APPENDIX B.
173
" The schoolmaster, and in his absence the usher, shall publicly every morning read a chapter out of the Canonical Scripture and then pray, concluding at night also with prayer."
The masters were further ordered diligently and constantly to catechise the pupils in Archbishop Usshers Catechism, not only on Sundays but also at other convenient times.
Some of these rules were made by Erasmus Smith after the granting ofthe Charter and under the powers given to him therein, and some of them, especially that relating to Archbishop Ussher's Catechism, were actually incorporated in the Charter itself at his own special request.
Can any rational unprejudiced person have any doubt upon his mind as to his inten¬ tions, and as co the nature of the instruction to be given as the basis of his school education, viz.,
that it was essentially Protestant 1
The next argument which is> brought forward in support of this Scheme for destroying the Protestant character of this Endowment is based upon Erasmus Smith's supposed intentions with regard to the children of his tenants.
There is no doubt that one cf his great objects in founding his Grammar Schools was to benefit the children of his tenants, not generally, as is supposed, as if for primary education, but to give such of them as should show sufficient talent to be benefited by a University Education, a chance of rising in the social scale and of getting on well in the world, but the free education which he provided for them was also provided for other poor scholars, especiaUy those of the labouring class, and in the Rules, above referred to, he expressly provides for paying pupils to be admitted to the Schools at an entrance fee, and at such reasonable rates for schooling as might be agreed upon.
But he took care to state exactly the conditions upon which this free education was to be given, and one of the essentials which he laid down was that this education was to be exclusively Protestant.
Here is where Sophism No.
2 is introduced.
It is argued that Erasmus Smith had two intentions —(1) To educate the chUdren of his tenants and other poor chUdren ?
(2) To bring them up as Protestants ; and then it is assumed that the former was his primary intention, and that if both of his intentions could not be carried out, he would, if now living, and with the advantage of the experience of the intervening 200 years, have decided to abandon the latter and carry out the former alone.
But unfortunately for this assumption, and for those who take it upon them¬ selves to invent intentions for founders according to their own notions, this very conflict occurred during the lifetime of Erasmus Smith, and he has left on record a remarkable letter which is absolutely decisive upon the point.
A report had been sent over to him by the Governors, in 1680, as to the state of the schools at Drogheda and Galway, in which it was stated that " those who are ofthe Popish religion wUl not suffer then* children to be educated in those schools, nor by the schoolmasters."
Erasmus Smith, after some further correspondence, winds up with the letter of June 6th, 1682, in which he says—"My Lords, my design is not to reflect upon any, only I give my judgment why those Schools are so consump¬ tive, which was, and is, and wiU be (if not prevented) the many Popish Schools, their neighbours, which as suckers do starve the tree.
If parents will exclude their chUdren because prayers, catechism, and exposi¬ tion is commanded, I cannot help it, for to remove that bar is to make them seminaries of Popery.
Therefore, I beseech you to command him that shall be presented and approved by your honours to observe them that decline these duties and expel them."
Again, I ask, can any unprejudiced person doubt which of his intentions, above referred to, he con¬ sidered paramount 1
But it is charged against the Governors that they have in modern times failed to carry out these stringent regulations, and by introducing a " conscience clause "
in their schools have violated the intentions of the founder, and that therefore this Endowment becomes a free fund, applicable for educational purposes in Ireland irrespective of any religious denomination, and the powers of this Commission are invoked to carry out that view.
This is what I call Sophism No.
3, and the answer to it is very simple.
The obvious remedy for the complaint would be to re-impose all Erasmus Smith's restrictions and conditions, but how would that please the complainants'?
It would only leave matters worse than they were, so far as the complainants are con¬ cerned.
If the suggestion of the Sophists were adopted, it would amount to this—that the best way to undo the effect of a partial violation of a founder's intentions would he to violate them altogether.
How would that be in accordance with the express direction in our Act, that we are " to have regard to the spirit of.
founder's intentions "; If we are to invent intentions for this founder, based upon the experience of 208 years since his time, we might suggest that, as a
" conscience clause " is now the law in all State aided Schools, even when managed by Governors of individual denominations, Erasmus Smith would probably have approved of the bberal steps taken by the Governors, without ex¬ pressing an opinion that their property should be con¬ fiscated for not carrying out his original intentions in then* most stringent form, or a wish that the Protes¬ tant character of the Governing Body as framed by him and sanctioned by Royal Charter should be destroyed.
This brings me to Sophism No 4, viz : that because there are accidentaUy some Roman Cathobc Governors on the Board at present, its Protestant character should be taken away, and no restriction placed upon the religious qualifications of the rest.
Again a simple answer presents itself.
AU the Trustees to whom Erasmus Smith gave his property in 1641 were Protestants, all the Trustees to whom Charles II.
granted the Letters Patent in 1667, and all the thirty-two Governors named in the Charter of 1669, were not only Protestants, but members of the Church of Ireland, and the public officials who were ex-officio Governors, and upon whose accidental re¬ ligion so much stress is now laid, were at that time necessarily members of that Church, as then estab¬ lished by law, and as those Governors sit on the Board at present only in their official capacity, which has nothing to say to their religion, it is obvious that they are as much bound to carry out the Protestant trust of the Charter as if they were Protestants, and that they must be still considered for aU practical pur¬ poses as Protestant Trustees to carry out the in¬ tentions of Erasmus Smith.
If this Sophism were to be admitted, it might as reasonably be argued now that the Commissioners of Charitable Bequests should be guided by their own religious ideas bi the adminis¬ tration of the trusts confided to them by law.
There is another remarkable disposition of a part of his property, by which Erasmus Smith showed the strong Protestant ideas by which he was actuated.
In the Royal Charter, which, it must always be remem¬ bered, was granted upon his own petition, it was pro¬ vided that a moiety of the residue of his revenues and rents should be applied " for the binding out of poor chUdren to be apprentices to and under such Pro¬ testant masters as the said Governors should think fit," and whUe in this case also the children of his tenants were to have the preference, he secured as far as he could that even in industrial education they should be brought into contact with none but Pro¬ testants.
It has generally been held to be a good rule of law, even on this Commission, in trying to ascertain the intentions of a founder, to see how in practice those intentions were interpreted during his lifetime, or in the period immediately subsequent.
I have shown how Erasmus Smith made known his intentions during
