EDUCATIONAL GRANTS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XVI, Issue 907, 20 July 1861, Page 5

EDUCATIONAL GRANTS.

To the Editor of the Lyttelton Times. Sir,—Your ■.correspondent. "A Parish ; Curate " has tried to prove that public schools should be supported wholly by Government subsidies and school fees. .If .that view be correct, why should not the Government build schoolrooms, employ teachers, and manage the whole business without any interference from religious denominations? If education be properly a Government department, just like post offices, police, jails, and other things,' surely the Government should have the entire management of it. When this question is decided, we shall be able to judge whether the opinion of "A Parish Curate" is correct or not. My opinion is, that education is not essentially a department of Government. It may be, as the present ordinance says, expedient for grants to be made for educational purposes; but that expediency alone can never prove that education belongs exclusively or essentially to any government. I know it may be said that education lessens crime, and that money spent therein is saved in police and jails; and that 'scarcely a heavier rod can we provide for our own backs than ignorance in any section of our population.' All this may be true,'but if grants from the public purse towards education be given solely from such reasoning, then surely it must follow that our ministers of religion should receive grants also; and so should every society which has for its object the benefit of our fellow menV Such a conclusion, however, would neither suit the public purse, nor public opinion. But if education does not belong absolutely to the Government, to whom does it belong? Certainly the parents are mainly responsible for the education of their children, and it is the duty of religious denominations to assist in the matter, at least in giving a religious education. Sunday schools, of course, are doing this to some extent, but Sunday schools alone are not sufficient; religious instruction should also be given in the day schools, for education without religion will be found of no avail in lessening crime, &c. .Education, looked at in thislight, becomes a sort of home missionary work, and for such a work, subscriptions have always been found beneficial. In order to obtain them, public meetings are often held, and when religious people meet together to promote education after this manner, it gives such an impetus to the thing that the children take double interest in it; and those parents who have wholly or partly neglected the education of their children are often led by such means to see their duty. Your correspondent, however, seems to think that such a course would be making ' Charity Schools.' Now, suppose " A Parish Curate "were abouji, to establish a school, this is the way he should go to work, according to my scheme; and I am sure he will see that his idea of 'charity' and my idea of subscriptions are somewhat different things. First of all, then, he would have to call a meeting of his hearers, who should appoint a committee. Then himself, probably, would correspond with the Government, to see if a grant could be got towards the schoolroom. If so, as according to my scheme, only half was to be given by the Government, the committee and himself would have to obtain the rest by subscriptions, or the profits of a tea meeting, or both. .This done, jl teacher must be procured, and the committee would have to-promise a certain salary, say £150. If Government gave £50, and about £80 were raised by fees, then let the remainder be raised by subscriptions; and if obtained, when a public examination of the school was held, providing the scllolps had made satisfactory progress,'there would /'not be much difficulty about the matter. Now, in such a case, would not most, if not all, of the parents subscribe? And if so, that unhappy name 'Charity School' could not, with any propriety, be applied to it. I am, sir, yours, &c, SUGGESTION,