her than those of enlightened Paganism.

Enough, then, your honors, has been said on this point; and I am willing
that inquiry should be prosecuted to any extent of research to
controvert this position, that a school of education for the young,
which rejects the Christian religion, cannot be sustained as a charity,
so as to entitle it to come before the courts of equity for the
privileges which they have power to confer on charitable bequests.

Mr. Webster then replied to the remarks of Mr. Binney, in relation
to the Liverpool Blue Coat School, and read from the report of Mr.
Bache on education in Europe, Mr. Bache having been sent abroad by
the city of Philadelphia to investigate this whole matter of
education.

If Mr. Girard had established such a school as that, it would have been
free from all those objections that have been raised against it. This
Liverpool Blue Coat School, though too much of a religious party
character, is strictly a church establishment. It is a school
established on a peculiar foundation, that of the Madras system of Dr.
Bell. It is a monitorial school; those who are advanced in learning are
to teach the others in religion, as well as secular knowledge. It is
strictly a religious school, and the only objection is, that in its
instruction it is too much confined to a particular sect.

Mr. Binney observed that there was no provision made for clergymen.

That is true, because the scheme of the school is monitorial, in which
the more advanced scholars instruct the others. But religious
instruction is amply and particularly provided for.

Mr. Webster then referred to Shelford, p. 105, and onward, under
the head "Jews," in the fourth paragraph, where, he stated, the
whole matter, and all the cases, as regarded the condition and
position of the Jews respecting various charities, were given in
full.

He then referred to the Smithsonian legacy, which had been
mentioned, and which he said was no charity at all, nor any thing
like a charity. It was a gift to Congress, to be disposed of as
Congress saw fit, for scientific purposes.

He then replied, in a few words, to the arguments of Mr. Binney in
relation to the University of Virginia; and said that, although
there was no provision for religious instruction in that
University, yet he supposed it would not be contended for a moment
that the Univers