a

the 22,330 children just mentioned, 12,706 children kept at home from the indifference of parents to the subject of education, or from their inability or unwillingness to pay the school fees. Now as impediments to school attendance of this character are removable, and ought to be removed, I say there is no reasonable cause for these 12,706 children being absent from school, (2338).

This is cleverly put, and the coincidence in the numbers is certainly felicitous. We submit, however, 1. That this reasoning assumes the absolute correctness and adequacy of Table 29, an honour to which it is by no means entitled. 2. That the 2,670 children kept from school as " too young,” cannot be allowed to be kept at home for a sufficient reason, since they were 3 years old and upwards, and thus, for all purposes of calculation, within the school age. This number ought consequently to be added to the 12,706 who, according to Mr. Richson, ought to have been at school; and the sum would be 15,377—much nearer three-fourths than one half of the 22,330 who were not at school. 3. That Mr. Richson cannot be permitted to employ Table 29 for the purpose of calculating an average for the entire school district. He hates averages, and asserts repeatedly and vehemently that he will have nothing to do but with the known case of the individual ; and we are entitled to keep him to his word. 4. That, if the average were taken, according to this Table, of the possible school attendance in the whole population, we should have an utterly incredible result. Thus out of 36,527 children we should have at school the following numbers :Present attendance

14,197 Absent from alleged poverty

12,067 Absent from indifference of parents

639 Absent from being too young

2,670 Or a total of 29,573 children out of 36,127, or very nearly six-sevenths of the whole number! This is educational philanthropy become dizzy.

We suspect, however, that this recourse to Table 29 is an after-thought, and that Mr. Richson in the first instance had no intention of availing himself of so dangerous a refuge. We are led to this conclusion by the repeated instances in which he himself adopts the principle, that one half of the whole number of children are as many as can be expected at school at a time. Giving an account of the object he aimed at, he says,

“ We think we ought to endeavour to raise this number [of scholars] to 42,670, which would be about one half the total number between 3 and 15; the total number being 84,566. The number then which

we wish to bring into school by these means is 42,670, and we think probably that is as many as could be expected, in a mannufacturing district, to be induced to attend school under very favourable circumstances.” affirms the same principle, when, in answer to Mr. W. Miles (128) he says of this number and proportion, " That, I expect, is the total number we could get to school under the most favourable circumstances." In answer to Mr. Peto, he says,—“We think we ought to have one half at least of those between 3 and 15 at school," (62); and afterwards, “We have only assumed the maximum school attendance to be one half of the children requiring to go to school between the ages of 3 and 15,' (590).

Mr. Richson, indeed, makes a determined attempt to escape from this conclusion, and to evade (we cannot use a milder term) the force of his own language. In his answer 2338 he wishes it to be understood that he named 42,000, or the half of 84,000, only as the measure of the

He

success he might hope for, if so much, within 3 or 4 years. We do not think, however. that his language can be restricted to this meaning. The number of children that could be got to school“ under the most favourable circumstances," is surely the whole number that can reasonably be expected there. Besides, in the words we have quoted from his answer 960, he speaks of this proportion as being as many as could be expected in a manufacturing district under very favourable circumstances," again generalizing the conception.

Still more unsatisfactory is Mr. Richson's attempt to get rid of his answer to Mr. Bright, who had asked him the following question :

129. Mr. Bright (to Mr. Richson). — The number you calculate upon to attend school is 42,670 ?

Ans. Yes.

130. You conceive that if that number attended school, the population of Manchester and Salford would be as well educated as it was possible for them to be ?

Ans. I think we should have great reason to be thankful if we got that number.

Mr. Richson deals with this reply in the following manner :

In answer to 9130, where, as I understood, I was asked to affirm that if that number attended school, the population of Manchester and Salford would be as well educated as it was possible for them to be, no one, I think, can mistake that I declined any such inference, limiting my reply to these words, 'I think we shall have reason to be very thankful if we get such a number,' (2338).

Mr Bright evidently noticed the equivocal character of this language, and added the following question :

“ Mr. Bright (to Mr. Richson).—You would not consider it necessary to come for an act of Parliament to increase the number?

Ans. I hope not. I should be very sorry to see any compulsory system of education adopted.

Now we ask Mr. Richson what is the meaning of this ? Was this too an intended evasion ? Or does it not, beyond the power of evasion, imply -what, for some reason quite unintelligible to us, he was so reluctant expressly to state—that the numerical proportion was satisfactory, and that if another act of parliament should be desired, it would not be to increase the number, but only to coerce attendance? It gives us more pain than we can express to make these remarks. From the first moment we saw him, we gave Mr. Richson credit for as much frankness as benevolence; and these indications of a want of candour can neither afford pleasure to good men, or render service to a good cause.

We must, however, give Mr. Richson the benefit of a certain confusion of mind, under which he was evidently labouring from the first in relation to this point. How very far he was from clearly apprehending the facts of the case, may appear by the following instances.

After stating that there cannot be less than 57,220 children between 3 and 15, of a class of life to attend common elementary schools, who are not attending them," he is thus examined

249. Lord J. Russell (to Mr. Richson). How many does that make not attending those schools ?

Ans. The whole of these are not attending.

Why, surely those cannot be reckoned as “not attending ” in the sense of this inquiry and of Lord John Russell's question—that is, voluntarily not attending—who, being either in employment or hindered by justifiable causes, could not be expected to attend. The proper answer to this question would have been, that the number of children after whom his Lordship inquired would be stated afterwards.

Here is another example of the same fallacy.

175. Mr. Brotherton (to Mr. Richson). Can you show the number of children who do not avail themselves of the accommodation which is afforded in the day schools ?

Ans. The number would be the difference between those attending and the total number of age and class in life to attend the schools.

Clearly not. The number wanted is the difference between those who are at school and those who may be reasonably expected to be there. Children at work, cripples, idiots, the sick, and many others, can never be classed with those “who do not avail themselves” of school accommodation.

In one instance the rev. gentleman goes a great deal farther than even this. In page 9 he presents a table, (Table 6) “ the result of which,” he says, "is, that the total number of children in a class of life to avail themselves of common elementary schools is 84,566, for whom we ought to provide the means of education.” What, for all the 84,566 ? Including the 27,000 who are at school already, the 15,000 who are at work, and the thousands physically unable into the bargain ? But lately he was content with setting down the number at 55,000; now they have sprung up to 84,000! Not Falstaff's men in buckram multiplied so fast. At a subsequent period, when Mr. Richson was developing his plan for raising the number of school attendants to 42,670, Mr. Bright noticed this statement in the following manner.

457. Mr. Bright (to Mr. Richson).—It appears to me that the statements you have made to-day differ somewhat considerably from the table you put in on a former day. You state in p. 9 of the first day's evidence, that the result of this table is, “that the number of children in a class of life to avail themselves of the common elementary schools we consider to be, between the ages of 3 and 15, 84,566, for whom we ought to provide the means of education." But you propose now to do so upon a very much lower estimate than that. I presume that you consider, or your Committee believe, that the proper course would be to make a provision for this larger number, according to your original statement?

Ans.-There is no discrepancy that I can see between my two statements. In making an educational provision for 84,000,* I stated distinctly that I never contemplated having 84,000* at school at once.

Mr. Bright is certainly not wanting in quickness of apprehension ; but even he was bewildered by this Manchester mystery, that a scheme for getting 42,000 children to school was making provision for the education of 84,000.

To us, however, the most curious case of all is that in which two different numbers are blended in the same answer. Having put in his calculation that the number of children “ for whom we ought to provide the means of education” was 84,500, his examination thus proceeded.

* Erroneously printed 87,000.

43. Mr. Peto (to Mr. Richson). --In your judginent, is it at all likely that children in Manchester, in such a condition of life, would require to go to school for 11 years ?

Ans -Certainly not.

44. If such be the fact, assuming that something like half that period would be as long a time as people in that condition of life in Manchester would send their children to school for, does not that reduce your calculation at least by one-half ?

Ans. I think so: and I have taken that calculation eventually, that somewhere about half that number ought to be in school.

Here the meaning is clear enough ; “ half that number” is half 84,566. Yet at the end of the very same answer, he tells us that the number not attending school is 57,220, and adds,—“I assume that one-half that number is about the number that may be expected to go to school ”! Certainly the clear head is of some use in affairs, as well as the good heart.

CHAPTER V.

EVENING SCHOOLS.

An important branch of the educational process in Manchester is formed by the Evening schools. Mr. Richson's treatment of these in his first examination is very brief and cavalier. He just mentions in table 9, that the “attendance at evening schools connected with the various religious bodies in Manchester and Salford ” amounts to 3,733 ; and, in answer to a question from Mr. W. Miles (46), he makes the following statement.

The summary of our returns is this : there are 2,168* males, and 1,565 females, and the ages of a few are as low as 8 and 9; the majority are from 15 to 18 and upwards.

In fact, however, he takes no account of these, or any of them, in his educational estimate of the district. On this Mr. Baines makes the following observations.

With regard to evening schools and classes, Mr. Richson gives only the evening school attendance in connexion with the several religious denominations, the number being 3,733. This return is doubly restricted, first, by giving only the “actual attendance,” which is always considerably below the number really belonging to those schools, and secondly, by confining his return to the “religious denominations." He thus excludes the evening classes of the Mechanics’ Institution, where there are about 500 pupils; of the Miles Platting Mechanics’ Institution, where there are 154 pupils ; of the Ancoats Lyceum, where there are 20 pupils ; of the Chorlton and Medlock Mechanics' and Temperance Institution, where there are 75 pupils, and probably of other public institutions, besides all the private evening schools, which I am assured are numerous, though small. In 1834-5 these private evening schools were 109 in number, and included 1,723 scholars ; and the report of the statistical society said of this class of schools, that, “though not numerous, they are generally more effective than other schools, as none attend them who do not wish to learn, and who are not of an age to appreciate the advantages that are thus afforded them. Some of these scholars are adults, and the great majority are from 14 to 18 years of age. These schools are principally kept by masters of day schools, and the terms for instruction are often higher than

Erroneously printed 22,168.

*

in the day schools.” I do not think that Mr. Richson should have added the evening scholars to the day scholars ; but I think he should have given the numbers of evening scholars at private schools and at public institutions, as well as the full number of those in connexion with religious denominations ; and also it would be well if he had pointed out the real value of these evening schools, as supplementary both to the day schools and the Sunday schools, especially in a place where children go to labour so early. If, as seems not improbable from the above figures, there should be 6,000 or 7,000 children and young persons receiving instruction in evening schools, it would make an important feature in the school statistics of Manchester, (1485).

Mr. Adshead also laid considerable stress on the evening schools ; but Mr. Richson was inexorable. The following is the part of his second examination which relates to them.

2310. Chairman (to Mr Richson). Will you give your reason for the omission of the evening scholars at private schools ?

Ans. With the exception of the evening classes of the Manchester Mechanics’ Institution, I believe the return in Table 19 gives within, perhaps, 200 or 300, the total number of evening scholars belonging to the public schools in Manchester; and if Mr. Baines had given 4,500 as the total number of young persons receiving instruction in evening schools, including all the institutions he has mentioned, I think he would have been nearer the correct number, than assuming 6,000 or 7,000 ; but his statements here are very vague. But be this as it may, my reason for not entering very minutely into the question of evening schools is this : I do not attach sufficient importance to the present unsystematized mode of conducting those schools; nor, however useful they may be in some cases in supplying the educational defects of young persons, do I regard them as such adequate substitutes for the early and regular training of the day school, as to attach any great importance to them generally, as educational institutions. The time may come, when they may more effectually conduce to adult education ; and if I should ever see them brought into connexion with, or made preparatory to, schools of design and schools of practical science, I should entertain a much higher opinion of their utility than I do at present. Entertaining these views, Mr. Baines will scarcely be surprised that I did not in my former evidence, and that I do not intend now, to enter more into detail in respect to these schools.

2311. But still in those evening schools it is a voluntary attendance, and a voluntary payment, is it not ?

Ans.-Yes. 2312. Consequently, with regard to those who wish to improve themselves in education, do you not think that they may be looked upon as useful adjuncts in the education of the operative classes ?

Ans.- I admit their utility to a limited extent; but I know they are badly conducted frequently, although in some cases, no doubt, they may be pretty well conducted. I know in some instances they are little better than reading schools, and are taught by teachers of Sunday schools not very much in the habit of teaching those branches of education with which we wish to see the working classes more familiarized; but I complain of their being unsystematized. They are not such schools as I think important, in their present form, in an educational inquiry.

2313. There are some children between the ages of 13[3] and 15, who attend those evening schools, are there not ?

Ans.—Yes, I believe so. There are some in connexion with the Mechanics' Institution in Manchester ; but that institution is very well known to have changed its character very much indeed; and instead of being an institution for the working classes, as such, it is very well known that there are very few working people, “very few fustian jackets,” ever seen in the theatre of that institution.

2314. Whether your calculation as to the evening schools is right, or Mr. Baines's, as far as those between the ages of 13 [3] and 15 go, they should be

с