ?

an army upon land, she could not be resisted landing on The most perfect system in Europe is soon found. It is as

any country bordering on that sea :nearly as possible the opposite of our own, and, being of the most Roumania, Bulgaria, and Northern Asia Minor would at antique and unreformed type, is even like no other in Europe. once become, in fact if not in theory, portions of the Russian Yet that it is the most perfect is seen by its long-continued Empire. The frontier which Russia would thus acquire success, a success unequalled. It will be understood at once would place the eastern half of the Austro-Hungarian that the Russian system is meant; and therefore that, however Monarchy at her mercy. well it may work, there can be no thought of imitating it. Rather than allow which, Austria-Hungary would

But Mr. Greenwood will be merciful. He will not fight. Moreover, Russia in possession of the Dardanelles urge us to copy “this effective me ljævalisin."

could keep the Black Sea as a training-dock for as larve Let us turn from this too shining example of victorious un a navy as she pleased to construct, with which to sally sentimental policy, and look to France, which has shown is a

forth and take the initiative whensoever she pleased. successful way of rising from difficulties infinitely greater than

This would give her such a preponderance as would leid our own. When France was beaten to the ground, had a other nations to resent it, and, if possible, prevent it. strong and violent foe standing over her, and no very assured Constantinople Austrian would not be so general an friends at some distance, she had many Governments, but only affront to the rest of Europe, but would have its grave one policy--a policy that every Frenchmin understood and

risks: played his part in . ... we should do what France did ; that is

The Black Sea would not become an Austrian lake, but there to say, go softly, stick to our own affairs, and promptly and

would sooner or later be a naval war between Austria and urgently make up England's strength to whatever point would enable her to face combinations and attract alliances.

Russia for its command, in which, however, the cessation of her

trade would paralyse the southern provinces of Russia, and an But “nothing of this kind is likely to be done.” The Austrian victory woula be disastrous to the Northern Empire. only hope is to turn out fancy with fact, and make our For these reasons Russia is as strongly driven to resist an people understand that “ the balance of power is Austriav acquisition of Constantinople as Austria to oppose a destroyed, and what that means is no secret from any

Russian atteinpt upon that place. one-a dictatorship.”

A prince of European origin, sovereign or nominally THE INTERNATIONAL DICTATORSHIP.

under the Sultan, acting as Administrator-General, might

have Constantinople as the seat of his government. The We are face to face with " a change which seems destined passage of warships through the Straits would still be a to prove another of the great turning points in history.” difficulty. They should be closed to all or none. But in The European system has resulted in a despotism.

either case Russia would seek special advantage for herThat it is an enormous triumph for the dictator is confessed self. The way out of the difficulty suggested is this:by every known manifestation of homage; which also con The closure of the Straits to ships of war might be effected fesses that the triumph was achieved neither by guile nor by separating the ownership of Constantinople from that of the violence. And if it opens a more glorious future for France, Dardanelles. A principality of Constantinople with Northern the rejoicing of France is as blameless as natural. But to and Central Asia Minor is not more rational por more natural Europe a dictatorship is very far indeed from ideality. It is than a principality of Western Asia Minor, with its capital at a change that portends long conflict, boundless disturbance, as Smyrna, and its northern limits at the Mysian Olympus, the much of the Continent feels; and when it is said that this Sea of Marmora, and the lines of Bulair.


OUR ALLY THE ASSASSIN. Is THE CYPRUS CONVENTION STILL BINDING ? MR. T. G. BOWLES contributes an article in the Fortnightly Review for November apparently with the express purpose of justifying all that Madame Olga Novikoff and Prince Lobanoff have said as to the absurdity of discussing the adoption of any effective measures against the Sultan so long as the Cyprus Convention blocks the way. In reply to their plea for the repudiation of the Convention and the evacuation of Cyprus, we have been told that the Convention is practically dead. Mr. Gladstone, with one breath, says that it is so dead that it is impossible for Prince Lobanoff truthfully to say that it is any obstacle to Russian intervention, and in the next breath he says it is so much alive as to afford a valid basis for our single-handed action against Turkey. Lord Rosebery says that it is a sham to begin with which is no doubt true—and that it has practically ceased to exist; but even he does not deny that its uneasy ghost haunts the Foreign Office.

THE VERY LATEST RUSSIAN "AGENT.” He does not object to its being laid with bell, book and candle. Mr. Bowles, however, takes up the cudgels on behalf of the contention of Madame Novikoff and Prince Lobanoff. Of course, he will be horrified to see his name coupled in print with Russian diplomatists, whom he seems to regard as the natural enemies of Great Britain ; but no Russian could have done Madame Novikoff a kindlier service than has Mr. Bowles in the November number of the Fortnightly. For therein, writing from the point of view of a staunch Turkophil, Mr. Bowles succeeds in demonstrating to his own infinite satisfaction, but hardly to the edification of the leaders of the Armenian agitation, that the Cyprus Convention binds us hand and foot to defend the Assassin, should Russia make any movement that could be construed into a menace of the integrity of his Asiatic possessions. If Mr. Bowles can gravely and even ferrently argue thus, even now when the wail of Armenia still rings in the ears of our people, and when the Russian Government shows no disposition to send a single soldier across the frontier, it is not difficult to imagine how passionately the Convention would be invoked in favour of war against Russia, when the memory of the massacre dies down and international jealousies are roused by the movements of Russian armies.

THE QUESTION STATED— Mr. Bowles opens his article by asking :

What now is the Cyprus Convention ? Has it been abrogated by disuse? Is it null and void ? If not, can it be nullified and avoided? And if so, how? And, if it be nullified, what would be the results? These are questions to which various diplomatic documents, authoritatively published in the Blue Books, supply a very complete reply.

Mr. Bowles deals first with the view of Lord Rosebery that the treaty is practically abrogated, and then having demolished this position, proceeds to defend the Convention against those who would formally repudiate it :

Lord Rosebery described the Convention as one of three clauses. The one article of which it consists does indeed contain three stipulations, whereof it would have been simpler and plainer to make three separate articles; but the annex contains six other stipulations, each in a separate article ; so that the stipulations are nine in all.

—AND ANSWERED. Have these nine stipulations been abrogated by disuse, as Lord Rosebery says? So little is this the case that it will be found on examination that, so far as the contingeney has arisen

or the situation been created, for which each stipulation provided, every one of them has been carried out; and that instead of there being disuse and abrogation, there has been, and still is, a constant use, execution, and maintenance of the Convention.

Every one of the stipulations has been in use and has received its execution, so far as the contingency provided for has arisen in each instance, There has been no disuse whatever, nor any abrogation

IZZET BEY, arising therefrom.

Chief Adviser of the Sultan.
Neither can the
Convention, in any (

(Photograph by Abdullah Frères, Constantinople.) sense, be considered as “ null and void,” or as a “dead letter.” For, in virtue of this Convention alone. England has occupied and administered Cyprus during eighteen years; she still occupies and administers it; and she thus occupies and administers avowedly and professedly for no other purpose than to enable her to carry out her engagement to defend Asiatic Turkey by force of arms against further Russian attack.

ARE TREATIES IRREVOCABLE? Having thus dealt with Lord Rosebery, and those who maintain that the treaty has practically lapsed, he turns to those who maintain that it exists, and therefore should be formally disowned. Ho argues in a strain which implies that it would be a scandalous outrage upon treaty faith if we were to withdraw from any treaty whatever, no matter how grossly the other party to the treaty violated his obligations. In fact, Mr. Bowles' argument would be just as strong, supposing the Sultan, in addition to massacring his Armenian subjects, were to have the children of all the English residents in Turkey served up to him as roasted baby for breakfast every morning as long as they la-ted. The possibility of the Sultan forfeiting his claims to be regarded as any. thing but an enemy to the human race is not yet borne in upon Mr. Bowles' mind. Possibly, if Mr. Bowles were to be impaled by a Turkish pasha, he would for the first time, in the last moments of his life, understand the true inwardness of his friend and ally the Turk.

WHY THE CONVENTION IS MAINTAINED. Mr. Bowles maintains in the true old Russophobist strain that the Turk may be a fiend incarnate, but that does not matter, the Convention was not made for love of him, but to defend India against Russia. Here we have the same old mildewed rubbish carted out once more :

What this means is plain enough. It means that the Cyprus Convention was made for the protection of India-as, of course, it was--and if Lord Salisbury's arguments were good in 1878, to show the necessity of the Convention for that protection, they must be equally good now.

There is no need for further extract. Mr. Bowles' article is amply sufficient to confound the critics of Madame Novikoff and Prince Lobanoff by justifying to the letter the suspicions and misgivings with which the Russians regard us so long as the Convention remains in force.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]


Two MANIFESTOES BY SIR JOHN GORST. Sir John GORST, always a bold man, has broken his own record by the appeal which he has just made to public opinion to force the hand of his colleagues, and compel them, however reluctant they may be, to face the duty of educating our people. The audacious article which he has contributed to the North American Review for October is a manifesto of the first order of political significance-a significance but thinly disguised by its publication as far away as New York, as if it were merely an essay on the prospects of education in England. That we are not exaggerating will be admitted by every one who reads Sir John Gorst's article.

(1) INSTANT ACTION: “THE ONLY HOPE.” The Vice-President of the Privy Council begins his plucky appeal to the nation to bestir itself energetically in a campaign against the ignorance and backward state of public instruction by the following clear and vigorous statement of the case :-

The chief obstacles to the progress of education in England are party spirit and religious intolerance. Proposals for educational reform are discussed and decided, not in a philosophical spirit, but with all the acrimony of partisans. Yet it is admitted that the case is a very urgent one; that England is engaged in a struggle with her foreigu compeíitors not only for the supremacy, but even for the very existence of her industries; that her workers are worse instructed than their rivals, and are on that account going to the wall; and that better education, both elementary and technical, is vital to the continuance of her prosperity. It is the fact that in both town and country elementary instruction is so backward that, even if adequate technical schools were provided, the mass of the people are unfitted to take full advantage of them. Yet, notwithstanding all this, English statesmen will postpone reform indefinitely if they can see their way to secure a party advantage thereby. The only hope is that public opinion may appreciate, before it is too late, the position of education, both elementary and technical; may become agreed as to the direction in which development ought to take place, and may force Parliament and the Government to grapple with the difficulties which have to be overcome.

“THE SACRIFICE OF OUR CHILDREN.” There are two obstacles which hinder the full measure of success being attained by the Education Act:

The first is the short time which the children remain in the elementary schools. Till recently, the age for exemption from full-time attendance at school was ten. It is now eleven, and in some boroughs has been raised by by-laws to as much as thirteen. The value of the child's labour is too great a temptation to parents and employers, and the general interest the community have in keeping children longer at school is not sufficiently realised to counteract this strong motive. But if we choose to sacrifice our children at so early an age to the necessities of their parents or to the industries of the country, we must not expect to find tliem so apt to receive technical instruction as the German or Swiss child who has been kept at school to the age of fourteen. Until the school age is raised, English children cannot be turned out by the borough Board schools as well equipped for further instruction as the Continental children who are to be their future rivals.

THE BADNESS OF VOLUNTARY SCHOOLS. The staunch Church Tory will rub his eyes with amazement and horror on reading what his own VicePresident of the Council has to say about the Voluntary schools. Proceeding in his indictment of the existing system, Sir John Gorst says:

The second obstacie to complete success is the fact that the School Board system in boroughs does not cover the ground.

Of seven children cducated in boroughs, three are educated in Voluntary schools, as against four in Board schools, and these Voluntary schools do not in general possess the means of giving so efficient an erlucation in secular learning as the Board schools.

The education in Voluntary schools, he points out, must necessarily be below the mark, because they starve their teachers and scrimp the teaching of the scholar. To quote his own words :

Upon an average in boroughs the Voluntary school managers spend from local sources ten shillings per child in average attendance, while Board schools spend twenty-five shillings, a difference of fifteen shillings per child : and thirteen shillings of this difference is accounted for by a difference in the amount spent on the teaching staff. The teachers in Voluntary schools are paid lower salaries, the assistants have lower qualifications, the proportion of children to teachers is greater, and child labour is more extensively employed.

THE INADEQUACY OF AN IMPERIAL GRANT. He scouts the idea that there can be any diminution of the cost of School Board teaching, and he ridicules the notion that a beggarly dole of 4s. per child will bring the Voluntary schools up to the level of the requirements of the nation :

A grant of four shillings per child, which is all that is likely to be obtained from the Imperial Exchequer, would go a very small way towards placing the two classes of schools upon an equality ; besides this, it is not reasonable to suppose that the cost per child in Board schools will be arrested at the figure of twenty-five shillinge. of twenty-five shillings..

It has increased greatly sinc: 1870. and no one can say precisely where it will stop. To attempt to limit by a hard and fast line the cost of elementary education is as absurd as to attempt to limit the cost of a gun or warship. The rivalry of nations is continually increasing the cost of these instruments of war, and the rivalry of nations may continually increase the cost of education.

Sir John Gorst would saddle the ratepayers with the duty of paying for denominational education :

It is evident that if the Voluntary schools are to be maintained in a proper condition of efficiency the managers must have more money.

THE RUIN OF OUR RURAL DISTRICTS. From the town schools, Sir John Gorst proceeds to consider the rural schools, and here he finds the condition of things far worse. The general level of education is far below the city standard. The rural Board schools are worse than the Voluntary schools, and-oh, cruel blow from a Tory Minister of Education !-we are expressly told that the Church schools in rural districts expi can “hold their own without further pecuniary support":

There is no part of the country in which education is more necessary to the preservation of English industry. Mannifacturing districts are still struggling against their foreign competitors, and are in many cases holding their own; but the agricultural interest is already beaten. The greater part of the food of the English people must of necessity be supplied by foreign competitors. But not only are bread and meat, the great staples of agricultural production, imported from abroad, but such articles as egys, poultry, butter, and vegetables, which might be produced in unlimited quantities at home, are supplied to a great extent from Normandy, Belgium, Holland, and Denmark.

THE LANDED INTEREST'S HATRED OF EDUCATION. But the passage in Sir John Gorst's manifesto which will create the greatest stir in Ministerial circles is that in which he boldly denounces the landed interest as the chief obstacle to the education of the people. He says:

If any one contrasts the elementary and technical instruction

most pernicious change," that the State-aid should be given on the system of payment by results which the Commission had proposed as a basis for rate-aid.

FRIENDS OF VOLUNTARY SCHOOLS NOT WISE.” Mr. Forster's Bill is next contrasted with the finished Act passed by him in 1871. Both proceeded on the “fatal error" of making every rural parish an independent school district. In towns the School Board was intended by the Bill to be elected by the town council and in rural parishes by the vestry. “If county and district councils had been in existence in 1870, it is impossible to believe that parishes and vestries would have been elected” for this purpose. The Board was to grant rate-aid to local Voluntary schools as it saw fit, subject to conditions approved by the Education Department. Sir John reminds his friends that they are responsible for the change they now so much deprecate :

The two fundamental changes which the Bill of 1870 underwent in passing through Parliament, both of which were brought about by the friends of Voluntary schools, were:

(1) That the local education authorities were to be independently elected, and that education was to be thus separated from the other functions of local self-government.

(2) That the new authorities were to be deprived of the power of using the machinery of the existing schools for the establishment of a comprehensive scheme of National schools. They were to set up a rival system.


imparted to the children of the peasantry in these countries and in England, as well as the amounts spent by the respective Governments thereon, there is no reason for surprise at the defeat of English agriculture; and it is impossible to refrain from asking whether better education of the people would not tend more to the relief of agricultural depression than remedies like bimetallism or protection. The understandings of all those who are connected with the cultivation of the soil appear to be darkened. The landowners exhibit that dislike to intellectual development which is characteristic of a territorial aristocracy; the farmers regard the imitation of the methods of their forefathers as the highest agricultural art, and scoff at the teachings of science; and the labourer's children are turned out of school to scare crows when eleven years old, and often by the connivance of the school attendance officers, who are under the thumb of the farmers, at a much earlier age. After leaving school the children get no further instruction; they have no means of keeping up the little knowledge they have obtained ; and in a few years they forget everything they have learned, and are often incapable even of reading and writing. How can such a population compete with the French agriculturists, carefully trained in schools and colleges in the art they are to practise ? The mere distribution of a capitation grant from Government amongst the country schools would not raise rural education. Unless ear-marked and appropriated to specific purposes, it would all go in relief of subscriptions and rates.

Sir John Gorst concludes his article as follows:-

It is obvious from this survey of the condition and prospects of education in England that the early attention of the Government and of Parliament to this subject is most urgently demanded; but if every attempt to promote the reform and development necessary for the progress of education is to be received in the spirit of party politicians, and to be recklessly thwarted for the sake of a party victory, and if the difficulties which have been pointed out are to be made greater still by the infusion of sectarian and religious animosity, it is very improbable that a system of education can be established which will enable the workers of England to compete on fair terms with their foreign rivals. Public opinion has, however, already, to a considerable extent, removed questions of foreign policy and of the national defence from the party arena ; it may do the same for national education, and compel both parties to shape their policy with a due regard to national interests.

(2) THE NEEDS OF VOLUNTARY SCHOOLS. Having spoken his mind in the North American Review for October to the Western half of the English-speaking world, Sir Joha Gorst now, in the Nineteenth Century for November, addresses the Eastern half. His subject is, “ The Voluntary Schools," and whatever breath has been left in the high and dry old Tories after they have read his American manifesto, will be taken away by this.

IN THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES. He begins with a short review of Governmental connection with elementary education in this country. He recalls Lord John Russell's Education Bill of 1853, which was permissive, and applied only to boroughs, enabling the Town Councils, acting through a Committee which might include other than Town Councillors, to give rate-aid to every public elementary school. Country schools were to receive State-aid. The Bill was coldly received and was dropped. A dash of cynicism appears in the remarks that the Government, judging “ that the education question was ripe for being hung up for some years by a Royal Commission,” appointed a Commission accordingly in 1858; and that its recommendations “shared the common fate of the recommendations of Royal Commissions; no attempt was ever made by the Government to carry them into effect.” But they did suggest "a

The result has proved that the friends of Voluntary schools were not wise in rejecting the provisions of the Bill which rendered possible a concord between the representatives of the ratepayers and the managers of Voluntary schools. The School Boards in the towns and populous places have well performed the duties put upon them by the Act of 1870. They have constructed a system of elementary education which is inferior to that of other nations only because of the early age at which children are withdrawn from instruction. They have, not unnaturally, pushed and extended their system in every direction; they have regarded efficiency before economy, and have never spared the rates out of regard to the necessities of their districts other than educational. Unless some radical change can be speedily made in the position of Voluntary schools in School Board districts, all of them, except such as the strong religious feeling of their supporters can succeed in keeping on foot, must shortly disappear.

THE TWO THINGS NEEDFUL IN RURAL DISTRICTS. In the country districts" the Voluntary schools are in no danger of extinction.” Rural School Boards are often a costly and dismal failure. The country parson,“ with all his alleged shortcomings, is generally a better manager than they." To put them in his place would be a mistake. “To improve country schools, Board and Voluntary, two things are requisite—more money and better organisation.” The parish too small an area for real organisation. Federated School Boards are the exception:

Church schools dare not federate, for fear of losing their subscriptions. People will subscribe to their own village school who would, it is believed, cease to do so if the school became merged in a diocesan federation. Only a county education authority could form an effective nucleus for common action amongst the individual schools of the country.

But in the towns, Voluntary schools want “ money and organisation” just the same as in the country, but the Board schools are amply provided with both. Where is the needed money to come from?

WHAT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Can the difference-in London of twenty-five shillings and in provincial towns of twelve shillings per child

- be reduced by curtailing expenditure in School 5. Lastly, the managers of Voluntary schools must make up Boards?

their minds to accept, along with increased grants of public

money, increased public control. If aid come from the State, It is said that they are extravagant. They are probably

Parliament is sure to impose conditions with the view of not so economical as they would be if they were responsible

securing the application of the special grant to increasing the for the general finance of their district as well as for its

efficiency of the schools. If from the rates, the representatives education ; but there is little doubt that, on the whole, the

of the ratepayers must have some sort of voice in the manageratepayers get excellent value for their money. Increased

ment of the schools. Managers must submit to such coneconomy will not do much.

ditions as ratepayers may properly require for securing the “Neither is it possible that the cost of education can efficiency of the secular education in their schools; the only be arbitrarily fixed in advance, as some persons have

thing which they cannot surrender, and for which they must

stand out to the last, is full liberty to teach their distinctive suggested,” for

religious doctrines to the children of their own communion. It depends on the cost of buildings, the price of apparatus, ' * and the salaries of teachers. Thego are regulated by the law of supply and demand ... It is thus impossible to place a MR. DIGGLE ON NON-BOARD SCHOOLS. limit on the cost of education. The State may fix its contri MR. JOSEPH R. DIGGLE writes in the National Review on bution, the power of the School Board to rate may be restricted, “ The Government's Opportunity.” He remarks on the but there must be some authority behind whose liability is slightness of the effort made by either side to inform the unlimited if the efficiency of the Board schools is to be

popular mind, and is evidently amused at Sir John maintained.

Gorst “enlightening public opinion in England” by Sir John has even less mercy for the proposal to writing in the North American Review. To assist in the restrict School Boards to teaching“ elementary” subjects guidance of the nation Mr. Diggle offers his suggestions, only.

all but exclusively, in the interest of non-Board Schools, In many places the Boards have established excellent as he prefers to call Voluntary Schools. Better organisahigher grade schools. Until some better public provision is tion and more money are two principal needs of these made for secondary education it would be the height of folly schools, neither of which the defunct Bill adequately to stop these laudable efforts, highly popular among the rate- met. payers concerned. .

- HOW TO FEDERATE NON-BOARD SCHOOLS. These higher schools, moreover, make a profit and What is wanted is to make Federation of non-Board su diminish the general cost of education :

Schools inevitable and speedy. In every school district, But so long as our industrial population is so inferior in howsoever defined, the organisation of the non-Board elementary and technical knowledge to their rivals in other should be commensurate with that of Board Schools:-, countries, any attempt to lower the quality of education is

Every non-Board School has now a recognised body of local dangerous to our national interests, unless we could persuade

managers. · The Council of the 'Associated Schools might other nations to step down to the same low level.

spring naturally out of these recognised bodies. All GovernFIVE CONDITIONS OF AID.

ment and Local Grants should be paid into the common fund

of the Federation, to be used by them for the common purposes Sir John Gorst reiterates, in conclusion, that the

of the schools, either allied or to be allied to the Federation. Voluntary schools in towns, to be preserved in efficiency It should be compulsory upon the Council of the Federation, at all comparable to Board schools, must be provided as it is now permissive upon School Boards, to delegate the with means something like equal. For fifty years friends administration and management of the schools to local of Voluntary schools have been unable to make up their managers; and, in this delegation, the conditions and purposes minds whether rate-aid would destroy the religious of the Trust under which the school was originally erected character of the schools. The article closes with five should be preserved intact. There might be pliiced upon the "conclusions":

Councils of the Federated Schools representatives of the rate. 1. An additional State subvention, given in towns to Board

payers of the area concerned, wherever local grants from the

rates were made, in order that the expenditure might be reguand Voluntary schools alike, will not redress the existing

larly supervised and guarded. These representatives might be inequality in their resources. Whatever is given to the

nominated by the County Councils or by any public body Voluntary schools must either be withheld from the Board

having an equivalent authority to act on behalf of the general schools or be such as the latter possess. Whether it is possible to persuade Parliament to give to schools, because they are

body of ratepayers. Voluntary, exceptional grants, which are neither now nor in

RATE-AID FOR NON-BOARD SCHOOLS. the near future to be extended to Board schools, or whether,

The need of more money is not met by the special aid after so many schemes of rato aid have been proposed and

grant of 4s, per child, which Sir John Gorst declares to none accepted, it is now possible to devise something which Parliament will adopt, are questions for the party politician.

be all the Government can offer:-- ' 2. The aid must be adequate. It must be sufficient to

The evil springs from the fact that all public elementary enable the managers of Voluntary schools to give an education schools, rendering as they do an equality of service, do not as efficient as that of the Board schools. Some plan will also

receive in return an equality of recompense. Local aid is have to be devised to secure that the aid will go to the school,

diverted by the law directly to the support of one set of and not to the subscribers.

schools, and indirectly to the destruction of the others. And 3. The aid must be elastic. It is impossible to regard the yet the latter schools minister to the wants of a majority of the existing cost of education as a maximam which will never be

people. What is needed is a simple readjustment of the law exceeded. If the cost in Board schools increases, the Boards

which will enable non-Board Schools to receive in common have the rates to fall back upon. The managers of Voluntary

with Board Schools their fair and proportionate share of local schools must have a source of income capable of simultaneous

assistance as they now do of State-aid. augmentation.

NO HOBTILITY TO SCHOOL BOARDS. 4. The aid must be permanent. Any relief given now to Voluntary schools which might be withdrawn a few years

Mr. Diggle concludes by emphasizing three things hence will only ensure their destruction ... Its permanence

which he thinks the Government ought to do: can only be relied on if it is the result of a common under First of all the Government should take measure to allay standing.

the apprehensions aroused by what was undoubtedly a most

« PreviousContinue »