they had the opportunity under the Bill the requisite school accommodation, of raising the controversy again and the Education Department would have again. Yet if only by one vote a school the power to require that the deboard had been created, it was not to be ficiency should be supplied. The Deabolished, even although it might be partment would give the voluntary contrary to the wish of the influential principle the opportunity of supplypeople in the parish. Hon. and right ing the deficiency, or would cause hon. Gentlemen opposite seemed to think a school board to be established, if the that no one was influential in a parish deficiency were not supplied by the except the rich and powerful. They voluntary principle. It would in the were very much mistaken. He agreed latter event fix on that parish a school that when a man owned the whole of a board for ever, as far as the present parish he might do either a great deal clause was concerned. It was said that of good or harm. In the majority of the population of the country was inparishes, however, unless he was sup- creasing. That was no doubt true, ported by the really influential people but it did not grow to the extent who were interested in imparting reli- suggested in a day, or a week, or a gious education, he was powerless to do month, or even in a year. There would, good, although he might be powerful to therefore, be ample time for the Educado evil. When the people found school tion Department to interfere where the boards unnecessary, and became tired of voluntary principle did not meet the the disputes and expense of elections, emergency. The right hon. Gentleman were they to be told they were to be de- the Member for Edinburgh University— barred from asking to be relieved from a great Liberal-taunted the Governthat encumbrance? He could not be ment with being supported on the present charged with hostility to school boards, occasion by the most effective assistance because the only time he had lifted up of the hon. Member for Roscommon (the his voice in Committee was when his O'Conor Don). The right hon. Genhon. Friend the Member for Newcastle tleman, who would never ask what a took a strong view against them, and man's religion was, and who would prowhen he spoke against his hon. Friend's test against any investigation into the Amendment. The present clause was religious creed of any one who sat in an act of justice and equity, and was in that House, did not hesitate to say that harmony with the Act of 1870, the only the Government, of whom he had spoken difference being that while that Act al- as upholding the bulwarks of Proteslowed the vote for the setting up a school tantism, had begged for Roman Catholic board to be given freely, the Govern- assistance. He had seen the time when ment thought it right, on the other hand, Roman Catholic assistance had been where the people thought they could get begged for by Parties in that House. It the work better done in other ways by was not in his time, but he had heard of Town Councils and the school atten- " compacts" with Roman Catholic Gendance committees of Boards of Guar- tlemen years ago at Willis's Rooms, and dians, to allow them to do so. The he had known much more recently the right hon. Member for Birmingham assistance of Roman Catholic Members (Mr. John Bright), in a speech which sought for the destruction of a Proteswas, he (Mr. Hardy) thought, extremely tant Establishment. He avowed that in irrelevant-one of those speeches in this case without asking it they were which the right hon. Gentleman showed ready to take that assistance, because it the animus he bore towards the Church was founded on justice. The hon. Memof England-made statements so unfair ber for Roscommon put forward no reliand so unreasonable in connection with gious ground for giving them his support; that Church that he did not think it and yet the right hon. Gentleman had necessary to reply to them. His sole thrown out that miserable taunt, when the argument was that by the local authori- proposal of the Government was founded ties, which would be set up where there on justice alone, and when he hoped by were no school boards, schools could not this means to obtain that united action be built out of the rates. Well, that was so much to be desired by the Party oppoperfectly true; but the Education De- site. When he was told that the Governpartment retained all its powers, and if ment were pursuing a re-actionary policy the voluntary principle did not supply on the question of education, it passed by him like the idle wind which he re- | For his part he must decline to be bound garded not. The question now before by what was stated in any magazine, the House had nothing whatever to do although he had no doubt there was a with religion. It was whether school great deal of truth in the article in quesboards were necessary or not, and whe- tion. The hon. Member went on to say ther that, when they were not necessary, that if the Church of England was going parishes should be relieved from them. to stretch out her hand everywhere to În order to give effect to their taunts exercise power or to receive money— hon. Members opposite had assumed which she could not do under the clause that the two excellent Representatives -the result would be to unite the great of Bury St. Edmund's were leaders of Liberal Party to procure the disestathe great Conservative Party. He had blishment of the Church and to throw great respect for the honesty of his hon. her upon her own resources. Well, the Friend (Mr. Greene), and was sure that time might come when the Party oppowhen he made his general observations, site might band together for that cruhe had regard to the question of justice sade, and for that crusade he would alone, and did not think of re-action. The wait. For the present he was content hon. Member for Burnley had quoted to say that the Government had preLord Palmerston, and said the dirty sented to the House an honest Bill, and Party and the religious Party were gene- they believed they were in no wise imrally connected, but the sanitary question pairing the honesty or force of that Bill had nothing to do with the matter, and by tendering as they did to his hon. under the provisions of the Bill the dirty Friend the Member for South LeicesterParty, or the non-education Party, would shire (Mr. Pell) in a sense of equity and have little chance of success. In fact, justice, a hearty support. the right hon. Member for Bradford ad- MR. W. E. FORSTER said, he was mitted that the Bill contained provisions anxious to go back to the pnrely educaof effective [compulsion for education; tional aspect of the matter, and to exand although he wished for something plain why he and many others who better, he was bound to admit that as one thought with him were, upon solely eduof the clauses now stood it would make cational grounds, strongly opposed to a very considerable advance in educa- the clause. The right hon. Gentleman, tion. What, therefore, was the posi- in alluding to the previous history of the tion? The noble Lord the Vice Presi- Bill, hardly did justice to hon. Members dent of the Council had brought in a on that side of the House. He spoke of Bill for the spread of education through- the hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. out the country, and hon. Members Mundella) as if he had opposed the seopposite said they had supported it up cond reading. No opposition was offered to a certain point. That was not exactly to that stage, and the opposition subsethe case. At all events, they had not quently offered was consistent with a done so as a body. They admitted that general support of the Bill. The divithe Bill was calculated to advance edu- sion which was taken on the Motion of cation; and there was now a scheme on his hon. Friend the Member for Burnley foot which, so far from confining school (Mr. Rylands), also, was justified by the boards to places where they at present Amendments which were made in the existed, took the power of extending Bill, as a concession to opinions expressed them to every district in the country, so on both sides of the House. Then again, that in every parish the majority might in Committee, the sole view of hon. call for school boards if they wished. Members was to secure as good a Bill as Where, then, was the reality or justice possible. Why, then, was the position so of the taunt which said-" You are re- changed by this clause? He certainly tarding education, and setting yourselves thought the right hon. Gentleman would against it?" It seemed to him that the have stated the grievance which was to attack on that ground was wholly with- be met and the cases which required the out foundation. Well, the hon. Member operation of the clause. Some isolated for Burnley wound up by reading an cases had been mentioned, but they were article from the The Church Quarterly not sufficient to call for such a provision, Review, and endeavoured to make hon. and the argument had never been anMembers at that side of the House re-swered that the clause would affect very sponsible for every word of that article. many cases that ought to be let alone. Mr. Gathorne Hardy The right hon. Gentleman said-"We | boards than in voluntary teaching, and will find you a substitute for the powers where there was a considerable number which are taken away;" but in the case of Dissenters in school board - districts of Stockport, Cambridge, and Kendal, they had obtained almost a vested right for instance, no substitute whatever was in school boards, and Government had provided. What was feared was, that in no right to take from them that protecplaces where the school boards were tion even by a vote of the majority. doing good work, the clause would lead With reference to the remarks of the to agitation and a combination of all hon. Member for Roscommon (the who for any reason were opposed to O'Conor Don) he must express a doubt school boards with a view to have them whether the clause would be received dissolved. This was all the more likely with satisfaction by the Catholics in from the fact-which he would admit- towns like Manchester and Birmingham, that school boards were not popular. because the Catholics were there repreThat unpopularity, however, existed sented on the school boards, and it was only to a certain degree, and might be very doubtful whether they would be accounted for, if they considered that represented for educational purposes in school boards could not have done their the Town Councils. The principle of duty without earning some unpopularity; Church and State was involved in the but he should never have expected the proposal and it was opposed by his side Education Minister to threaten that if of the House, because they thought it they opposed the clause, he would retail would discourage the rate system as every insinuation which the Inspectors compared with the denominational syshad heard against the school boards. tem. He appealed to the Government Those who opposed the clause had no whether it was worth their while to risk particular love for school boards, but the failure of their Bill by insisting were anxious to maintain the principle upon the retention of the clause. The that the inhabitants of a locality should Government might depend upon it that elect persons to look after education, in the long run this step on their part believing that upon such a principle they would be found not to be a popular must rely for the success of education in one, and that instead of enhancing, it this country. Parliament should be pre- would gradually diminish the usefulness pared to abide by the compromise of of the measure. 1870; and while saying that where a district could do without a school board, it should not be interfered with, he should strongly object to a clause which would virtually upset everything that the Act of 1870 had done. With regard to the discretion to be given to the Education Department, he thought hon. Members ought not to be blamed if they declined to repose unlimited confidence in that Department. In many a rural parish where a school had been voluntarily transferred to a school board, the influence of neighbouring parishes would, in the event of this clause being passed, be exerted to procure the re-transfer of the school to its original owners. What cause, he should like to know, was there for such an agitation? Was it worth while to spend more time in discussing a clause which could not be passed? It was not too late for the Government to clothe the new authority with the necessary organizing power, and then they would hear very little more of the opposition. Dissenters in the country had much more confidence in school Question put. The Committee divided:-Ayes 221; Noes 140: Majority 81. MR. W. E. FORSTER moved, as an Amendment, to the proposed new clause, to insert at the beginning, the words "Where a School Board has been formed under sub-section one of section twelve of The MR. PELL hoped that the Government would not accede to the Amendment, as it would very much restrict the operation of the clause. MR. W. E. FORSTER said, that by far the largest number of important school boards had been voluntarily formed; but still many had been established compulsorily, and there would be great danger in allowing the clause to apply to the latter. VISCOUNT SANDON declined to accept the Amendment, which he did not think would be in accordance with the vote to which the Committee had just come. Moreover, it would not meet cases where schools had been re-transferred to their original owners, and where, consequently, school boards were left with nothing to do. MR. W. E. FORSTER said, that to meet some objections which he understood were entertained, he would ask leave to amend the Amendment by leaving out the words "sub-section one." MR. FAWCETT thought that they ought not to be asked to go on with the clause that night. They had all along been told that it was simply meant to give the ratepayers power to rescind their decision to create a school board; but now it was found that the new clause would go far beyond that. He did not wish to impede the progress of the Bill, but he considered it unprecedented that great principles should be imported into a Bill after it had passed its second reading, and was on the eve of becoming law. VISCOUNT SANDON said, they had had rather a heavy evening, and therefore he would consent to the Motion. Question put, and agreed to. House resumed. Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow, at Two of the clock. POLLUTION OF RIVERS BILL. (Mr. Sclater-Booth, Mr. Salt.) [BILL 186.] SECOND READING. ADJOURNED DEBATE. Order read, for resuming Adjourned the Bill be now read a second time."Debate on Question [22nd June], "That (Mr. Sclater-Booth.) Question again proposed. Debate resumed. SIR CHARLES W. DILKE hoped that the Bill would not be proceeded with at that late hour (10 minutes past 12). He considered that, if the Amendments proposed by the Government were introduced, the Bill would not affect the object in view, and he believed its principal supporters were certain Scotch manufacturers who thought that if it passed they would be able to pollute the rivers as much as they pleased. He was sure that those who had given their attention to the pollution of rivers must know that the prevention must be attended with considerable ex MR. OSBORNE MORGAN said, as there seemed to be considerable confusion regarding the effect of the Amend-pense to those manufacturers who, ment, he thought they should have further time for its consideration, and would move that Progress be reported. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again." (Mr. Osborne Morgan.) THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER pointed out that there would be none of the dangers which some hon. Members anticipated from the clause the House had just adopted, and considered the Amendment unnecessary. MR. W. E. FORSTER hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consent to his Amendment, as his only objection to it was that he thought the object he had in view was already provided for by the Bill. for the purposes of their manufactures, first polluted them. The Bill had been so altered by Amendments that it was by no means the same Bill. The whole construction of the Bill would depend upon the interpretation put upon the words "reasonable cost." He would not move to report Progress; but, if necessary, doubtless some other hon. Member would make such a Motion. MR. WHITWELL supported the Motion. The Bill had far better be carried, than that nothing should be done for the purification of rivers for another Session. He considered it most essential to the health of the country, inasmuch as infection, it was well known, was carried along the stream of polluted rivers. He could not agree with the hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea in his opposition to the second reading of the Bill; and with regard to the manufacturers, for whom he expressed so much interest, he did not see that they were to be considered more than other people. He hoped Parliament would pass the Bill that Session. What the Government proposed to do was quite reasonable; it was that the Bill might be read a second time with a view to the introduction of Amendments which they had well considered since the debate had been adjourned, and which, when printed, hon. Members would be better able to understand than they could do at present. MR. ORR EWING hoped the opposition to the Bill would be withdrawn, and a hearty endeavour made to pass it that Session. It was an excellent Bill, and if passed into law would effect a great improvement. MR. LYON PLAYFAIR said, the Bill was in the interest of both the traders and the manufacturers. The subject of pollution of rivers was considered so important that it was mentioned in the Queen's Speech last year, and it was to be regretted that it was not brought in until the end of the Session. The House was no doubt aware that there had been a Royal Commission sitting on the subject for some years, and that Commission had decided on a Report. A Select Committee of the House of Lords had also inquired into the subject, and had made a Report upon it, but there was not a single one of the recommendations of that Committee included in the Bill. He asked what chance such a measure as that would have if it reached the House of Lords, where it was directly opposed to the views of the Royal Commission, and did not incorporate a single recommendation of the Committee of that House? The President of the Local Government Board wished the House to pass the Bill in silence. ["No, no!"] Well, the right hon. Gentleman had not explained what the new Amendments were to be, and the Bill was getting changed since it was first brought into the House. He considered that they would simply be wasting time to discuss the measure at that period of the Session, and therefore hoped it would not be proceeded with. MR. HERMON would rather have no Bill than an imperfect one, but this was a Bill which was greatly required and called for in the North of England, and he hoped the House would consent to the second reading; at the same time he hoped the Amendments would be very carefully scrutinized in Committee, as he looked upon some of them with suspicion. MR. STEVENSON also supported the second reading. MR. NEWDEGATE was most anxious that the Bill should be passed, because the supposed indifference of the House upon the subject was in itself an obstruction to putting even the provisions of the present defective law into force. By passing the Bill, the House would remove an impression that that pollution could be carried on with impunity. MR. YEAMAN thought the Bill in its present shape too stringent, but if the 16th clause were omitted, and certain other modifications made, he should not oppose the second reading. He advocated uniformity of legislation for England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the compulsory acquisition of land to enable manufacturers to purify refuse. MR. M'LAGAN considered it very desirable that the second reading should be agreed to, in order that the various Amendments which were in contemplation might be placed before the House. LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH said, it was impossible that a Bill on such a difficult and complicated question requiring such careful consideration could pass during the remainder of the Session. It could only be passed by satisfying all the manufacturers and traders who were engaged in polluting rivers, and would then be an obstruction to really useful legislation. COLONEL MURE hoped that the Bill would pass a second reading. The deputations, so many of which had come up to London, were at first opposed to this Bill; but they had at last come to the conclusion that while it would prevent the pollution of rivers, it would not be oppressive to the manufacturing and other interests concerned. In Scotland there was a general desire to see the measure passed, as the present law had not succeeded in purifying the rivers. MR. DILLWYN wished that a Bill with this object should pass, but then he wished it to be a good Bill, and they were not likely to have a good Bill when they were discussing it at that |