the heritors (_the sole rate-payers_) and minister of the parish.
Before admission to his office, however, the schoolmaster-elect must
pass a strict examination before the presbytery of the bounds, as to
his qualifications to teach the elementary branches of education, and
such of the higher branches as either the heritors on the one hand, or
the presbytery[17] on the other hand, may think necessary in every
case; and must profess his adherence to the Established Church by
signing the Confession of Faith and formula. The parish minister acts
as the regular school-inspector: and every presbytery is bound to hold
an annual examination of all the schools within its jurisdiction,
usually conducted in the presence of the leading inhabitants, and to
make returns to the supreme ecclesiastical court of the attendance,
the branches taught, the progress of the scholars, and the efficiency
of the teachers. It must be here added that, although thus placed
under the superintendence of the national church, and although based
on the principles of the national faith, the parish schools are
acknowledged to be free from anything which, in Scotland at least,
could be called a _sectarian_ character. Lord Melgund frankly admits
that "the teachers and presbyteries appear to have dealt liberally by
all classes of Dissenters in religious matters, and certainly cannot
be reproached with having given offence by dogmatical teaching, or by
attempts to proselytise"--(_Remarks_, p. 24;) and adduces some proofs
in support of this view, with which we shall content ourselves,
though they might easily be multiplied. About twelve years ago, a
series of queries was sent to all the parish schools, containing,
among many others, the following,--"Do children attend the school
without reference to the religious persuasion of their parents?" and,
as quoted by Lord Melgund, out of 924 answers, 915 were in the
affirmative.--(_Remarks_, p. 27.) "It is but justice to the present
teachers," said the Rev. Dr Taylor of the Secession Church to the
House of Lords' Committee, in 1848, (_Remarks_, p. 34,) "to say that,
as far as my knowledge goes, they do not generally attempt to
proselytise or interfere with the religious opinions of the children."
Mr John Gibson, the Government inspector, states, that not only the
children of orthodox Dissenters, but even Roman Catholic children,
find these schools non-sectarian. "Roman Catholic children (he says)
have been wont to attend the schools of the Church of Scotland in the
Highlands and Islands. This they seem to have done in consequence of
the manner in which these schools have been conducted in reference to
the Roman Catholic population."--(_Remarks_, p. 32.) With respect,
indeed, to the great body of dissenters from the Established Church,
there can be no difficulty. The Catechism taught in the parish
schools, and, with the exception of the Bible, the only textbook
insisted upon by the church, is a religious standard acknowledged by
them all, and is taught almost as generally in the non-parochial as in
the parochial schools.
Our answer to Lord Melgund's principal reason for a fundamental
revisal of this the present parochial school system of Scotland is,
that that reason is founded on a great delusion. The reason may be
thus stated, that while the parish schools, however useful as far as
they go, are confessedly inadequate to the increased population, their
present constitution stands in the way of the introduction into
Scotland of a general system of national education.--(See _Remarks_,
p. 35 and _passim_.)
It may be here noticed, in passing, that rather more than enough is
perhaps sometimes said as to the inadequacy of the provision for
education made in the parish schools. The population has certainly
enormously increased since 1696; but so has the wealth of the country,
and so also, along with the power, has the desire increased, of
compensating, by voluntary efforts, for the growing disproportion
between the legal provision and the actual wants of the people in
regard to education. In a great measure, the parish schools continue
to serve efficiently some of the main purposes contemplated in their
institution. In a great measure, they still afford a legal provision
for education, _as far as legal provision is absolutely
necessary_.[18]
That a strictly national system of education is on many accounts
desirable, no one will doubt, any more than that the connexion between
the parish schools and the National Church is, in the present state of
opinion in the country, an insuperable obstacle to any such material
extension of the present machinery, as would constitute a strictly
national educational system. But whether the necessity or propriety
of an alteration of the present system be an inference from these
premises is a different question. Our answer to Lord Melgund here is,
that to remove the parish schools from the superintendence of the
Church would not have the smallest effect in facilitating arrangements
for the purpose which Lord Melgund and others profess--doubtless,
sincerely--to have so much at heart, and that, upon the whole, a
national system of education for Scotland, of a more general
description than the one already in operation, is, at least in present
circumstances, _wholly impracticable_ on any conditions or terms,
after any fashion, or mode, or plan whatsoever. It is right that this
should be distinctly understood. If Lord Melgund believes that the
only or even the principal difficulty in the way of his utopian scheme
of a strictly national system for this country, which shall unite all
sects and parties, is the connexion between the parish school and the
parish church, he must be extremely ignorant of the state of public
opinion in Scotland, where, in fact, any such scheme is, on every
account, notoriously out of the question.
Whether, with all its defects, the present system is not better than
no system at all, is therefore a question deserving the serious
consideration even of those who are most inimical to it. We would
venture here to suggest, that if the existing system is to be
interfered with, that interference should not at least be attempted
until a _strictly national substitute_ for it has been actually agreed
upon. But it is vain to talk thus. The education system of 1696,
already established, to which the people have long been habituated,
and whose value they have had the best means of appreciating, is the
only approximation to a national system which would now be tolerated
for a moment, and, if it were set aside, could not be replaced by any
other.
In the first place, the Church herself would not consent to any scheme
which deprived her of her present securities for the "godly
upbringing" of the children of her own communion. Abolish in the
parish schools the tests and rights of supervision which she now
possesses, and she must seek, in schools raised by voluntary
contribution, the means of carrying out her principles on the subject
of education.
It is equally well known, that neither would the dissenters agree
among themselves as to a national system of education. Of these
members of the community, a large proportion would object to any
system which excluded the Bible and the Shorter Catechism from the
schools; and another large proportion--all who are voluntaries--would
be equally bound, on their own principles, to oppose any plan which
did NOT exclude the Bible and the Shorter Catechism--the latter class
holding that the state cannot, without sin, interfere in any way in
the religious instruction of the people, as strongly as the former
class holds such interference to be the duty of the state. But this is
not all. Thus, for instance, the Free seceders have shown, in the most
unequivocal manner, that their objection is not only to the parish
schools, as at present organised, but to all schools not under their
own special superintendence.
What the views of the present rate-payers would be remains to be seen.
The endowment of the parish schools cannot be called national. It
comes exclusively out of the pockets of the landed gentry and other
heritors of the country, who, as far as we are aware, have never as a
class expressed any dissatisfaction with its present application, or
any wish to interfere at all with the general ecclesiastical system
with which it is connected. How far their concurrence to a radical
alteration in the appropriation of funds, for which they originally
consented to assess themselves on specified conditions, could be
secured, we do not know; but we have strong suspicions that not the
least of the difficulties would arise from this quarter, which is not
usually taken into account. In short, let the question be put to the
test. Propose a substitute for the enactment of 1696. Draw up a bill
in which the details of a workable national system of education are
intelligibly set forth, and let that system be what it will, liberal
or illiberal, exclusive or catholic--a system in which all sects are
endowed, as in many of the German states, or from which all religious
instruction is excluded, as in America--let it be the wisest, most
comprehensive, most flexible scheme ever devised--and see the result:
see whether the true difficulty in setting in motion a more extended
and more strictly national system of education than at present exists,
lies in the connexion between the parish schools and the Established
Church, which an act of parliament might remedy any day, or in causes
which no strong-handed measure of the legislature can reach--in the
irremediable differences of opinion on the subject of education, and
on the subject of religion, and on the subject of national endowments,
prevalent at this day in Scotland, to a degree, and with
complications, perhaps, nowhere else to be found in the world.
We consider it unnecessary to say anything as to the only other reason
alleged by Lord Melgund for an interference with the present
management of the parish schools--namely, the practical injustice
suffered by dissenters from the Established Church, by the exclusive
character of that management. We almost hope we misinterpret his
lordship's statement, in attributing to him an objection which is
nowhere announced in explicit terms, but which seems to us to be not
the less obviously suggested. The objection, however, is a common one.
Thus, as quoted by Lord Melgund himself, the Rev. Dr Taylor stated
before the Lords' Committee, that the "Dissenters desired the reform
of the parish schools less on account of the education of the
children, than to open a field of employment for persons who wish to
be schoolmasters, and are members of congregations not belonging to
the Established Church;" and that "Dissenters consider it a grievance,
or badge of inferiority, and an act of injustice, that they should be
excluded from holding office in schools which are national
institutions."
We think it needless to enter upon this topic, for if the reason here
alleged be valid as against the parish schools, it is also valid as
against the parish churches--against, in a word, the whole system of
the national religious Establishment; and we trust that the time is
not yet come when the propriety of overthrowing that institution,
and--for all must stand or fall together--those of the sister
kingdoms, admits of serious discussion. It is worthy of notice,
however, in passing, not only that such is at bottom the true state of
the question, but that, with almost the whole of the advocates of a
change, it is acknowledged to be so; and that that change, like the
similar proposed innovations in the universities, and like the Lord
Advocate's Marriage and Registration Bills, is mainly desired, when
desired at all, as an important step towards the gradual
accomplishment of an ulterior object, which it is not yet expedient to
seek by open and straightforward means.
Before concluding this protest against the sweeping measures proposed
by Lord Melgund and the party which he represents, it is right to take
some notice of another question. Is the school system of Scotland
incapable of any alteration whatever for the better? Granting that its
fundamental principles ought to remain intact, may it not, and should
it not, be rendered more efficient in the details of its
administration, by the aid of the legislature?
One matter of detail which has been often pointed out as calling for
legislative interference, is the difficulty, under the present law, of
relieving parishes from the burden of incompetent schoolmasters, and
particularly of schoolmasters who have become unfit for their duties
by age or infirmity. Unhappily there are no retiring allowances
provided in the parochial school system of Scotland. The consequence
is, that it depends upon the mere liberality of the heritors--who
however, to their honour, are seldom found wanting in such
cases--whether a man who has outlived his usefulness shall continue to
exercise his functions. For this evil it is very desirable that the
obvious remedy should be furnished; and we think that there are no
insurmountable practical difficulties to arrangements on the subject
being carried into effect. It might also be proper to give greater
facilities to presbyteries in dismissing teachers for wilful neglect
of duty--a contingency which it is right to mention is both of very
rare occurrence, and is best provided against by care in the
selection, on the part of the heritors, and in the rigorous exercise
by presbyteries of their large powers of examination and rejection,
when the appointments are originally made.
With regard to the existing salaries, their inadequacy has been
already insisted upon. Nor, for many reasons, can we accept the
recently propounded--if it can be said to be propounded, for its terms
are not a little ambiguous--plan of the Privy Council's Committee for
their augmentation as any remedy whatever. That plan--not to speak of
more serious objections to it--includes certain conditions which are
so framed, as practically to exclude from participation in the grant
all parishes except the wealthiest and most liberal, which, of course,
least need it. It is enough to mention here, that one of the
conditions on which this grant, in every case, depends, is the
_voluntary_ concurrence of the heritors themselves in the payment of a
considerable proportion of any addition to the present salary. We, of
course, wish, that eventually some truly practicable means may be
adopted to secure for the parish schoolmasters, throughout the
country, allowances more in proportion than their present pittances to
the importance--which can hardly be overrated--of their duties, and,
we may add, to their merits.
These matters of detail admit, we repeat, of improvement. It is
desirable that something should be done in the case of both. Better,
however, a hundredfold, that things should remain altogether as they
are, than that the principles lying at the foundation of the system
should be shaken. It is to be hoped that the Church will be true to
herself in regard to the question of pecuniary aid either from
government, or by government legislation; refusing for its sake to
compromise in the least degree her sacred rights--or let us rather
call them her sacred duties--of superintendence; Better to be poor
than not pure.
One word more. Alarming as is the proposal of the member for Greenock,
we have to state, with great regret, that it does no more than confirm
apprehensions for the safety of a system hitherto found to work well,
which have been awakened by actual proceedings already adopted. It is
impossible that any one can have watched the gradual development of
the plan, in regard particularly, though not exclusively, to Scotland,
of that anomalous board, the Privy Council's Committee on Education,
without being persuaded that they are, we do not say intended, but, at
least, most nicely adapted to the eventual attainment of the very same
object which Lord Melgund would accomplish _per saltum_. The every-day
increasing claims of the Board to a right of interference with the
internal management of all schools, its assumption of apparently
unlimited legislative powers, and its continual indications of special
hostility to the parochial school system, constitute an ominous
combination of unfavourable circumstances. Even in the act of
ostensibly aiding, it is secretly undermining that system. It is not
only weakening its efficiency by the encouragement of rival
schools--_rival_ in the strictest sense of the term--but, by its
grants to the parish schools themselves, on the conditions now
exacted, it is purchasing the power, and preparing the way, for an
eventual absorption of these schools in a comprehensive system to be
under its own exclusive control, and to be regulated by principles at
direct variance with those under the influence of which, in the
schools of Scotland, have been for nearly two centuries brought up a
people--we may say it with some pride--not behind any other in
intelligence, or in moral and religious worth.
FOOTNOTES:
[11] _Remarks on the Government Scheme of National Education in
Scotland_, 1848.
[12] We observe, however, that by the Parliamentary Returns of 1834,
the school accommodation was even then considerably greater than is
here stated. The greatest number attending the parish school was 246,
and non-parochial schools 443; which, to the population there given of
3210, was nearly a proportion of 1 in 5 of the inhabitants--a larger
proportion than in Prussia!
[13] They have taken care to sound the committee on the subject, and
have received an answer encouraging enough. The following extract is
from their report of a deputation to the Lord President:--"2. In
regard to applications for annual grants under the minutes, it was
asked--What evidence will ordinarily be required to satisfy the
Committee of the Privy Council that any particular school is needed in
the district in which it stands, and that it ought to be recognised as
entitled to its fair share of the grant equally with others similarly
situated? Supposing, in any given school, all the other conditions, as
to pecuniary resources, the qualifications of teachers, &c.,
satisfactorily complied with, will it be held enough to have the
report of the Government inspector or inspectors that a sufficient
number of children (say 50 or 60 in the country, and 90 or 100 in
towns) either are actually in attendance upon the school, or engaged
to attend, _without the question being raised as to the contiguity of
other schools_ of a different denomination, or the amount of vacant
accommodation in such schools? In reply, it was stated that the
Committee of Privy Council could not limit their discretion in judging
of the comparative urgency of applications; their lordships were
disposed to receive representations, and to inquire as to the
sufficiency of the existing school accommodation; and they would also
consider any other ground which might be urged for the erection of a
new school where a school or schools had been previously
established."--_Minutes for 1847-8_, vol. l, p. lxiv.
[14] _Schoolmasters' Memorial_, p. 3.
[15] In many parishes side schools are built and endowed, in addition
to the parish school, from the same funds: the salary in these cases
being fixed by the Act at about £17.
[16] _Parliamentary Inquiry_, 1837, _Appendix_.
[17] That the presbytery has the power of insisting upon
qualifications supplementary to those prescribed by the heritors, was
decided, we think about a dozen years ago, in the case of Sprouston.
[18] The Church herself, to a considerable extent, supplements
deficiencies in the legal school provision by means of her "Education
Scheme," whose object and efficiency may be partly gathered from the
two first sentences of the last report of the managing committee:--
"The schools under the charge of your committee (as has often been
stated) are intended to form auxiliaries to the parish schools, not to
compete or interfere with these admirable institutions; and,
accordingly, are never planted except where, owing to local
peculiarities, it is impossible that all the youth of the district
requiring instruction can be gathered into one place. While much
needed, your schools continue to be most useful; and, indeed, by the
divine blessing, they appear to have been rendered eminently
beneficial.
"The number of schools under the care of your committee may be
reported of thus:--Those situated in the Highlands and Islands, 125;
those in the Lowlands, 64; and those planted at the expense of the
Church of Scotland's Ladies' Gaelic School Society, and placed under
your committee's charge, 20; in all, 209."
ARARAT AND THE ARMENIAN HIGHLANDS.[19]
It were a worthy and novel undertaking for a man of science,
enterprise, and letters, to explore and describe in succession the
most celebrated of the earth's mountains. And we know of no person
better fitted for such a task, and likely to accomplish it with more
honour to himself and advantage to the world, than the persevering
traveller and able writer, the title of whose latest work heads this
page. Has he allotted himself that task? We cannot say; but what he
has already done looks like its commencement, and he has time before
him to follow the path upon which he has so successfully and
creditably entered. In Dr Moritz Wagner we have an instance of a
strong natural bent forcing its way in defiance of obstacles.
Compelled by the pressure of peculiar circumstances to abandon his
academical studies at Augsburg before they were completed, and to
devote himself to commercial pursuits, he entered a merchant's house
at Marseilles. Business took him to Algiers, and his visit to that
country, then in the early years of French occupation, roused beyond
the possibility of restraint the ardent thirst for travel and
knowledge which had always been one of his characteristics. Abandoning
trade, he returned to Germany and devoted himself to the study of
natural history, and especially to that of zoology, which he had
cultivated in his youth. In 1836, being then in his twenty-ninth year,
he started from Paris for Algeria, where he travelled for two years,
sharing, in the capacity of member of a scientific commission, in the
second and successful expedition to Constantina. It is a peculiarity,
and we esteem it laudable, of many German travellers of the more
reflective and scientific class, that they do not rush into type
before the dust of the journey is shaken from their feet, but take
time to digest and elaborate the history of their researches. Thus it
was not until three years after his return to Europe, that Dr Wagner
sent forth from his studious retirement at Augsburg an account of his
African experiences, in a book which still keeps the place it at once
took as the best upon that subject in the German language.[20] The
work had not long been issued to the public, when its author again
girded himself for the road. This time his footsteps were turned
eastwards; Asia was his goal: he passed three busy and active years in
Turkey and Russia, Circassia and Armenia. The strictly scientific
results of this long period of observant travel and diligent research
are reserved for a great work, now upon the anvil. To the general
reader Dr Wagner addressed, a few months ago, two volumes of
remarkable spirit and interest, which we recently noticed; and he now
comes forward with a third, in its way equally able and attractive.
The apparent analogy between the subjects of the two books, as
treating of contiguous countries and nations, but slightly cloaks
their real contrast. The two mountain ranges, whose world-renowned
names figure on their title-pages, are, although geographically
adjacent to each other, as far apart as the antipodes in their history
and associations, and in the character of their inhabitants. Of the
one the traditions are biblical, of the other pagan and mythological.
Upon a crag of Caucasus Prometheus howls, and Medea culls poison at
its base; upon Ararat's summit the ark reposes, and Noah, stepping
forth upon the soaked and steaming earth, founds the village of
Arguri, and plants the first vine in its valley. In modern days the
contrast is not less striking. Amongst the Caucasian cliffs the rattle
of musketry, the howl of warlike fanatics, the glitter of Mahomedan
mail, the charging hoofs of chivalrous squadrons, the wave of rich
robes and the gleam of costly weapons purchased with the flesh and
blood of Circassia's comely daughters. "Curse upon the Muscovite!
Freedom or death!" is here the cry. Upon Ararat's skirts how different
the scene and sounds! Cloisters and churches, monks and bishops,
precious relics and sainted sites, the monotonous chant of priests and
the prayer-bell's musical clang, the holy well of Jacob and the
vestiges of Noah's floating caravan.[21] Dr Wagner esteems his journey
to Armenia one of the most interesting episodes of his three years'
Asiatic wanderings. In the preface to its record, he pays a handsome
and well-deserved tribute to the enterprise of English travellers--to
the names of Ker Porter, Wilbraham, Fraser, Hamilton, Ainsworth, and
many others--who have contributed more, he says, to our geographical
knowledge of Asia, than the learned travellers of all the other
nations of Europe. He himself, he modestly and truly intimates, has
added in the present volume to the store of information.