Sunday and Ragged Schools Rating Exemption Bill. in a measure to settle this question of difficulty and embarrassment. He held, therefore, that the late Government did pledge themselves to the teashers of the country that they would give consideration to the settlement of this question. Some deputations had since waited upon Ministers, and now that a new House of Commons had assembled, it was thought by the friends of these institutions that the whole question should be brought to a settlement by a Bill. He did not make his appeal to the Government, but he asked the House to declare what the will of the people was with regard to these institutions. (Cheers.) The name of Robert Raikes ought not to be men tioned, and especially in the House of Commons, without the greatest respect and reverence. In 1782 that gentleman formed the first Sunday school, from which had arisen the whole body of Sunday schools, at present occupying so high and important a positien in the country. Mr. Raikes gathered the children together with a wonderful amount of foresight from the streets of Gloucester, where they were creating the greatest amount of mischief. He hired persons to take charge of them and teach them, and his institution grew until it became so considerable as to be attacked in the Senate and cathedral as one of a dangerous character to the country. But what had happened? That institution, which began in 1782, acquired such strength that in 1818 there were 5,463 schools in the country, with a million and a half of children taught in them. (Cheers.) By the census of 1851 there appeared to be 23,498 of these schools, with considerably above 2,000,000 children. On March 30, 1851, which was the Sunday upon which the census was taken, there were present 78 per cent. of the whole number of children on the books. (Cheers.) This proved that these institutions were no visionary matter. Taking the same basis he calculated that in 1869, taking the whole of the schools of the United Kingdom, there would be 3,897,000 children, their gra 331 tuitous teachers numbering no less than 498,000. (Cheers.) He could not help thinking the House would view this progress as something wonderful, and, as far as he knew, it had no parallel in history. (Cheers.) The hon. gentleman then proceeded to quote the opinion of Mr. Butterworth, M.P., and read an extract from the Quarterly Review to prove the great benefit and utility of these schools, and he then went on to say, in the strictest Parliamentary sense, that non-interference in this matter would be unfair, impolitic, and oppressive. He said it would be unfair, because churches, chapels, and some other places were exempt from payment of these rates. He had himself been a Sunday school teacher for nearly forty years, and he spoke in the presence of hon. gentlemen who had acted in a similar capacity, all of whom would bear testimony that these schools were taught upon religious principles, and that religious worship was conducted within their walls adapted to the wants of the children frequenting them. It might be asked why did not these schools register; but that was not what they wanted; what they asked for was a declaration from the House of Commons that their purposes were deserving of recognition as well as those of churches and chapels. He had known one of these schools to be held in the belfry of a church tower, and it did seem hard, when a separate building was procured, there should be a liability to pay the rates. There had been a great extension of school accommodation of late years, and separate buildings had been erected; everything, in fact, having been done for their improvement. But what was the reward which they were to get? Why, if they were in pews or under a chapel they were not to be taxed, but if they had a separate building the rate collector could come and make his demand upon them. The cost of these institutions had hitherto been borne by the teachers; there was no common fund from which money could be taken to pay this tax, and therefore, he said, to make them liable to pay these rates would be most unfair. (Cheers). Further, he contended that it was of national advantage that these schools should be preserved, and everything done to encourage their development. It was the first duty of Parliament and of statesmen to repress the growth of the criminal classes as much as they could, and to attack, whatever they met them, ignorance, intemperance, and vicious habits. This he believed would be best done in these schools, where children were brought together to get instruction based upon the highest principles of religion and morality. He noticed that there was a tendency in the House to foster the introduction of secular education into their day schools, and if this were done it would render it more necessary to preserve Sunday schools, where religious instruction would continue to be taught. The hon. member then quoted the opinions of Dr. Chalmers, the Bishop of Hereford, Sir J. Kay Shuttleworth, and others—all bearing high testimony to the great benefits of Sunday schools, as instruments for the prevention of crime and pauperism. He then went on to say that if they desired to check hereditary pauperism and crime, they had no more powerful means at their present command than these Sunday and ragged schools. In Manchester and Salford upwards of 10,000 children were regular attendants at these latter schools; but half the present number of schools would have to be shut up if they were to be called upon to pay rates. The amount which they would have to pay in many cases would be equal to a moiety of the expense of conducting the schools. In the opinion of the best judges, to have to pay these rates would be a most embarassing thing for most of these schools, and they would be placed in the greatest difficulty. Most of the schools were now in debt, and such a thing as a surplus at the end of the year was an unknown quantity with them. At this moment the ragged schools of London were several thousand pounds in debt, and to call upon them to meet other liabilities would be to seriously impair their efforts for 'usefulness. It had been said that there would be a difficulty in drawing the line; but surely when places of wor ship, Government offices, and university buildings were exempt from rates, these schools might fairly claim to be so. (Cheers.) If those institutions were to be free which were for the training of the richer members of the community, surely those which were established for the train. ing of the lower classes ought also to be free. These schools for which he pleaded brought class into communion with class, for the poor children met the sons and daughters of the wealthier classes who taught in them, and the present Lord Chancellor might have been seen last Sunday morning in a school in Westminster teaching. (Cheers.) It was difficult to exaggerate the influence of these schools during the Chartist riots and the recent cotton famine in Lancashire. It was a noteworthy fact that 80 per cent. of the teachers in these schools had been previously scholars themselves-and so much did they value the benefits which they had received, that they gave their gratuitous services. For his own part he would as soon tax lighthouses, lifeboats, and fire brigades, as these schools. Looking at all the circumstances, he did hope the House would sup. port him in voting for the second reading of the Bill. (Cheers.) Mr. Grades (of Liverpool) seconded the motion, and, though opposed by the Government, the second reading was carried by 228 to 71 votes. The Editors' Box. From the great pressure on our space we are compelled this month to omit our replies to contributors to this department. BEAUTY and verdure, though always attractive, delight us most when seen in unexpected places. The palm tree, waving its feathery crown and yielding its luscious fruit in the midst of the desert; the olive, flourishing in the hard and rocky soil; the Alpine gentian, seeming as if it reflected the bright blue of the sky among the silent wastes of snow; these appear all the more beautiful because surrounded by apparently unfavourable circumstances. So piety and goodness are most worthy of admiration when found under adverse influences,where there is nothing outward to foster and encourage them. Such was the piety of Cornelius-the praying officer of Cæsarea. The more we examine into his position and circumstances, the more we are taught to admire the grace of God which caused such piety to spring up and flourish in such an uncongenial spot. 1. Cornelius was a Roman-a Gentile, not a Jew-a heathen, one born outside the people of God. Most likely his parents were worshippers of idols, and therefore he had never been taught, like Timothy, to read the Holy Scriptures; or led, like Samuel, to the temple at Jerusalem, to join in the worship offered there. Much depends on early training, and we can never be thankful enough for pious parents AUGUST, 1869. L and teachers. But God can, and sometimes does dispense with these means of instruction. "Lord, I ascribe it to Thy grace, And not to chance, as others do, Cornelius could not say this; but he could say, "By the grace of God I am what I am." Should it not shame us, if, with all our advantages, we fear God less than one who had been brought up in ignorance and heathenism? At this time, we should also remember, the idolatry and wickedness of the Romans were very great. The people worshipped the idols of other nations, as well as their own; they learnt the crimes and sins of those nations, and yet there was also a fearful amount of unbelief and contempt for religion. Those were dark days indeed. Then, Cornelius was a soldier. Young folks see the gayer side of a soldier's life, and think how grand it is. But war is a dreadful trade, and no occupation is less favourable to piety than that of the soldier. Hedley Vicars remarked that, if he had been a Christian before he entered the army, he should have chosen some other profession. A great general used to say, "The worse man, the better soldier;" and though this is hardly true, yet we know how much of desperate courage a bad man may have. Cornelius was a rich man, or, at least, a man of property. Riches are to piety what baggage is to an army,—what weights are to a runner. See what our Lord said about them, Mark x. 24. And he resided at Cæsarea. His was not a calm, quiet life, in some country village, with few temptations, and abundant opportunities for thought and meditation. Like Joseph, and Moses, and Daniel, he dwelt in a grand and populous city, surrounded by wealth and luxury, pomp and pleasure. Cæsarea had been built by Herod the Great, in honour of Augustus Cæsar. It was a city of sumptuous palaces, theatres, and idolatrous temples and images. There was also a magnificent harbour, in which ships from the West cast their anchors, sometimes bringing troops from Rome, and sometimes the governors of Judea, with their retinues. It was at Cæsarea that these rulers or procurators resided (Acts xxiii. 33, &c.). But all is now silent and deserted; no sound is heard but the washing of the waves, the cry of the sea-bird, or occasionally the voice of the wandering Arab. Learn from the position of Cornelius, that PIETY IS NOT DEPENDENT ON OUTWARD CIRCUMSTANCES. 2. What was the character formed under these unfavourable conditions? We might have expected it to resemble that of the centurion who had charge of the soldiers by whom our Lord was crucified (Matt. xxvii. 54), or the captain who ordered St. Paul to be scourged (Acts xxii. 24). Roman soldiers, generally speaking, did their duty to their superior officers, and thought of little else. But what do we learn of Cornelius ? That he was devout,—truly religious, as we say; like Obadiah in Ahab's wicked court, or Havelock and his "gaints" among their careless and ungodly comrades. He feared God, with all his house -openly, so that his family and servants felt the influence of his example. His motto was that of Joshua, chap. xxiv. 15. He was benevolent, and bore a high character for excellence (ver. 22). There was nothing to be said against him by his heathen relatives or companions, except that he feared God; just as it had been with Daniel at Babylon. Learn from the character of Cornelius, that TRUE PIETY IS TRUE EXCELLENCE. 3. Do you ask the secret of this remarkable consistency of character? It is a secret worth knowing. It was known to Nehemiah (chap. i., ii.), and thousands have learnt it since his day. Cornelius was a man of prayer. He lived near to God, and hence was not carried away by the temptations incident to his position. Travellers sometimes wonder to see the palm tree flourishing in the desert. They do not know that it fed by a secret spring. Living near to God, in daily communion with Him, is the source of a pure and consistent life. Enoch thus walked with God, and was a good and holy man in the midst of a corrupt generation. So did Noah; so did the true-hearted Nathanael. LIVING NEAR TO GOD IS THE SECRET OF TRUE RELIGION. (Note Book, 47.) Cornelius had his reward. He lived in accordance with the amount of knowledge he possessed, and God gave him more. Jesus seemed to say to him, as to Nathanael, "Thou shalt see greater things than these." To him was the promise fulfilled, "The secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him, and He will show them His covenant;" and, as we shall see in our next Sunday's lesson, the path of this praying officer became like "the path of the just," shining more and more unto the 'perfect day." 66 MY AWKWARD SCHOLAR. G. SHALL I draw her portrait for you-Henrietta's portrait-as she sat week after week in my class? A tall, broad-shouldered girl of eighteen, with large red hands, always in her way, with a dull face and light eyes, and a rough head of hair; there was nothing attractive about her appearance. Then her manners were not pleasing. She had a way of drawing into her shell whenever addressed, and becoming distant and shy. Her answers, always monosyllabic, were given with averted face, and her whole attitude was a silent plea to be let alone. Yet she always came, rain or shine, and was never late. She had always prepared her lesson too, and was eager to be taught, notwithstanding her dislike to answering questions. I found her at home very much as she appeared in school, only more reticent and unapproachable. Her father kept a bakery, and it was Henrietta's duty to wait upon customers, and as I repeated my visits, I found that this duty was supplemented by a host of others. Her mother was a sickly, washed-out looking woman, and upon the eldest daughter fell the care of the house, as well as of the shop, and the oversight of a numerous flock of children. |