Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE EDUCATION BILL.

DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS. PRESS COMMENT. United Press Araociation — By Electrio Telegraph — Copyright. (Received December 21, 7.42 a.m.) LONDON, December 20. During the debate on the Marquis of Lansdowne's motion, 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, whatever the :risks and disadvantages. They had only asked for equal opportunities for all. The Duke -of Devonshire declared that it would be % better to make almost any concession than to relegate the question to another session. The Duke of Devonshire and the Bishop of Hereford voted with, the minority, the Archbishop of Canterbury and eight bishops with the majority. The " Times " says that if the others had displayed the spirit exhibited by the Duke of Devonshire and the Archbishop of Canterbury the result would nave been different. It advises the Government to p.gree to a round table discussion on the subject during the recess, in order to secure a permanent solution which will not offend the convictions and desires of the largest religious community in the country. The Radical Press predict the introduction of a more stringent Bill, and also a demand for legislation curbing the pretensions of the House of Lords. They hint that it was in the Government's power largely to coerce the voluntary .schools by means of administrative measures, and declare that all inefficient schools ought to be rigorously dealt with.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS19061221.2.25

Bibliographic details

Star (Christchurch), Issue 8808, 21 December 1906, Page 2

Word Count
249

THE EDUCATION BILL. Star (Christchurch), Issue 8808, 21 December 1906, Page 2

THE EDUCATION BILL. Star (Christchurch), Issue 8808, 21 December 1906, Page 2