or to a change of system. Those of the candidates then in the city replied to the inquiry, and a card also appeared, signed by Messrs. Solomon Townsend, D. R. Floyd Jones, George Weir, Paul Grout, Conrad Swackhamer, Auguste Davezac, William McMurray, George G. Glazier, David Dudley Field, and Edward Sandford, in which they declared that they "discountenance altogether the schemes and the objects of the present Governor of the State," who, as they charged, had originated all the difficulties of the school question.

The election for members of Assembly resulted as follows:

The last three names in the above list are those of candidates not on “the regular ticket" of the party supposed to be most favorable to the objects of the Carroll Hall party. The three names voted for by the Catholics, as recommended by Bishop Hughes, with the number of votes they received, are the following: Michael Walsh, 2,330; Tighe Davey, 2,172; Timothy Daly, 2,163.

The vote for Senators resulted as follows: Thomas O'Connor, 2,202; J. G. Gottsberger, 2,175.

This demonstration at the ballot-box of a religious body, under the leadership of its most popular and prominent dignitary, occupying the chair of bishop of the diocese, was universally regarded by the people at large, and especially by the members of other communions, as highly offensive and dangerous as a precedent, and antagonistic to the spirit of our republican institutions. It created a profound impression, which, however, was sensibly relieved when the canvas had been completed,

and the strength of the Carroll Hall party was ascertained by the test vote on the last three candidates. The comparatively small number of votes of all parties who were willing to make the sectarianism of our schools a special issue, dissipated the apprehensions of many who feared that a powerful organization would be created for further movements. It was the last effort made, as the occasion for a distinct issue was removed by the action of the Legislature in 1842. The proceedings during that session, and the change introduced, are made the subject of the next chapter.

The reader of the speech of Bishop Hughes will have noticed several allusions to "TRISTRAM SHANDY," LAURENCE STERNE, and the Journal of Commerce. The record will not be intelligible without an explanation of the facts.

After Mr. Spencer's report appeared, the session of the Legislature being far advanced, the indications of success on the part of the Catholics threatened the friends of the Society with the decay of their system. One of them wrote a reply to the report of the Secretary, which was published in the columns of the Journal of Commerce at the last moment. The bill had been made the special order for Friday, May 21st. On Thursday, the 20th, the article appeared, and a number of copies were sent by a gentleman in New York to a friend in Albany, by whom they were marked, and placed on the tables of the senators, so that they would attract immediate attention. It was as follows:

From the Journal of Commerce of May 20, 1841. REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE BRIEFLY EXAMINED.

MR. EDITOR: The report of the Secretary of State on the subject of school education in the city of New York, having been before the public for several days, and feeling, as I do, a deep interest in the cause, I am constrained to make a few suggestions in reply to it, in the hope that I may contribute a little to a full understanding of this interesting question.

The importance of universality in the systems of education adopted by the people has not been overdrawn, and cannot be too much appreciated. No one should be left without the opportunity of making some progress in those studies, the acquisition of which will qualify him for a high and honorable and useful station in society-at least, to prepare him to exercise the responsible privilege of deciding, by the right of suffrage, the course of legislation under which he would prefer to live. This is the principal feature of the report; this is its professed object. Regarding it as an essential

principle, that, as all have civil equality, they should also enjoy an equality in the means of education, the Secretary has proposed the destruction of one system and the substitution of another. If the figures he presents were consistent with facts, and the new system were not open to powerful objections, his report would meet with even more general approbation than it receives at present.

The statistics which he furnishes respecting the number of children in and out of school, show that 32,194 did not attend any school, while less than that number, or 30,758, were registered on the books of schools, of whom 22,955 were embraced in the public schools-the average attendance being 13,189.

The disparity between the attendants upon the means of instruction, and those children not attending, is far less than, by this statement, would appear to be the case.

1. The public schools in this city are open to the reception of children and youth between four and sixteen years of age, but the proportion of those over twelve or thirteen is but as one to twenty-five or thirty. Hence, a very large reduction in the number of non-attendants must be made. I have no data by which I can give the number of children between twelve and sixteen, but there is doubtless at least one third of the whole number, making a consequent reduction of 15,000 or 20,000; leaving the number of non-attendants at 15,000 to 17,000, instead of 32,194.

2. A large number of children are foreigners, who do not speak our language, who are unacquainted with the schools, do not feel their importance or understand the system, and who will not be enticed into school. For these, another proportion must be deducted.

3. Many of the poorer class of the population find it necessary to avail themselves of the services of their children for their own support, and they are consequently put out to work, in factories and other places, at an early age. Many occupations are performed principally by children eight and ten years of age, and no doubt several thousands are thus engaged. For these, another reduction must be made.

In this manner, by an appeal to facts which may be apparent to every one who will look at the subject, we reduce the number of non-attendants to about 8, 10, or 12,000. I might add another item: many of the children of wealthy parents are not sent to school, but are placed under the care of private teachers and governesses. Thus we leave the number of children who may be justly called non-attendants, at about the number of those who are prevented from attending these schools by their parents and priestly censors, whose jealous anxiety is so watchful lest the children might receive any sectarian bias "hostile to their views."

The next deficiency to be accounted for is the great difference between the registered and actual attendance at the schools; and this is no more difficult than the other.

1. Many of the children are kept from school by their parents for the sake of their services.

2. Children are mortals as well as ourselves, who are but "children of larger growth," and often are sick, or feign sickness, as the case may be.