are not left to conjecture, to judge what sort of loyalty this system would teach. Some of the reading books of the Christian Brothers were discussed in the evidence. One of the Commissioners, Master Brooke, describes one as the most direct training for Fenianism' he could possibly imagine. Bishop Keane and Cardinal Cullen both gave the same explanation; it was intended to implant loyalty by enabling the Irish pupil to contrast the gloomy past with the sunshine of the present. In vain the witnesses were asked to point out a passage where this moral was suggested; nor was it alleged as a matter of fact that the teachers in this school put such considerations before the pupils. This very controversy about education is at the present moment alleged as a justification of some of the violent language about English rule contained in these books. When one of the Christian Brothers examined is pressed about such phrases as 'Erin's fetters,' he answers that he feels one of the fetters himself. Even Mr. Chichester Fortescue does not propose to accept the Bishops' programme, only to approximate to it, and still the education grievance will remain a calamitous cloud over all that sunshine which the Cardinal refers to. The theory that the proposed policy will generate loyalty in Ireland, is worthy of the ministers who supposed that a partial Fenian amnesty would convert disaffection into gratitude. Nor can we forget altogether the body of children whom the Bishops ask to have sacrificed, in order to give effect to the fulness of Catholic teaching.' All over Ireland there are Protestant minorities, whose existence cannot be absolutely disregarded. They are there, and entitled to national education as well as any other portion of the Queen's subjects. The present aim of the Bishops is to secure absolute control over the Catholic majorities, and they trouble themselves as little about the scattered Catholics of the north as about the Protestants of the south and west. 'The vexatious restriction' involved in the present conscience clause must be removed in 70 per cent, of the national schools. The Protestants may be only 10 per cent, of the pupils in Catholic schools, three or four in each of these small mixed schools; and because they are so few they are to be ignored in the school arrangement. They may be admitted as tolerated intruders, but still they are intruders. Under the present system they come in with as good right as the dominant majority. They cannot attend the schools without seeing the power of the Roman Church in numbers and influence. The priest is the patron, the teacher a Roman Catholic, the great majority of their school fellows Roman Catholics, the whole sentiment of the school is Roman Catholic; but it is a peaceful, regulated, not a militant propa gandist gandist Catholicism. The schoolroom is free from those pictures and emblems which Protestant feeling rejects. The Protestant child is not called on to witness or to participate in Catholic devotions. It cannot escape the consciousness of its own isolation, but it can enjoy a certain sense of security and independence; and this security is not a favour, conceded by the condescension or the caprice of the dominant power of the neighbourhood, but a right, guaranteed to all by the providence of the State. When we examine the language of the ministry by the light which the history of the national system affords, it is impossible not to feel great anxiety for the future of this noble Institution. It was designed by some of the ablest men who have had to do with the government of Ireland, in the confidence that a sound system of general education would be a great step towards removing the troubles of the country; that it would open out a field for individual exertion to a naturally quick-witted race, lay the foundations of national prosperity, and reconcile them to our rule. The money of the State was lavishly spent on it, for the country was steeped in poverty; and the religious faith of the people was to be sheltered with jealous care, as well from the respect which the founders of the system entertained for the principle of religion as from their anxiety to mark the contrast between their work and those efforts at popular education which had been made in the last century. In its own schools the national system invited all ministers of religion, equally, to come and teach their respective flocks. In the nonvested schools it trusted to the sectarian zeal of the respective managers, and of that zeal it had had many proofs to provide for the religious training of the pupils. For twenty years the Roman Catholic clergy worked with the Board without reserve; they thus became the channels for distributing the State funds through the country. Not content with drawing these annual supplies from the State, they encouraged the State to invest large sums in erecting magnificent schools all over Ireland. By the time that this investment had been made, on the faith of their co-operation, they awoke to the consciousness that the English Government was desirous to win the confidence of the Bishops.' Now is the time, says Bishop Keane, to press our demands. The Roman Church may get back to that position which Ultramontanism dreams of as its right. The Bishops cannot get all they ask, but the more they ask the more they are likely to get. Had this mutinous spirit of the priesthood been met boldly when first it shewed itself-fifteen or twenty years ago, there would be no difficulties about this question now. The Ultramontane Ultramontane party dare not even yet drive the people to the alternative of quarrelling with them or rejecting the State system of education. The cry of proselytism is losing its terrors, and the people themselves know the benefits of the system. But the Liberal party, contemplating the miserable failure of their policy to re-establish order in Ireland, cling desperately to the notion that if they can only win the confidence of the Bishops' all may be yet well. In this wild hope the Liberal press is ready to sacrifice the acknowledged responsibility of the State for the education of the people. One of the noblest gifts of the English Government to the people of Ireland is to be destroyed for the sake of concealing for awhile longer the catastrophe of Irish administration. The Irish Bishops assembled at Marlborough-street demand what, members of their own body admit, amounts to the whole control of education. The entire evidence of the recent Commission proves that they are not competent for the work, even if they undertook it in good faith. Whatever might be their qualifications for the conduct of small ordinary schools, they are manifestly disqualified for the conduct of training-schools, as the condition of their own large schools, their statements of opinions about training, and their estimate of the position of the teacher clearly prove. Still it is not impossible, from what we have seen of Liberal policy on this question, that Mr. Chichester Fortescue or the Marquis of Hartington may offer them some such instalment as the possession of these model schools, if Parliament can be induced to consent to the proposal. The instalment will be important for what it brings, and it will leave the Bishops quite free to use this increase of power in pushing their further demands. And this policy on the part of the Government is the more criminal, as the inquiries of the Commission prove that if Parliament, relying on the character which the national system has won amongst the Irish people, once made it clear that it intended to maintain that system, the difficulties which at present beset education would immediately fade away. Let the condition of the teacher be improved, and the exertions of the State be directed not to twist or lop away the system, but to secure it room for free growth, in accordance with its nature, and not only will the Ultramontane designs in Ireland be baffled, but the English Government will have vindicated its self-respect, and have established a real and lasting claim to the goodwill and gratitude of the Irish people. ART. ART. XI.-1. Political Problems for our Age and Country. By W. R. Greg. London, 1870. 2. The Rights of Labour and the Nine Hours' Movement. By a Lady. Edinburgh, 1871. 3. Chambers' Social Science Tracts. Edinburgh, 1864. 4. Secret History of the International. London, 1871. By Onslow Yorke. 5. Address to the Social Science Association. By William Newmarch, F.R.S. London, 1871. ONE NE of the saddest spectacles on earth is the spectacle of misdirected energies and wasted resources. It is also one of the commonest, the most provoking, and the most disheartening. There is activity in abundance, there is ability, there is zeal to overflowing, there is industry, there are good intentions, philanthropy, and wealth, adequate to the extirpation of many of our social miseries, and the mitigation of many more, if only they were rightly applied, and worked with ordinary vigour and ordinary sense. But what with want of philosophy and want of thought, want of patience and want of courage, prejudice which stops one road, fear which bars another, and the defects of administrative capacity inherent in our clumsy and stupid way of managing public business—all these means and resources of rectification are thrown away, and social miseries spread, deepen, and gangrene as before. Simple and obvious remedies are scouted or neglected, while the silliest and wildest ones are propounded, and gain a ready hearing from the classes which are maddened by suffering; and, sick of the present, are prepared for any experiment, any struggle, any destruction, which promises, or seems to promise, a better future. We need go no further than our own doors for a startling illustration. The metropolis teems with ignorance and pauperism; its paupers reach 150,000; its totally untrained and uneducated children no statistics have yet accurately numbered; yet the sums annually distributed or available for charitable purposes would suffice to extinguish destitution, and to instruct the whole poor population of London. These funds amount to the enormous figure of seven millions and a half; enough, as Dr. Hawksley has shown-assuming that one-eighth of the population, or four hundred thousand persons, are wholly destitute and dependent on their fellow-citizens, to allow eightyfive pounds per annum to every such family for sustenance and education. Yet the evils, against which all these vast resources are provided or can be directed, go on increasing from year to *The Charities of London,' by Dr. Hawksley. * year. year. In this, as in so many other matters, we endure so much evil and do so little good, because we manage so badly, and are so constantly sailing on the wrong tack. None of us are more perpetually or more obviously on a false scent than the working-classes and their leaders; and in no case is error so mischievous or so formidable. The Proletariat-to adopt a much-needed foreign word—are right and warranted as to their miserable condition and sensations:-they are wrong only in the causes they assign, and the remedies they would apply. We sympathize with them in every fibre of our frame. We are ready to paint their wretchedly unsatisfactory state and prospects in language as strong as any of themselves could use. We agree with them that their condition is an opprobrium to half the countries in Europe, and more especially to our own. Millions of them lead a life which intelligent beings should not consent to live, and exist in a condition of struggle and wretchedness which makes existence a burden and not a boon. They have a right to be discontented. They do well to be angry. Nay, more:-the rectification, speedy and thorough, of the evils of their condition, is the first duty of every statesman, and the most urgent necessity of every State; and all legislation which does not address itself, mediately or immediately, to this supreme purpose, is of secondary moment, and involves a postponement of higher to lower claims. The improvement, the rescue, the comfort, the well-being (in every sense) of the classes of which we speak, constitute the primary obligation of all who influence opinion or rule the country; first, because these classes are the most numerous, secondly, because they are the most helpless, thirdly, because they are the most unfortunate and suffering, and we share to the full in the burning indignation they express when questions vital to their interests are pushed into the background to let party conflicts have a fair field to fight in. So far we go along with the loudest and most violent of their leaders. But there we part company as widely as may be. Our indictment against these leaders is, that they systematically and persistently, and ignorantly even if honestly, divert the people's attention from their real grievances and the true causes of their sufferings, and urge them to measures and objects either wholly irrelevant or certain to aggravate what they seek to cure. They are for ever hounding the people on a false scent, guiding them away from the right track, misinforming them or blinding them as to facts, misteaching them as to principles, and confounding their perceptions as to friends and foes. The great central truth which lies at the root of the whole problem is that, with few exceptions and slight qualification, the |