Board is convened, and takes an active part, whereas, in the other cases, there is no such Board taking an active part in the business?-There is something very like it at the India Office. 614. But that is not identical, is it?-No two things are identical; simile non est idem, it, if like, cannot be identical. 615. Do you think that the nature of the business conducted by the Education Department is of such a nature as to make it desirable that those officers should be called in to assist the Lord President and Vice President?-So far as making Minutes goes, I think it is a valuable check; those Minutes involve a large expenditure of money, and I think that it is quite right that the single will of the Lord President should have some check in the discretion of his colleagues. 616. Then are you of opinion that the nature of the business is such, that it would not be prudent to entrust the conduct of it to the Lord President and the Vice President?-I think that the legislative, or I may call them the quasi legislative functions of the office, must be carried on in some way or other in the Department itself; the business is too technical to be carried on in the House of Commons; and I think that it is quite right that the officials of the Department should be fortified by the calling in of a number of eminent persons, and that it should not be left to the single discretion of the Lord President, as would otherwise be the case. 617. When you speak of leaving it to the single discretion of the Lord President, is it not a fact that under the present constitution of the office you have a voice in such questions as well as the Lord President?-As a Member of the Committee of Council I should have a voice like any other Member, but I have no other voice; I have never considered myself to have any authority whatever except under the direction of the Lord President. 618. Do you consider that that view of your position is consistent with the announcements which were made to Parliament by the Government at the time when your office was created? -I do not know; I do not care much about the announcements that were made, because I take it from the Order in Council. I think that it is laid down there that the Vice President is to act under the direction of the Lord President, and for him in his absence. 619. Will you allow me to call your attention to the language of Lord Granville when he moved the creation of your office; he says, "It would be desirable that some Minister should be appointed who should be responsible to the House of Commons for the proper distribution of these grants, and who could answer any question that might be put upon the subject." Sir George Grey used very similar language; he said, "The importance was pointed out to the Government of centralising the responsibility of administering those grants, and of superintending matters of education, so far as the Government were concerned, in the hands of one Minister. Referring to the Bill, he said, "It authorised the appointment of a Vice President who would be enabled to have a seat in the House of Commons, and would be the responsible Minister there in all matters connected with education, so far as the Government were concerned." You yourself have made the following statement in the House of Commons, and you have now repeated it: "I am 24 March 1865. but the humble instrument of much higher autho- Right Hon. rity, and all these changes have been submitted R. Lowe, M.P. to the Education Committee." Then, again, you say, "In what I have had to do, with regard to Education, I have looked upon it as a matter of business in a Department which I have had to administer under superiors;" do you think that those statements upon your part are consistent with the avowed intention of the Government, that you were to be responsible to the House of Commons for the administration of the grants?I may say, that it does not appear to me to be of much consequence whether they are or are not, because I was bound to take the Order in Council which constituted the office for my guide, and I have done so; but these statements appear to me to refer to the state of circumstances which prevailed before the Vice President was appointed. The mischief to be guarded against was, that, before that time, there was nobody specially charged with education business in the House of Commons, and nobody to answer questions and move the Estimates. Sir George Grey used to move the Estimates, and no doubt he performed that duty better than a subordinate like myself could have done, but still he could not do it with the knowledge of the details which an official of the Education Department. would have possessed; the appointment of Vice President was given to a particular person, who was to answer for the whole of the Department in the House of Commons, to move the Estimates, and to give explanations when they were necessary, instead of its being done by the Home Secretary, or by other persons who were not acquainted with the detailed working of the Department. The mischief that existed was that there was nobody in the House of Commons to whom it could look for such explanations of the Estimates as only that person can give who actually administers the Department. 620. Whom do you consider to be the responsible Minister for the Education Department, and for the administration of that large annual sum, as the office is now constituted?-So far as making the Minutes goes, the responsibility rests on the Committee of Council; so far as the administration goes, I hold that that responsibility is single and undivided on the Lord President. 621. Your opinion is, in fact, that while holding the office of Vice President you were not in a responsible position as connected with that Department? I think that I should have been arrogating too much to myself if I had stated myself to be responsible for anything connected with that Department except for administering it with honesty, and to the best of my ability, and for obedience to my official superiors, the Lord President, or the Committee of Council. I considered myself neither more nor less than an Under Secretary, with the single exception of having a seat in the Committee of Council. 622. Are the Committee to understand that your view of your position in that Department was that you occupied a position very closely analogous to that of the Parliamentary Secretary in the Department of a Secretary of State?-That is my opinion; I have been Under Secretary of the India Board, and I think that it is a very similar position in many respects. 623. Do you think that it was contemplated when the office of Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education was created that such Right Hon. should be his position ?-I cannot say whether or R.Lowe, M.P. not that is so. I have stated what I understood those passages to mean. No doubt, in a strict 24 March sense, I was not responsible, but I think that in a 1865. loose and popular sense I was responsible. If a responsible person is a person who is called upon to answer questions, I think that I was a very responsible person. 624. Supposing that it had been the intention of the Government, and of Parliament, that you should occupy such a position as that which you now describe, what reason would there have been for the Vice President being a Privy Councillor ? -He could not otherwise have been a member of the Committee of Council; he would not have been able to attend the Committee, and, as the Right Honourable Chairman knows quite well, whenever a Board is composed of Privy Councillors, it is the practice that the Under Secretary, or the person corresponding with the Under Secretary, should himself be a Privy Councillor, as in the case of the Vice President of the Board of Trade, which office I have also filled. 625. Do you not think that there is something anomalous and inconvenient in the relation which at present exists between the Lord President and the Vice President of the Committee of Council in connection with the business of the Education Department?--I see nothing anomalous in their relative positions, because it appears to me to resemble the connection which has been practically found to work well in other public offices, and because there has not been the slightest friction between myself and the Lord President, or between myself and the Secretary. 626. Are you quite content with the present constitution of the Department, or do you think that it is capable of improvement?-For myself, I do not think that you can very well improve it. Individually I should not object if you took away from the Committee the power of making Minutes, and said that they should never alter anything except by Act of Parliament, because I consider that the Minutes, as they now exist, do very well, and I should feel very much with regard to them as Lycurgus did, who made the Spartans promise that they would keep his laws till he came back again. 627. You do not think that it would be an advantage to assimilate the practice of the Education Office to that of the Secretary of State's Department?-I can see no advantage that would arise from it, and I think that you would lose the co-operation of the Committee of Council, which I think is of great practical advantage. 628. Do you see no objection to the constitution of the Department being such that the nominal chief in fact transacts a very small portion of the business of the office?—I do not think there is business enough for a Secretary of State. I think that a Minister of that rank is not required for it, and I think it would be too little for a Minister like the Lord President to do, if he had not other duties to perform. 629. Do not you think that there is enough business to occupy the attention of a Minister, when the Science and Art Department, and the various other branches of the Education Office are taken into consideration ?-No; I think not. I think that the duties of the Vice President even are very light. 630. But you have a Minister of his rank who, you say, is responsible at this time for the proper conduct of the business of the Education Office? -Yes; certainly incorrect 631. Who exercises the patronage of the Education Office ?-The Lord President. 632. Does he do it entirely?-Entirely. 633. Would it be an unfair or description of the office, as it is now constituted, to say that there is one man to do the work, and another to exercise the patronage?—I think it would. 634. In what respect would it be unfair or incorrect to make such a statement?-The Lord President, with his position, and in regard to his office, has by no means a sinecure; and when the work does come, it is both anxious and important work. For instance, we have been so unfortunate as to be compelled to dsimiss three inspectors within the last few years, and all the responsibility of that rests upon the Lord President, and a more painful and difficult duty than that can scarcely be conceived. 635. But that is a duty which the head of any Department could exercise equally well, is it not?-I think it is just as well that it should be a Minister of higher grade than the Vice President, who should exercise that duty, because you have to deal with gentlemen who occupy a very high position in the public service, and who have great influence and great power. I think that it is just as well that you should have a person who you may suppose to be raised above any sort of influence or intimidation to perform that duty. 636. But, supposing that office to be reconstituted, might it not still be superintended by a Minister of high rank, and of great weight and influence ?-I think not. 637. Will you state why you think not?— Because I think that the office does not correspond to the dignity of a Minister of high rank. It is not analogous to the Secretary of State office; we do not administer important affairs; we merely follow the public where it leads, and pay out money. and pay out money. That is a much lower occupation altogether than the administration of great transactions which is vested in every Secretary of State. 638. Is that answer which you have just given quite consistent with the fact that you have at the present time a Minister of the highest rank at the head of the office?-I think so; he has many other duties to perform: and the duties of the Education Department take up a comparatively small portion of his time he has duties connected with the Council; and he is the leader of the Government in the House of Lords. There is not much detailed work for him to do at the Education Office; but I think it a very desirable arrangement that the little that there is to do should be given to a Minister of high rank and dignity. 639. Have you formed any opinion, from your experience in that office, as to how far you would think it desirable or otherwise to assist the Central Department by some system of local organisation? -The business of the Central Department consists in paying out public money on the performance of certain conditions, and in seeing how those conditions are performed; and I do not myself see how that business could be delegated to any local agency; but the question is a very general one. 640. With a view to the extension of education through the country, and to the better superin tendence tendence of education, even as it stands now, do you think that local organisation might be useful? -I do not quite understand what the Right Honourable Baronet means by the words "local organisation." May I may be allowed to ask, whether the expression means that the duty of superintending the expenditure of the public money is to be delegated to public Boards? If it is to be a branch of the office moved into certain parts of the country, of course that would be a question merely of convenience; if it means, that, the office of paying out public money is to be delegated to some public Board, of course that would depend upon the construction of that body, and its responsibility, and a number of other things. 641. Have you ever considered whether the extension of education throughout the country might be assisted by any form of local organisation ?-Yes, in the form which was suggested to us in the Report of the Royal Commissioners, when it was thought that it would be proper to form County Boards, and to have a sort of supplementary agency out of the county rate. We decided that that plan was impracticable; we thought that it would be impossible to persuade the House of Commons to agree to it. 642. Is that the only form of local organisation with a view of extending the education of the country which you have thought of?-I myself have never considered the extension of the education of the country as the duty of this office. 643. Although you have been for five years connected with the Educational Department, are the Committee to understand that you have never thought on the subject of extending the education of the country further than it now goes ?I have thought it impossible for the office, for the special reason that the initiative is given to private individuals, and the Government, according to the present system, is only to follow their lead; therefore, I conclude that the extension depends upon individuals, and not upon the Government. 644. You have never thought that in any respect your Department was, so to speak, a suggestive department ?- No. 645. Have you ever thought it desirable that it should become so?-I think not; if the present system is to remain in existence, I think that it is best administered by being confined to the duty which is imposed upon it, namely, the prescribing of conditions upon the fulfilment of which the public money may be received by schools, and by taking care that those conditions are such as will give assistance in the best and simplest form, and render the education which is given as good as possible. 646. Are the Committee to understand from that, that you are of opinion that it is a satisfactory system under which, while a large sum of more than 800,000 7. is annually devoted to the management of education in the country, and under which 11,000 parishes still remain unaided by that grant?-I think that considering the machinery by which Parliament has elected to work, that is to say, to found the education of the country on the religious feeling of the country, and on private benevolence, and the charity and kindness of individuals, the result is satisfactory on the whole; but if you ask me, whether that system is on the right basis on which a really national system of education ought to be founded, I should say in the abstract that Right Hon.. I do not think so. R. Lowe, M.P. 647. With reference to the conscience clause, how long is it since the office first commenced, with regard to National Church of England schools, making the insertion of that clause in some of the deeds a condition of assistance?—I cannot admit that that is a correct description of what has been done. 648. Will you give your own description of what has been done?--I should state to the Committee, that the question of controversy which relates to the conscience clause was in existence before I came to the office, so that, of course, I cannot describe exactly what was done about it previously to that time, but anything that I had to do with it arose thus: When I came to the office, the practice was that a paper awarding a building grant was brought to the Vice President for his signature, and then I inquired into the nature of the district, and the population, and the religious views of the people whose children would attend the school, and the number of schools in the district, and all those things which go to influence the decision of the question of a building grant. Sometimes I thought that the grant was not properly given, and then I was always told that those things had been settled in previous correspondence, and that it was too late to object then. I said, that is a bad system, and I will change it, and go into the thing earlier where I can take objection with effect; and I desired that the rudiments of the correspondence should be brought to me, and that I should see it in its first inception; and then, guiding myself as well as I could, not by any abstract rules or principles of my own, but by what I understood to be the practice of the office, so far as it could be ascertained. I began to consider the terms on which I should grant this assistance, and I soon found that there were cases in which I could not, as it appeared to me, in accordance with the principles of the office, and with justice to the public, and to the parties concerned, grant the assistance which was required. Taking, for instance, a moderate sized parish with 60 children to be educated, 40 of whom belonged to the Church of England, and 20 of whom were children of Dissenters. If the clergyman asked for a school for 60 children, I felt that I ought not, in accordance with the principles of the office, to give a grant for a school for 60 children if he insisted upon the National the National Society's rules. I could not allow him to count the Dissenters' children, because no provision was made for their religious instruction, except that they might be forced to attend Church services, and to learn the Church Catechism, which would be contrary to the views and feelings of their parents; and, therefore, I could not make a grant in that case for a school for 60 children. Then there was an alternative, and the alternative was, could I grant a school for 40 children? I said, No; because the Dissenters would say, We want a school for our 20 children; and then we should have had two little schools in one parish, illmanaged and poor, and unfairly onerous to the revenue. I have considered, in all such cases, that it was my duty to refuse the grant, and that there my duty ended. But if the persons to whom I refused the grant chose to come and say that they would remove the difficulty respecting the religious feelings of those parents 24 March 1865. Right Hon. whose views differed from their own, and engaged R.Lowe, M.г. that the children of those parents should not be compelled to learn the Catechism or attend the 24 March place of worship which those who asked the 1865. grant attended, and would put a clause to that effect in their trust deed, then I was able to make the grant. I have always considered that when I refuse the grant there my duty ends; but in order that the Churchmen might not lose the school, I was quite willing to mitigate the decision, if care was taken for the Dissenters. That is what is called enforcing the conscience clause, but unfairly so, because I did not refuse the grant for the purpose of enforcing the conscience clause; I refused it because in my judgment, following the system and practice of the office, I was bound to do so. The conscience clause came from the other side. The conscience clause was not my end; my end was to see that the public money went only as it ought to go; it was merely to protect the public purse and the rights of conscience that I refused the grant, and I was quite as well or better pleased that public money should be saved, as that the conscience clause should be adopted. 649. You have given a long explanation upon a point to which my question did not refer; it referred rather to how long you have acted upon the system which you have now described?—I was asked to give my own description of what has been done, and I have done so. I very soon altered the practice with regard to those papers, and adopted the present practice; the practice did not originate with me of refusing a grant on those terms; what the precise practice of my predecessors was, I cannot say, because they appeared to me only to have the grant before them when it was too late to do much good with it; in fact, when they could hardly refuse it. 650. The explanation which I apprehend the Committee are to draw from your long answer is, that you found that system, and that you did not begin with it?-The system certainly did not begin with me, but it was worked with much more accuracy and rigour, if you please, by my taking under me the whole correspondence, and it assumed in my hands the form of something like a rule. 651. Whether or not that practice, as you have described it, ever did assume the form of a rule, has it ever been regarded in the office as a rule? -No: there has been no possibility of laying done a simple rule, because the thing is modified by so many circumstances; it depends upon the size of the parish, upon the distance of the schools, and upon other things of the kind. 652. But your answer relates to the building grant; is it not the fact that the conscience clause refers rather to the children who are to come to the school?-If the Honourable Chairman will excuse me, I would say that that clause arose only upon the question of the building grants. 653. Is it your opinion, from your long experience in that office, that the system on which you have regulated that question could not be laid down as a rule?—I think not as an unvarying rule. 654. Will you explain to the Committee why not? Because de minimis non curat lex. There is a certain number of children, and the great point is to see how we can prevent the undue multiplication of schools on the one hand, and injustice to Dissenters' children on the other; and that must depend upon a variety of local circumstances; for instance, if you have a very small number of Dissenters' children; if out of 60 children there were 10 Dissenters' children, and 50 children of Church of England parents, I should, in accordance with the practice of the Department, give a grant for the whole 60; it is impossible to lay down an iron rule without doing an injustice. 655. Is your opinion, as to the difficulty of laying down any rule with regard to that question, the reason that the office has never made the matter of the conscience clause the subject of a Minute?—I do not see, in my view of the case, how it could be the subject of a Minute. Our Minutes would command us to refuse the grant, and there we should stop, if we stood upon the strict rule. It then comes merely as a matter of negotiation as to whether or not we could relax the rule, and as to the terms on which that relaxation should be granted. I do not see how it could be put in a Minute. 656. May not your practice be described generally in this way; that the grant has been refused in cases where the population included Dissenters, but was not large enough to afford the attendance of more than a certain number of Dissenters' children in the school?-No; I think not. 657. Will you state to the Committee in what respect that is not an accurate description of the practice?-It is inaccurate in various ways. It does not describe the number of the population, or the proportion of Dissenters to Church people, or a variety of other things. 658. My question was, whether that was a general description; you say that it is not so? No; I think not. I think that it is no description at all. 659. Has there been any rule adopted, or any line drawn in the office, with regard to the number of children who might be expected to attend, in order to justify the refusal of a grant to more than one school in a parish; what number of children would induce you, in the administration of that office, to decide that there should be more than one school?-I think that no strict rule can be laid down, because it must depend on a number of local circumstances. We consider 150 to be a good number for a school. 660. That number was laid down in the correspondence with the National Society, was it not? It was a proposal made to the National Society. 661. Was it laid down in any other shape?Not that I am aware of. It was a mere matter of negotiation. 662. Is it from the reasons which you have now assigned that the conscience clause was never made the subject of a Minute, and was never submitted in any form to Parliament?-Certainly; we never have enforced it in any way. 663. Mr. Adderley.] You gave it as your opinion, did you not, that there was nothing in the office, or in the whole work of the Department, which a good man of business might not perform alone? So far as the administration goes, I think that it would be wrong to trust one man with the making of the Minutes. 664. Then, in your opinion, the only use of the Superior or Lord President over the Vice President is, that you consider that he discharges functions requiring a man of a higher grade?I think that there are several circumstances which render the superintendence by the Lord President valuable. In the first place, the Education Education Office is a Department which it is exceedingly difficult and delicate to administer, because it is brought into contact with people's pockets, and that makes them very irritable; and then again, it is a Department which touches very closely on affairs of the Church; and then also I think that it ought to be represented in the Cabinet; and I think that the work of the Department is not of that class which would entitle the Minister who held the office, if he held that office also, to be in the Cabinet; it is below the position of a Cabinet Minister. I think that if a Minister, not being a Member of the Cabinet, had to meet the Committee of Council, he would be very much wanting in weight and influence with them, and I think that, probably, he would get very little attention from them. 665. The question is, whether one officer, who might be a Cabinet Minister, could not efficiently discharge the whole duties of that office without the necessity of a chief officer and a subaltern, would it not be possible to appoint as Minister a man of a rank and class who could fulfil all those requirements which seem to you so necessary?— I do not think that it would be right that such a person should be a Cabinet Minister for discharging the duties of that office alone. I do not think that the duties are sufficiently large, or that the position is sufficiently important to justify it; and I do not think that ultimately it would retain that place. 666. Do you recollect what has been the number of references to the Committee of Council during your five years of office?-No; but I presume that it would be about equal to the number of sets of Minutes which have been issued; there may have been one or two preliminary deliberations. 667. Is not much of the reference from the office to the Committee of Council very similar and analogous to the reference which the head of any Department may make on important subjects to the Cabinet?-It is not every Department which can make a reference to the Cabinet; it might be similar to the case of a Department whose head is in the Cabinet, as I understand; for instance, the head of the Poor Law Board, or of the Board of Trade is not necessarily a Cabinet Minister, and I apprehend that neither of those officials would have the power of referring any question to the Cabinet with any weight or effect, unless he were a member of the Cabinet. 668. I presume that the head of the Poor Law Board, though not in the Cabinet, would be able to lay before them anything which he might consider to be of importance in his Department?He would draw up a memorandum which might be presented by the Home Secretary, who would probably know very little of it, and would not care very much about it, and it would receive very little attention; it would be a very different thing from a Cabinet Minister himself presenting it. 669. Do you think that that is a very different case from the reference made by the Lord President to the Committee of Council?--I think that it is entirely different, because, in the one case, it is a matter for a sort of legislative body to consider; he proposes to the Committee of Council to assent to the making of a certain Minute, and the Cabinet generally meets to consult as to policy, and not to legislate. 670. Do you consider that the system of bye 24 March 1865. legislation in that Department is of itself some- Right Hon, thing so special as to justify the necessity, as a R. Lowe, M.P. check of the reference to the Committee of Council?--Yes; I think it is very desirable that there should not be the power vested in a single individual of making Minutes which dispose of large sums of public money, when you can obtain a check by having a Committee. My notion is, that a Board is a very bad thing to administer, but a very good thing to check the expenditure of money, for instance. 671. I understand your answer to be, that you think the working of the Board satisfactory for conducting the business, as far as possible, under the present denominational and voluntary system on the present basis, but that you think that there might be a better basis than the present one; would you indicate to the Committee what basis is, in your mind, in making that answer?If I had to start the thing afresh, and had not to consider all the feelings and influences which are wrapped up in it, my idea is that education would certainly be better conducted by rates levied by local bodies, with some central inspection; but that is an abstract opinion, and I do not think that it would be possible, after all that has been done, to conduct it in that way. 672. Do you believe that if we were beginning de novo, that would be possible?--I believe that it would be impossible now in England; but it is what I should like to see in England. I do not think that the religious bodies would tolerate it, and I doubt very much whether the country gentlemen, who would have to pay rates which would have to fall on the land, would tolerate it. I doubt whether it would be possible to sweep away all the system which we have raised up, and I imagine that it would raise a great outcry. 673. Is it your opinion that it would be impossible to engraft a rate system on the existing system, but that if the existing system were out of the way, there would be nothing in the religious feelings of the country that would impede such an arrangement?—I think that there would be a great deal to impede it, because I think that the local system would be an undenominational system in the end, from the natural wish of people to have as few schools, and as little expense as possible; and I think that that was originally the real objection, namely, that you could not get over the denominational feeling. 674. Mr. Stirling.] In regard to the meeting of the general Committee of Council, which the Committee were informed by Mr. Lingen occasionally took place when important alterations were being made in the office, do you consider that to be of value in the working of the office? -Yes, I think that it is of great value. I think that it is a very good thing for those who are invested with power to know that they have to look to somebody for a check, and I should be very sorry to see that check dispensed with. 675. Was the Revised Code, as it was submitted by yourself and the Lord President to the Committee of Council, much altered when it came out of the Committee?-I could not say positively, for it is now some time ago, but I do not think so. 676. Therefore, in that particular step, you do not think that that body exercised much influence? -It did indirectly, because those who framed the Revised Code knew very well that they must |