a measure which came into existence unnoticed, but which will, I believe, turn out to be of more importance to the welfare of the people than many political changes over which the noise of battle has rent the air.

On the proper working of the new Act depended the physical, moral, and intellectual betterment of the nation; in particular, “book-learning” needed to be tempered with not merely handcraft, but with something of the direct knowledge of nature; for in itself, if properly applied, this is an admirable instrument of education, and by its method promotes an attitude of mind capable of understanding the reasons for the vast changes at work in human thought.

Accordingly, he stood as a candidate for Marylebone, and, without canvassing, for which he had neither time nor inclination, he was elected second on the list.  He had addressed several meetings, and, as an amplification of his election address, he included extracts from his forthcoming article, “The School Boards:  What They Can Do, and What They May Do,” which were sent to the papers by the editor of the Contemporary Review. (See Coll.  Ess., iii, 374.) Here was his programme, a great part of which he saw carried out:—­Physical training, for health and as a basis for further training; Domestic training, especially for girls; Moral training, in a knowledge of moral and social laws, and an engaging of the affections for what is good instead of what is evil; Intellectual training, in knowledge and the means of acquiring knowledge, alike for practical purposes and for recreation.

The opponents of popular education raised their still familiar outcry about “cramming children full of nonsense” and “unfitting them for the state of life to which they were called.”  But one cannot say what state of life they may be called to without opportunity of testing their capacities, and as for cramming them with nonsense, such a scheme, if properly carried out, ought rather to expel nonsense.  Above all, it set the interests of humanity above the mere development of skill, which would simply turn the child of man into the subtlest beast of the field.

True education, he declared, was impossible without “religion,” the unchanging essence of which lies in the love of some ethical ideal to govern and guide conduct, “together with the awe and reverence which have no kinship with base fear, but rise whenever one tries to pierce below the surface of things, whether they be material or spiritual.”

It was in this sense that he advocated Bible-reading in schools—­simple Bible-reading, without theological gloss.  On the one hand, this was the only workable plan under existing circumstances.  True, that he would not have employed the Bible as the agency for introducing the religious and ethical idea in a system that could begin with a clean slate.  He believed that the principle of strict secularity in State education is sound and must ultimately prevail.