68 



The Review of Reviews. 



July 1, 1306. 



putably decided that denominational control of ele- 

 mentary schools, and with it religious tests for 

 teachers, will have to go. Mr. Morell says in effect 

 there are only three alternatives — (i) "right of 

 entry,'' (2) simple Biblical teaching by the teacher, 

 (3) a secular system. He pleads for the second. If 

 it is rejected, he says " the demand for a complete 

 secularisation of the schools will become irresistible." 

 He says that almost all the Labour members favour 

 this solution. Mr. Morell seems to forget that the 

 so-called secular policy of the Labour members does 

 not exclude the Bible from the schools. 



"THE SECULAR SOLUTION." 

 Naturally the Indcpotdent Review thinks that Mr. 

 Birrell's Education Bill will come to be regarded as 

 " a courageous and fair-minded attempt to settle the 

 difficult problem of religious education." In an ar- 

 ticle later on, Mr. J. M. Robertson advises " the 

 Secular Solution." He believes that Xonconformists 

 would be in a stronger position as against Anglican 

 encroachment if thev consented " to the just course 

 of making the ordinary schools entirely secular." If 

 the Bill is passed as it stands, 



the Ohuroli. with its foot inside the door, will go on push- 

 ins, and all the while the Nonconformists stand committed 

 to the principle which concedes the essentials of the sacer- 

 dotalist claim. There is. in short, no prospect of educa- 

 tional peace until all forms of ecclesiastical claim are ex- 

 cluded from the State schools. 



And he asks : — 



Cannot thoughtful religious people see that the one solu- 

 tion is the leaviiiiT of religious teaching to religious agen- 

 cies, and the elimination of the problem from the work of 

 tlie State school? 



POSITn'IST VitWS. 



In the Pflsiiivist Review Mr. F. J. Gould says that 

 Undenominationalism — free commentary — " usually 

 lacks enthusiasm, definiteness, and breadth of sym- 

 pathy." He thinks that the outcome of the new- 

 Act will be that children very often will not go to 

 school at all till 9.45. Some parents will keep them 

 awav because of unorthodoxy, others from indolence 

 or indifference. In this clause he sees " one of the 

 solvents which will hasten the end of the present bad 

 alliance between theology and the school." In the 

 same review Professor Beesly fears much valuable 

 time is going to be lost over the Bill, and savs no 

 harm would have been done by leaving the 1902 Act 

 in operation a little longer. " It was gradually 

 bringing the public to see that purely secular schools 

 are the only way out of the difficulty." 



FROM THE "LATE LAMENTED ' S.B.L. 



In the Contemporary Review, Lord Stanley of 

 Alderlev has a long paper on this subject, in which 

 he pleads for one national system under public local 

 management for all schools. In any school where 

 by far the greater number of the children ask for 

 specific religious teaching of any type, the local 

 authoritv, if there are other schools near enough, and 

 enough to meet the demand, should permit the par- 

 ticular school building to be at the service of the 



parents asking for it every morning of the week. If 

 the parents will be satisfied, two mornings a week 

 only might be allowed. In Lord Stanley of Alder- 

 ley's opinion the scheme would be best carried out 

 by making the public schools limited to secular 

 teaching which the State demands, inspects, and aids 

 by grants. On the whole he seems to approve the 

 Bill. 



In the Empire Review Sir Charles Elliott, a late 

 member of the London School Board, says no one 

 who studies the new Bill can fail to be intensely dis- 

 appointed. Sec. 6, removing any obligation for 

 children to attend during the time of religious in- 

 struction, he says must be met with implacable 

 opposition by everv'one who cares for religious edu- 

 cation of any denomination. And he makes certain 

 suggestions, too long to enter into here, for securing 

 an Act to pacify the " bigoted but earnest Noncon- 

 formist objector," and yet not cause serious injury to 

 the education of children. 



ALL CHILDREX FREE TO DROP RELIGIOUS 

 INSTRUCTION. 



The clause in Mr. Birrell's Bill which expressly 

 states that " the parent of a child attending a public 

 elementarv school shall not be under any obligation 

 to cause the child to attend at the schoolhouse, 

 except during the times allotted in the time-table 

 exclusivelv to secular instruction," is exciting a very 

 great deal of attention. Dr. Macnamara says in the 

 Niueiecnth Century : — 



I have not the slightest doubt that within ten years it will 

 be found that this clause has worked a greater revolution 

 in our common school system than all the rest of the edu- 

 cational legislation of the last thirty-six years put to- 

 gether. 



Mr. D. C. Lathburv-, in the same magazine, 

 says : — 



I once asked an eminent Liberal educationalist what pro- 

 portion of the children he thought would be found at the 

 Denominational lesson after the parents had come to un- 

 derstand that attendance at it was purely voluntary. It 

 would have suited his purpose better to say tiaat the num- 

 bers would not be appreciably reduced, but his love of truth 

 would not permit this, and lie replied. " Perhaps 5 j>er 

 cent." In the country tliis estimate would, I think, be be- 

 low the mark, and everywhere the personal popularity of in- 

 dividual teachers, and the extent to which the children liked 

 the lesson, would couot for a good deal. But in towns an 

 additional half hour's wage would be an object to careful 

 parents, and the preference of the children for playing in 

 the streets would certainly weigli with careless ones. The 

 change, says Mr. Birrell. is only one in najme. Attendance 

 when the school is opened has never been compulsory. The 

 clause only puts the existing law into words. But to put a 

 law into words may be much more than halt the battle. 



In the Quiver, Bella Sidney Woolf begins a series 

 of papers on Children's Classics — " the favourite 

 books of our childhood." The writers dealt with 

 are Miss .\lcott, who should surelv not have had 

 first place : Mrs. Ewing, a writer on an altogether 

 higher plane ; Miss Yonge ; Hesba Stretton : Miss 

 Sewell, the authoress of " Black Beauty " ; Miss 

 Montgomery, the writer of " Misunderstood " : Hans 

 .Andersen and the Brothers Grimm. 



