Page images
PDF
EPUB

HE BECOMES DIRECTOR-GENERAL.

37

confess that I think we should draw the children to church by cords of love, and not drag them by chains of iron. But in this respect I differ from many of the wisest and best men. Southey, too, has some admirable observations on this subject. The children should be allowed,' he says, 'to accompany the master to church, and not required to do it; and this not merely for the sake of the orthodox dissenters, (to whom, however, it ought to be allowed,) but because it is better that they should go with their parents, than with their school-fellows and their master. In the one case, example is likely to be mischievous, as it is sure to be beneficial in the other. Every one will understand this who recollects with what different feelings the church service impressed him, when he attended in his own parish church by his mother's side, and when he went among a drove of school-boys. Intolerance, however, gained the day, and chains of iron' were judged to be more efficacious in promoting church going than 'cords of love.'

From this time until his decease, a period of above twenty years, the life of Dr. Bell blends with the progress of the National Society and of its schools. To the service of that society he devoted himself with unwearied zeal and assiduity, travelling extensively on its behalf, and labouring for the

E

38

GETS A STALL OF GOOD VALUE.

on the

diffusion of his system with untiring energy, The crowded meetings of the British and Foreign School Society appear occasionally to have carried both astonishment and dismay into the .more orthodox camp,

but whole things went on quietly. In the month of January (1818) the Doctor was presented to a stall, of good value,' in Hereford Cathedral, which he subsequently exchanged for one in Westminster Abbey, valued at £1100 a year; "the rich preferments,' he says, , which all my brethren enjoy, being shut against me,' at Hereford. In soliciting this exchange, through the interest of the Bishop of Durham, he modestly says, If unexampled and disinterested services to the crown, to the church, and to the state, entitle a man to the notice and the favour of the minister, I shall not be afraid to put my claim in competition with that of any other man. If sacrifices made, odium incurred, and successful struggles encountered in their behalf, and without their support or protection, give pretensions, mine have not been wanting to a degree that few will believe. This letter displeased the bishop, as well it might, and he returned no answer. But Dr. Bell was not to be so easily put aside. At no period of his life had he ever lost anything for want of solicitation, nor did he now withdraw his claim because others might imagine that he

FINDS MONEY A BURDEN.

39

took too high a view of his own merits. He steadily persevered, and his wishes were ultimately acceded to.

In 1830 the health of Dr. Bell decidedly failed; and in 1831 Sir Benjamin Brodie stated his agreement with Dr. Newell in the opinion, that the nerves of the larynx were in a degree paralytic, as well as the organs of deglutition. * His mind was, however, in full vigour, and his vanity as rampant as ever. • His money,' says his biographer, “was now a burden to him. After changing his mind again and again as to its disposal, he at length suddenly transferred £120,000 to trustees at St. Andrews for a projected college. He then wrote to Dr. Southey, requesting that he and Mr. Wordsworth would edit his works, and begging their acceptance of £2000, and all expenses paid, and the expenses of those they might employ. Southey accepts the trust, and incidentally refers to his own declining strength. I am old enough myself,' he says,

to have the end of my journey in view, and to feel what a blessing it will be to escape from the cares of this world, throw off the burden of human infirmities, and be united in the kingdom of heaven with those dear ones who have gone before us.'

Dr. Southey very properly urged, that as almost all his wealth had come from the church, some of it, at least, ought to return to it; and

[ocr errors]

40

MAKES HIS WILL, AND DIES. suggested to him a plan for augmenting poor livings. Dr. Bell at first seemed to acquiesce, but soon after altered his opinion. Onetwelfth of the amount he had placed in the hands of trustees (£10,000) he subsequently gave to the Royal Naval School, and five other twelfths he transferred to the towns of Edinburgh, Leith, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Inverness. His Scotch estates, producing a yearly rental of about £400, he made over to trustees for the purpose of promoting and encouraging the education of youth in Cupar Fife, subject to a miserable annuity of £100 to his sister; £20 annually to six other persons; and £10 to Thomas Clark. His princely donation to St. Andrews proved most unfortunate; it involved him in disputes with the trustees, terminating only with his death, which took place at Cheltenham, on the 27th of January, 1832, in the 79th year of his age. His remains were removed to London, on the 9th of February, and deposited in Westminster Abbey on the 14th ; the highest dignitaries of the church, and other eminent persons, attending as mourners.

CHAP. III.

THE CONTROVERSY.-BEL AND THE DRAGON.

The fact is undoubted, that Lancaster, a very few years

after his commencement, was managing a thousand children, aided only by boys acting as monitors. The point in dispute is, whether he was doing this by methods of his own devising, or whether, as Mr. Southey harshly expresses it, deriving from Dr. Bell his knowledge of the system, he claimed for himself, with consummate effrontery, the honour of the invention ?

We can only say for ourselves that, after carefully perusing all the evidence that has been offered in support of this frequently-repeated charge, we see no reason whatever to believe that Lancaster was guilty of acting the base and unprincipled part attributed to him; and, believing this, we cannot but severely blame those who have accused him so rashly.

That Dr. Bell preceded Lancaster in the use of what was afterwards termed the system of mutual instruction, we freely admit; but we can by no means allow the claim subsequently made on his behalf, that he was as much the discoverer of the principle of conducting a school by means of the scholars

« PreviousContinue »