In this spirit the attack was begun-and in this it has since been carried on. We commiserate the spirit,-but heartily rejoice both in the circumstances by which it has been excited, and in the consummation to which it manifestly tends-for there is always a revulsion in the public mind, on its recovery from base delusions, most inauspicious to the credit of its deluders; and nothing should be so earnestly desired by the opponents of any administration, as that it should identify itself with the defence of all abuses, and openly avow, as its ruling principle, a fierce and indiscriminating aversion to every species of amendment, improvement, or redress. But though we can allow losers to be angry, and even enjoy the absurdities into which their ill temper betrays them, we must not allow the misrepresentations with which they endeavour to colour their vexa-. tion, to pass without a temperate correction; and shall therefore proceed, as quietly and deliberately as possible, to inquire into the grounds of the clamour which has been so industriously excited on the subject of the publications of which the titles are prefixed.

It has often been remarked, that there is no great and enlightened country, in which the State has done so little for the education of the people as England. All writers upon the science of Government, in ancient as well as in modern times, have classed, among the primary duties of the ruler, the care of public instruction; and it is very manifest that this duty is, from its nature, capable of being performed without any deviation from those sound principles of policy which prohibit an officious interference with the private habits of individuals, and the disposal of their capital. The Government may safely and advantageously be entrusted with the establishment of plans for educating the lower and more numerous classes of the community; provided that, in the adoption of such plans, no violence is done to the principles of natural liberty; and that the sound maxim is always kept in view, never to interfere where the object can be attained by individual exertion. But although, in England, no general system was ever adopted, the munificence of individuals, in almost all stations, from the Monarch downwards, has, in the course of time, appropriated large funds to the truly pious purpose of advancing public instruction;-and hence the obvious necessity which exists for taking the state of those funds into consideration, when the Government shall be called upon to supply what may yet be wanted for placing the education of the poor upon a perfect footing.

The Committee which was appointed in 1816 reported, that abuses existed in the management of those funds; and recom

mended a commission to inquire into them. When the Report was discussed in the House, not a dissentient voice was raised against this suggestion. All parties admitted that the inquiry should be undertaken, and that the Committee had done well in proposing it to the Legislature. In 1817, a similar recommendation was repeated; and in 1818, after some further examination of evidence, the bill was brought in, which, together with the subsequent inquiries of the Committee, has given rise to the present controversy. The subject is, in itself, exceedingly simple; it involves very few points of law or of policy, and those of a kind sufficiently obvious; it has no necessary connexion with details of fact, the most material facts being in truth admitted on all hands; yet has it, through the violence of political hostility, the influence of most misplaced theological hatred, the accidental intermixture of literary, and even national jealousies, and, above all others, the interested animosity of some persons actually implicated in well-grounded charges,, of others looking forward to exposure, and of a still larger class, who have a fellow-feeling with all established abuses, been involved in clouds of prejudice and misrepresentation which it becomes our duty to assist in dispelling, lest they should succeed in veiling for a season some of the very plainest truths that were ever offered to the attention of this country.

We trust that we shall not be charged with arrogance if we presume to assert, that we feel no doubt of being able at once to do so most effectually. The evidence lyes before us in the Reports, and the various publications to which the controversy has given rise; and it requires only a moderate degree of attention in any reader, to see how groundless the accusations are which have with so much industry been brought together, for the purpose of darkening the question. As we are anxious not to occupy more of the reader's time than is necessary for the performance of this office, we shall, without further preface, proceed at once to consider, first, the more general objections urged against the inquiry into charitable abuses; secondly, the answers given to the particular cases of abuse examined by the Committee; thirdly, the charges brought against the Committee, and the House of Commons itself, for their conduct in the inquiry; and, lastly, the merits of the works now before us.

The con

venience of this arrangement will appear the more obvious to those who are aware, as every one in the least acquainted with the subject must be, that the real merits of the question are quite independent of by far the greatest part of what has been urged by the enemies of the Inquiry; and we shall thus have an opportunity of discussing these by themselves, before examining

the less important, but equally misrepresented parts of the question. It is hardly necessary to add, that we leave wholly out of view, for the present, the great subject of national education, out of which these discussions have arisen. Some persons have, we fear, purposely sought to perplex it, by means of this controversy; and nothing can be more essential to the interests of truth, than the immediate removal of every accidental obstruction to the original investigation.

I. The object which the promoters of the inquiry had in view, was a full and fair investigation of the abuses universally allowed to exist in the management of charitable endowments. For this purpose, eight commissioners were to be appointed, with powers to examine persons, papers, and records; to divide themselves into four boards, carrying on their labours at the same time; and to report, at stated periods, the result of their investigations to the Legislature. But to prevent all abuse in these powers, no warrant for commitment could be issued without specifying the question refused to be answered, or the document withheld; no person could be called upon to produce any paper, unless it related wholly to a charity. If any other matter whatever were contained in it, an extract of the portion relating to the charity was to be sufficient; if he swore that no part of the instrument called for, related to charity, of course the inquiry as to that instrument must stop; and, at all events, if he swore that he was a purchaser, without notice, for a valuable consideration, neither himself nor his papers could be examined at all. These important restrictions on the powers of the commissioners, have been most studiously kept out of view by the opposers of the measure, because they could not otherwise hope, even for an instant, to raise clamours about the compulsory production of title-deeds.

We have spoken of the existence of abuses as universally admitted. The authority of Lord Kenyon and Lord Eldon, is perhaps a sufficient proof of the universality of this admission.

Whoever will examine the state of the Grammar Schools in different parts of this Kingdom, will see to what a lamentable condition • most of them are reduced. If all persons had equally done their duty, we should not find, as is now the case, empty walls without scholars; and EVERY THING NEGLECTED BUT THE RECEIPT OF THE SALARIES AND EMOLUMENTS.'-Per Lord Kenyon, C. J. 6 T. R. 493.

It is absolutely necessary that it should be perfectly understood, that CHARITY ESTATES ALL OVER THE KINGDOM are dealt with in a manner most grossly improvident; AMOUNTING TO THE MOST DIRECT BREACH OF TRUST.'-Per Lord Eldon, C. 13 Ves. 580. The language used by the opposers of the bill in Parliament, and out of doors, was equally explicit. They did not pretend

to deny that abuses existed; but some thought the law as it stood was sufficient to correct them; and others, who allowed that some inquiry was wanted, insisted upon confining it within such limits as rendered it almost inefficacious.

To the former class of reasoners, one answer seemed obvious, and that a very short one- the Court of Chancery.' What likelihood is there of a sufficient number of public-spirited individuals being found to risk their fortunes, and sacrifice their quiet, in the endless mazes of a Chancery suit? Lord Eldon himself proclaims the necessity of instituting such proceedings in a fearful number of cases; for he declares judicially, that the most direct breaches of trust, and the grossest improvidence,' are to be found in the management of charity estates all over the kingdom.' Then, where are we to look for persons able and willing to bring those delinquencies before his Lordship? It is true, that a remedy by petition has been attempted in the act of 1812 (52 Geo. III. c. 101), and much is said of the facility which this gives to suitors who may be disposed to come forward in behalf of the poor. (Letter to Sir W. Scott, p. 28.) But it is rather unfortunate that the high authority of Lord Eldon should again interpose, to damp any hopes which this act might have excited. For his Lordship is reported to have thus spoken of it in the debate of May 27. 1818. He allowed that the act was well meant; but said, that both he and Sir W. Grant, in applying themselves to redress, by means of it, the evils complained of, had in the end found so many difficulties in the application of it, that in their opinion, and that of almost every gentleman at the Bar who had been in any way concerned, they could do nothing but desist.' But even in the limited number of cases to which the remedy by petition is applicable, the difficulty recurs, of finding persons to proceed. It is vain to talk of the expense being much less than in proceedings by information or bill, or to comfort well disposed persons, by assuring them, as Sir W. Scott's correspondent does, that fifty pounds will cover all costs-although the act gives a power of appealing to the House of Lords, where four times that sum may be expended. No topics of this sort will avail with the bulk of mankind; and for one abuse corrected by such selfdevotion, we may rest satisfied that hundreds will pass unexamined.

As for the cumbrous remedy of a Commission of Charitable Uses, it has now fallen almost entirely into disuse; and probably for this, among other reasons, that it is apt to end in the Court of Chancery. In the first century after the statute (43 Eliz. c. 4.) 881 commissions had issued, exclusive of those from 1602 to 1643, which could not be stated, from the loss of books in the

office. From 1700 to 1746, there were 322; from that time to 1760, only 33; from 1760 to 1786, there were but two; and since 1786, there has been one such commission, which ended in the Court of Chancery; where, after full argument, and a case sent to the Court of King's Bench, it has now stood some years awaiting the decision of his Lordship.

The acts appointing charitable donations to be registered, seem also to have failed in a very great measure. Thus Mr Gilberts (26 Geo. III. c. .) produced for the East Riding of Yorkshire memorials of only sixty-seven school charities, the united revenues of which amounted to 880l.; whereas the evidence before the Education Committee proves, that one endowment there has a revenue of 900l., and in Middlesex the whole revenue is returned as under 5000l. for 151 charities; whereas the Committee found three schools worth 70,000l. a year. It is evident that no rise of rents during the last thirty years could account for such deficits as these. The late Registry act seems to have been still more incfficient-(52 Geo. III. c. 102). The whole number of memorials transmitted to the Enrolment Office, appears to be 588; and although it is possible that some may have been omitted by the Clerks of the Peace, yet this number includes the whole returns from above twenty English counties. The most cursory inspection, too, of the returns, shows how little the act has been attended to; for, were we to believe that it had been executed, we should be obliged to conclude that there are in the North Riding of Yorkshire only two charitable donations secured on land, and in Somersetshire 11, while there are 14 in Rutland. It seems then quite impossible to hold that the law, as it stood last year, afforded sufficient preventives or remedies for the abuses of charitable funds; and accordingly, the more skilful adversaries of the measure affected to admit, both the extent of the evil, and the general principle of the proposed remedy; and applied themselves to the equally effectual opposition which consists in attacking, not the whole, but all the parts.

To expose the gross inconsistency of their proceedings would be endless. They admitted that flagrant abuses everywhere existed, and that they were not confined to one class of charitics, any more than to one district: Yet they restricted the inquiry to charities connected with education. They allowed the necessity of sending commissioners hereafter to examine the other endowments also: Yet they refused to save all the time and expense which must be spared by having one inquiry for all. They adopted the important principle of dividing the commission into boards: But they insisted upon each board being composed of three members, and yet they retained the original