LORDS AND COMMONS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 6089, 22 December 1906, Page 9

LORDS AND COMMONS

- * EDUCATION BILL KILLED. ANNOUNCEMENT BY SIR H. C. BA XX Ell MAX. VIGOROUS SPEECH TO AX EXCITED HOUSE. WARNING TO 1 THE LORDS. (Received December 21, 10.17 p.m.) LOXDOX, December 21. Tlio fate of tho Education Kill was announced by tho Prime Minister in tho House of Commons yesterday. Addressing a crowded and excited House, Sir H. C. Bauncrman, in a vehement .speech, announced the demit© of tho bill. Ho accused Mr Balfour of being chiefly responsible for the failure of a settlement. Ho ridiculed tho mock heroics of the Lords in asserting that the House of Commons had adopted an unconstitutional procedure in rejecting the Lords’ amendments without giving specific reasons, and declared that it was impossible for the Government to yield to the Lords without perpetuating and extending the very system the bill was designed to remove.'

Tlio Prime Minister went on to say that tho aim of the Government was to secure a national, not a denominational, system of education, as distinguished from sectarian Christianity. Ho warned tho Lords that the resources of tlx© constitution were not exhausted. A way must and would be found to give effect to the people's will. Sir H. C. Bannerman’s concluding remarks were the signal for tremendous cheering. Air Birrell (’Minister of Education) denounced Mr Balfour as tho wrecker of the bill. He declared the country would never tolerate denominational education.

Mr Long (President of the Local Government Beard and later Chief Secretary for Ireland in tho Balfour Government) and Mr Wyndham (formerly Chief Secretary for Ireland) declared that Mr Balfour had .not acted independently, bnt was the leader of a party. DEBATE ON LORD LANSDOWNE’S MOTION. THE CONCESSIONS. LONDON, December 20. During tho debate on Lord Lansdowne’s motion in the House of Lords, insisting on the Lords’ amendments to the Education Bill (which was carried by 13*2 votes to 32), the Archbishop of Canterbury declared that since the Government was unable to meet reasonable demands on the question of teachers, it would be better to lose the whole bill, wdiatever the risks and disadvantages. They had only asked for equal opportunities for all. The Duke of Devonshire declared that it would he better to make almost any concession than relegate the question to another session. The Duke of Devonshire and the Bishop of Hereford voted with the minority, and the Archbishop of Canterbury and eight bishops .with tho majority. A Parliamentary paper gives the official reasons of tho House of Lords for insisting on the amendments to the Education Bill. The Lords do not admit that these contradict the principle's of the hill or alter its character beyond securing the rights of parents, the freedom of teachers, and just treatment in denominational schools.

WHAT THE NEWSPAPERS SAY.

MORE STRINGENT BILL PREDICTED. / LONDON, December 20. “The Times” says:—lf tho others had displayed the spirit tho Duke of Devonshire and the Archbishop of Canterbury exhibited, tho result would have been different. The journal advises the Government to agree round tho table to a discussion on the subject during tho recess, in order to secure a permanent solution which will not offend the convictions and desires of tho largest religions community in tho country. Tho Radical press predicts tho introduction of a more stringent bill; also that there will be a demand for legislation curbing tho Lord’s pretensions. The journals hint that it.is in the Government’s power largely to coerce voluntary schools by means of administrative measures, and declare that all ineffective schools ought to bo rigorously dealt with.