Now, to get rid of this difficulty altogether, I should, as was proposed by the commissioners of 1812, have the peculiar religious instruction given "in other places than the school-house." To this arrangement no reasonable man of any party could object. It may, I admit, in some cases, be difficult to get a suitable place for the peculiar religious instruction to be given in, but no difficulty is so hard to meet as a violation of principle or conscience.*

The next serious defect in the national system is shewn by this result, that a school may be carried on according to its principles, and yet no religious instruction be given in it. The system gives moral and literary instruction, but there is no security that this instruction shall be accompanied by religious knowledge; that is, in the system itself there is no provision for imparting such knowledge. The Bible is excluded altogether from the schools; the Scripture Lessons, and even the Ten Commandments, are merely recommended, and not required, to be used. Hence it follows, that in whatever schools the Lessons and Commandments are not taught as is the case in very many, and may be the case in all national schools-there is no religious, no scriptural knowledge, imparted to the children, except, perhaps, what is contained in an odd sentence here and there in the spelling and reading books. But no person that values religion at all will consider this a sufficient religious instruction for children.

When this point is clearly made out, the advocate of the national system is forced to maintain that literary knowledge, even without religion, is a great blessing to the poor. Now, instead of being a blessing, mere literary knowledge, without religion, without some acquaintance with the word of God, is, in my mind, a curse to the poor. Knowledge is power, and man is naturally corrupt, and therefore he is more likely to turn that power to evil, if he is not controlled by the moral influence of religion. Those who are in the middle and higher classes are sometimes a good deal restrained by considerations of interest, by regard for their reputation, and by the habits of the society in which they live; but these are influences which, comparatively, produce but a slight effect upon the minds of the poor. Religion is the only effectual restraint for them. The peasantry of the south of Ireland possess as much literary knowledge as any peasantry in Europe, more, I believe, than those in England; but they read not the Bible, and what are they? Dr. Sadleir, in his letter to Dr. Thorpe, tells us, and unhappily with too much truth, that "they are miserable and mischievous savages, proverbial for their violence and hostility to the laws."

But, I am sometimes told, if I or any protestant become the patron of a national school, we may have the Scripture Lessons read in it. True, we may; but, if we choose, we may not; and here it is that the system is vicious, for it is a matter of choice with the patron whe

There is no inconsistency in a protestant clergyman attending a national school, and giving religious instruction there; but how can a consistent protestant allow the errors of Romanism to be inculcated in a school under his patronage? Or, in other words, how can such a one be patron of an Irish national school?

ther religion or any portion of scripture be taught in the school or not. But, if I am allowed by the board to have their Scripture Lessons read in the school, I am also obliged to admit Romanism into the school-house; and, moreover, I look upon those lessons to be so objectionable, that I could not sanction the use of them in any school of which I was patron or superintendent.

I object to those lessons on several grounds: because the language, in very many places, is different from that of the authorized version; because some of the passages in them are positively false translations; and because the notes and questions are, in several cases, either absurd, or positively Romish, or of Romish tendency.

Many conceive that, if the sense of the two versions be the same, the difference of language is a matter of little moment. This, however, is a mistaken view; for, if the version used by illiterate persons, when children, be different even in words from that which they use in after life, it requires very little penetration to see that the effect upon their minds will be, either a mischievous confusion, or a doubt as to the accuracy of both versions.* This objection, too, is much stronger in the case of protestant children than in that of Romanists, and for the following reasons:

It is a principle of the protestant church that all should read and study the Bible; and the fact is, that all true protestants do consult it as the rule of their faith and conduct. On the other hand, the Romish church teaches that the written word of God was not intended for the use of all; and the result is, that very few Romanists do read that sacred book; and therefore, with regard to them, the difference in language between the version used at school and the Douay and Rhemish version is, comparatively, of very little consequence.

Romish writers, I know, are very unwilling to admit that their church discountenances the reading of the scriptures by the laity; but whatever doubt there may be raised by plausible writers as to the theory of the Romish church upon this point, there can most certainly be no doubt as to the practice of that church where she possesses power to act according to her wishes. There is, in the county of Wexford, a parish, with which I am well acquainted, that contains very nearly 4000 Romanists; and among so many, after the most diligent inquiry, I could not find more than six copies of the Bible; and I have no reason to think the proportion is greater in other parishes.

In the town of Wexford there are four Romish booksellers, and there is not a copy of the Bible or the New Testament with one of them. There is the same number of Romish booksellers in the

* I may here give an instance or two, to shew how the language in the Lessons differs from that in the authorized version. Genesis, iii. 15, and xlix. 10, are thus given in the Lessons:-" And I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and between her seed and thy seed; it shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for his heel." "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a ruler from his posterity, till he come to whom it belongs, and to him shall the nations be obedient."(See the notes to the celebrated "Letter of Pope Gregory XVI. to the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland," pp. 47 and 42.)

town of Enniscorthy; with these I found three copies of the New Testament; but in Ross and Gorey, when I made inquiry, there was not for sale a single copy of the Romish version, though there are eight booksellers' shops in these towns—that is, in short, in the four principal towns of this county there were not to be found,* with the Romish booksellers, more than three copies of the word of God, and those three of the New Testament only. From these few facts it is quite evident that the Romish clergy have no desire that the scriptures, even their own version, should get into the hands of their people, otherwise, a larger supply on sale than three New Testaments would doubtless have been provided for a county containing about 160,000 Roman catholics. We should observe, too, that the Romish clergy have no associations, nor private depôts, for the sale and gratuitous distribution of Bibles, such as the protestant clergy have for the supply of their congregations.

That the scripture lessons which have been adopted by the Board abound with false translations, and that the questions and notes attached to them are in many places such as I have already described them to be, has been repeatedly shewn by some of the most eminent scholars in this country. Their treatises are accessible to all who are desirous of accurate information on this subject, and therefore I need do little more than refer below to a few which brought conviction to my own mind,† particularly as it is impossible, in a letter such as this, to discuss the question as fully as its importance deserves.

Whoever examines these lessons with any care, will be amazed at their character, when he considers by whom and for whom they were drawn up. It is not merely that there is here and there an objectionable note or translation, but a general Romish colouring, or Romish tendency, has been given to the compilation, and so ingeniously, that it cannot well be understood except by those who read the whole work. The notes are the most extraordinary part of the production; for very many of them contain discussions about old manuscripts, various readings, and different views of different churches and commentators,

This inquiry was made about July last.

Newland's Examination of the Scripture Lessons. Pope Gregory's Letter to the Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland. 2nd edition. A Review of the Scripture Lessons; reprinted from the Christian Examiner and Church of Ireland Magazine. I have not yet seen the Reports of the Inquiry into the National System, before the education committees of the last session; but from the character of several of the witnesses that were examined, I should expect to find much useful information in their evidence respecting the Scripture Lessons.

The note on the Lord's Prayer is a specimen of those I here allude to; the text runs thus: "And the Lord said unto them, When ye pray, say, [our] Father, [who art in heaven ;] Hallowed be thy name; Thy kingdom come; [Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth;] Give us day by day our daily bread; And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us ; and lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." The following note is subjoined to this prayer :"The passages enclosed in brackets in this prayer are not found in some manuscripts, and therefore are omitted by many modern critics, as Griesbach, &c. They are supposed to have been supplied from the parallel passages in Matt. vi. They are omitted in the Armenian and Vulgate translations. Origen says that Luke has them not, though Matthew has."

which are quite unintelligible to any child, and which can produce no other effect upon their minds than that these lessons, and the book from which they profess to be taken, are of very doubtful authority.

*

While on this subject, I cannot avoid noticing that part of Mr. Commissioner Blake's evidence which relates to the lessons, and which, as I mentioned at the beginning of my first letter, has been published by the Board along with their reports. Being asked, "if any objections or complaints had been made to the Board as to any of the notes," he replied, that the note to Gen. iii. 15, had been objected to. The next question was, "whether any objection had been made to any other part of the selection ?" His answer to this question is suppressed in the evidence as published by the National Board, and the result is, that ordinary readers would be led to suppose, either that Mr. Blake's answer was, for some mysterious reason, unfit for publication, or that the Board had never heard of any objection but that against the note attached to Gen. iii. 15. After this, how can we exonerate the Board from the charge of jesuitry and fraud?

So,

There is another part of Mr. Blake's evidence, as published by the Board, which must not escape our observation. He attempts to defend the Romish church from a charge frequently made against her, that she does not give the second commandment to her people; in doing he chooses to say, that the ground of the charge is, their not dividing the commandments as the protestant church does. Now, were this the ground of the accusation, there would be little need of a defence; but it is not so, for the real ground-and I can scarcely suppose Mr. Blake to be ignorant of it-is this, that, in most of her catechisms, the words which make up what we call the second commandment are omitted altogether. But why did the National Board presume to publish such a discussion at all? Is it part of their duty, though they are supported entirely by the treasury of this protestant state, to publish, along with or in their reports, apologies for the Romish church? If so, how fully justified are the Romish hierarchy of Ireland in reckoning and publishing, as they do in their Annual Directory, the National Board as one of the "catholic" (Romish) institutions of this country?

But the deadliest crime with which the National Board is chargeable is this, "that it excludes the written word of God from its schools," and it is singular that the Bible is the only book that is expressly excluded. So long as this audacious rule exists, I am quite confident

* Appendix to the National Board Reports, p. 126.

+ Such as Devereux's, O'Reilly s, and Butler's, which are most generally used in the Irish schools. In England, where protestants are more numerous, and where it is the policy of the church of Rome to appear in the fairest colours, I understand that the Romish clergy do not so generally admit into their catechisms such mutilations of the commandments. Mr. Blake's words are, "That which constitutes the Second Commandment, according to the division of the established church, constitutes a part of the First Commandment, according to the division of the Romancatholic church. From this the mistake has arisen, that the Roman-catholic church does not give the Second Commandment at all." He then goes on to shew that the Romish division of the commandments is more correct than that of the protestant church. Appendix, p. 126.

that neither the protestant clergy nor laity of Ireland ever will sanction such a system.

But, strange to say, the friends of the system sometimes maintain that it is a slander to assert that the Bible is shut out from its schools. It is, however, no slander; for so long as the national master is required to be present, so long as the board claims or exercises any authority in the school, that is, in short, so long as the national school is held, the Bible is excluded. Such is both the theory* and the practice of the system. There is a national school, with which I am very well acquainted, to which the protestant clergyman of the parish goes once a week, after the school business is over, to give religious instruction to a few protestant children who attend it. The Testaments which are used by these children must be carried off when the clergyman has finished his lecture, and are not to be seen in the school till his next visit for religious instruction. Little did I imagine, some few years ago, that I should live to see the day when the Bible or the New Testament would be reckoned an unfit book to lie upon the table or the shelf of any school supported by the treasury of protestant England! It is the first instance in which the legislature of that state, or, I believe, of any state in Christendom, sanctioned such a regulation.

The practice of the clergyman to which I have just now alluded, leads me to notice a point very much insisted on by the advocates of the national system—namely, that the protestant clergy may and ought to go to the school houses after the national school is over, and there give that religious instruction which the board will not supply. In some parishes, where there is but one national school, the protestant clergyman might, and does, attend occasionally; but surely the board cannot suppose that their conduct as to the scriptures is atoned for by permitting the protestant clergyman to teach them after their school is closed. The right of teaching the scriptures he still enjoys without their permission; but in no case could a clergyman, with due attention to his other duties, attend a school daily, and, according to protestant views, the scriptures, or a portion of them, should be daily read as an indispensable part of a Christian's instruction. And what shall we say as to those instances where the benefice is extensive, the national schools in it numerous, the income small, and only one clergyman, and he perhaps not able to keep a horse? I cannot conceive anything more visionary than, in these and such like cases, of which there are many in Ireland, to expect the clergyman to

Rule 5, as to tuition, says, "The reading of the scriptures, either in the authorized or Douay version, is regarded as a religious exercise, and, as such, is to be confined to those times which are set apart for religious instruction." Times may be set apart for reading the scriptures, but no rule of the board renders it imperative on the master or any other teacher to attend at these times.

It was Sir Robert Peel, I think, who proved in some of the debates on the Irish church question, from data that were laid before the House of Commons, that the average size of Irish benefices was, or would be under the proposed arrangements, twenty-five square British miles.

VOL. XIII.-Feb. 1838.

2 E