Page:The Conscience Clause (Oakley, 1866).djvu/31

19 Such is the present position of the matter. The onus of proving the inadmissibility of the proposed settlement of an admitted difficulty rests upon the National Society. So does the onus of inventing a better method of effecting an indispensable solution.

A few words more, and they shall be few, on the course pursued by the National Society.

The society has laid down, on several occasions, principles which exactly meet the point in dispute.

In the memorandum with reference to the Management; Clauses, presented to the Lord President of the Council in 1848, occurs the following statement:—"The National Society has always abstained as much as possible from interfering with the discretion of the local founders and supporters of schools. Its terms of union were not intended to require any one specific constitution or form of management, but were limited to requiring such provisions as appeared absolutely necessary to give any school a claim to be regarded as a Church of England school."

A bonâ fide Church school, then, is their one object. This secured, liberty of action is the principle aimed at in the management. So far so good. Now this liberty notoriously extends in practice to the exemption of Dissenters' children from learning the Catechism and going to church. Nay, the liberty to practise this exemption is claimed in the strongest terms in another memorandum of the society of July 23, 1860. It maintains that to say "that every child shall be taught the Catechism, Articles, and Liturgy is also incompatible with union as depriving the managers of that discretion which the terms of union permit, and which has been extensively and advantageously exercised."

Further, the principle of this exemption has been expressly admitted even by the most vehement assailants or the clause