been given to a Radical speech on Education. The Church-party did not disallow, the Minister even spoke
in approval, and the advocates of secular instruction were fain to express by silence at once their hopes and
their fears. But the latter have most reason to predominate, notwithstanding apparent signs to the contrary.
Supposing even the cursing priests silenced and defeated, it would, we fear, be building a tower on sand to
expect that all other conflicting parties in this country are prepared suddenly to unite in the assertion that
differences of creed shall no longer be allowed to act as a prohibition against knowledge. Substantially this
is the principle of Mr. Fox's proposal; and though, to save us all, such a principle must be carried into
practice sooner or later, there is small chance of the right beginning being made, till the Government are
bold enough and strong enough to take some steps in advance of the people. Who can doubt but that the
religious cry, if not the religious curse, will again be raised if needful, to sustain the monstrous charge of infidelity
against men whose only error (if it be one) is to think religion too vital an element in education to be marred
or excluded by sectarian dispute?

Such is the vicious circle in which ignorance moves, that only to a people uneducated could the arguments
used to keep them so be addressed with any chance of acceptance. Secular education is described and
believed to be exclusive of religion, while all its efforts are shaped to give practical force to religion.
Does anyone believe that what at present passes for religious education, at Sunday-schools and the like,
is deserving of the name of education at all? Does anyone doubt that in proportion as spelling is taught,
religion is not taught, when the Bible is used for a spelling-book.  We shall have to look these truths in
the face before long, and to confess that children will not know religion less by knowing other things
as well, but that the capacity of better comprehending and acting upon its truths will be strengthened
by general knowledge. At present it is called encouraging infidelity to inculcate such doctrines; but
in what other way could religious teaching be made universal, but by giving free scope to the efforts of
every religious sect? What is now proposed to be tried would meddle with no existing plan by which,
in any small or great degree, education is already extended to the people. All that it asks to do is to
educate such waifs and strays as neither Churchmen nor Dissenters can draw within their several folds. Nay
more, it would make religion compulsorily a part of education, simply reserving to the parent a liberty of
providing the religious instructor. It would compel certificates of attendance on the instructors so appointed. It
would use the official machinery already established, apply no compulsion where voluntary efforts are found
to operate successfully, confirm all Government aid as at present given to rival or contending sects, and
simply secure (by a local rate) what every other means may have failed to provide for the remaining portion of
the people. But its merits foredoom it against all favourable fortune but such as it may derive from discussion.
Free and frank discussion alone can help us in the matter. The more discussion there is, and the
bolder it is, the more it will be made obvious that knowledge and religion can have no exclusive or separate
interests; seeing that the knowledge which indisposes a man to religion is as likely to be false knowledge, as
the religion which indisposes a man to knowledge is certainly false religion.

The representative of Oxford bigotry made a serious mistake in pointing to the celebrated tenth of April
as an answer to all this, and proof of a well educated people. Admitting that numbers of the working men
behaved well on that occasion, what is to be said of the numberless others whose ignorance and violence
made such a demonstration necessary? What is to be said of a multitude so duped and ignorant as to have
pinned their political faith on such an apostle as Mr. Feargus O'Connor? It would be difficult to conceive
so unanswerable an argument for the necessity of a more general system of education, than is supplied by the
influence of such a person over the tens of thousands he has deceived and misled. Most opportunely
occurred the case of O'Connor v. Bradshaw, for a comment on Sir Robert Inglis's remark. It has been made
manifest by this case, that, by a scheme entirely illusory which was to secure small freehold tenements to
working men, backed by a tissue of pretences now proved to have been utterly false, Mr. Feargus O'Connor
got possession of more than a hundred thousand pounds of the hard earnings of the poor; and that by the very
means which placed this money in his power, these being illegal, he was released from all subsequent accountability
for it. In fact the money became absolutely his own, if it had been his pleasure so to consider it; and
though, after he got it, he wrote to his "dear children" to tell them he would not rob them, his deluded and
dear children have never since had any profit from their dependence on his word. The most part of seventy
thousand industrious and honest, but easily gulled working men, are still trembling for their little earnings,
so foolishly committed to such hands, on the faith of an amount of braggadocio quite incredible and
monstrous. "I say that there never was such a day for England and the world," he wrote to these unhappy
men, on the eve of opening one of the land company's settlements, "as the first of May will be"—(a pity it was not
the first of April!) "At twelve o'clock on that day, your brethren will be each put in possession of his estate
for ever; and your feelings will be the best answer to my accusers, and the opponents of this plan, when
you sit down in your own house, from which no tyrant can hunt you. And when you are located, you and
your children, and your children's children (if I shall ever live to see my great-grand-children), shall ever be
the chief object of my every care and thought; and I won't rob you, neglect you, or diminish your store of
happiness; but I will work the harder to assist the needy, as I would sorrow greatly if any lost the nest I
built for him and his family." Could a more lamentable exhibition of the absolute need of education be
given, than that such rubbish as this should have imposed on seventy thousand men, with prudence to save
money but without knowledge to make proper use of it! Could ignorance be conceived more bigotted than
that which welcomed a braggart for a god, and "worshipped this dull fool." But he promised them
social and political emancipation; and said he would not rob them (an odd notion to have entered
his head); and, appealing to two of the strongest motives that actuate the uneducated and educated
alike, the passion for gambling, and the desire for possession of land, ultimately succeeded in obtaining
absolute control over more than a hundred thousand pounds. To not a farthing of this money, it was
proved at the recent trial, has any other person than Mr. O'Connor any legal claim. So completely is it
in his power, that (as the Chief Baron lucidly explained the law), supposing he became a bankrupt, his
creditors might seize it in satisfaction of their demands, and, if he bequeathed it conscientiously for the uses
of his subscribers, his heir-at-law might refuse to carry his intention into effect on the score of the illegality
of the transaction. The bursting of the bubble (and that the "Earth has bubbles" this land-scheme sadly
demonstrates!) of course took place as soon as the attempt was made to float it; the nests which Mr. O'Connor
had built for his children were flung open to the storm; and by a worse tyrant than he had promised to