The Cambria freeman. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1867-1938, 1875-01-29
Communications.


Liberty versus s-PairOnus Redtvivus"
Of the HOilidaysburg standard en-
ssa,Ompulsory Educ"tion'
Mr.. EprToR-A writer in the standard who
signs himself ''Patronus,' referring TO the sup
The recent Institute held in Hollidaysburg. ar
fer giving a passing notice OF tne manner III
which the speakers handled the subject, which
70 him seemed NOT very satisfactory, gives his
own views in a clear. pointed manner. The
in hehalf of compulsory education cannot be
painsayed. Such at least Is the impression
which the sharp a RI n,aIe wonld respect
fully suggest to the writer however, not TO
jump too hastily at he verv word
compulsory sounds rather harsh IN the ears OF
free ndependent peoPr wnG ight han even be for for
their own good 1t smacks a little OF Imperial
Despotsm Compuls9n he Eha ,be"rV of svins ho.
n free education to the children OF me com
monw ealth is charming, education being such
an extraordinary blessing; and thch the gen.
erosty of the State in forcing this great boon
on the blind, ignorant parents who know not
what is good for their children and themselves.
Herein the State shows its magnificent liberal
ity its great wisdom, and more than q parents
. love for his offspring! But seriously speak
mo has the State the right to take under its
peculiar charge the education OF inc youth
so? Because forsooth, a majority of the citi
zens has so declared! The action of ma jdrity
is not always right, especially when prejudice
Justice. May not this be the case with regard
TO State schools? Have parents no rights. no
saw so in the training of their children, neither
natural or divine? God says to the child, Hon
ehomld. " for certain reasons, say to the child
You shall not go to schools: while, on the
schooI heo What shall the child do? Must it obey
the State and dsobey its parents? Where has
God given the State such an authority over
child as that given 70 the parent by an express
commandment? Who has the stronger claim
to the child. the parent or the state? who is
ing and happiness Of the child, the parent or
the State? 1t may he that some parents are SO
lind 70 ftn3ax ys.lf lf,f
their offspring as to culpabiy neglect their pro-
per education, but surely the great majority
= re not of this callous. Indifferent class. And
then must the rights of the great majority be
trampled upon to secure the advantagcs-I do
not say the blessings Tor tnat Is uOuDtlul-ior
the neglected TewI
In this matter of State education. if under
special circumstances its expedency may be
admitted, the rights of all the citizens should
as far as practicable he regarded There should
be no interference with me conseient'9ns - r con-
visions of the Constitution should be scrupu-
lousy observed Many are o. f fme opi.iioh .hat
the school-room others hold that they should
go hand in hand together. Some will have one
kind of religion taught in school; others don't
want that kind. and so on How Will the state
harmonize these conflicting Views? VIII it. in
the Supr cmacy of its might, ignore all and this
with the view of promoting the good of all
The people truly must have some reserved
rights, aud l know of none more sacred than
that of the parent over the training of his chill
dren i'm the manner which IN his wisdom seems
to him fit. Some may surrender this right for
various ca uses, but il should not be forced from
any one who is gifted with even moderate
share of common sense and prudence. The pa
rent should not be treated as if devoid of the
cemmonest instincts of nature-a very beast,
without any interest in its offspring.
The State says to the parent I'll take your
child from you whether you like IL or not. and
give if the kind of education icisIt. not what
I'VE clear charter for thus acting. l have
never seen any conSiusiXe u, Sfoois OF such =, !,
lead me too far from my present purpose,
might enter somewhat rninuteiy into the pow
cs.f Sfatn hn hnn
come up again. I am now addressing myself
more directly to the arguments of ''Patronus,
SAWS ..PatronuS." ""has any liberty to do wrong"
| deny that proposition. 1 presume he means
not synonymous terms-they are not converti-
BILE. And again: IF a parent. using bis liber-
tn, does wish to educate or not his children,
does he not do what is morally wrong?" He
may or may not-tbat depends upon what kind
o,ae Sd Of IT. Edmcstion is very c"mprehen
sive term. With how many good and virtuous
men and women you will meet, who are enjoy
ing considerable Snare OF this worlds happi-
ness with a fair prospect of being happy in the
write They were educated by their parents
in virtue and moral rectitude, and taught how
to make AN honest living 10y their industry in
the performance of their respective duties in
life. Where does the moral wrong come in in
such a case, whlcn is by no means an isolated
one either? "Patronus's assertion is too broad.
1t supposes not alone the benefits but the abSo
lutte necessity of education tor all, ana perhaps
u high order of educatlon which can be found
only in the State schools. But lot me for mo-
meiIt suppose there is moral wrong What
then? Is the State bound TO prevent or pun
ish all moral wrong? i deny il, and will until
the contrary is shown. .Patronns makes a
State does not punish what he calls moral
wrong, viz. non-educating he child, then it
ought NOT hold him responsible or punish him
for any moral wrong. That is a fails" concliI-
sion. 1t is drawing a general conclusion from
particular premises. which sound logic will not
permit TO neglect to educate a child is, says
'sPatronus," "to surren1 Ter him to II life of in
dolence yagrancy and crime; l deny the , as
iLn made "a
tronus,'' it is too vague and general All the
ill.terate are not of the class described Many
of tbcm-the great bulk of them-are in
dustrious, thrifty and pure. IL is very qucs-
tiona5le whether the state edcatson Is promo
good morality. We bad good, industrious. NOR
people before the state began to net the part
of the pedagogue, although no doubt there
were many unlcttered citizens.
And now. sir. to the test. You may refer me
to the poor house as II proof OF at least a part
of your assertion. viz. the poverty OF its in
mates. ! do not allow. however, that all the in
mates of our poor houses are uniettered, nor
that those who are are or became poor on
that account. There will always be vast
number of poor in all nations. no matter what
the facilities OF educatlor. may ne ne, IS
glance our jails aud pcni, cniiarics. Are etheir
YOU III find crime attaching itself to- the skirts
of many smart person in said institutions.
Hence do not consider education as panacca
for the evils you mention.
"Patronus' says that mot to educate child
is to do him wrong and to infict AN injury an
the State, and that therefore to protect itselt
the State ought to compel the education OF
children. How Is the state inquired Dy an un-
Icttered person? But admit that he may com
nit a crime, or,'if you WILL great many of
them against the State. even because OF his ig-
norancc certainly "Patronius'' will nottdeny
but some highly educated persons can be found
who commit crimes. many equally il not more
heinous than those of the ignorant person, and
that their education enables Them TO do so- and
tnat very often with impunity. Therefore. ac-
cording to "FatrOnus, education ought not to
be allowed by the State.
See, MIR. "PGtronus," to what nbsuruities your
arguments would lead when pushad to their
logical conclusions. Before the state schools
existed education was pretty thorough. Wit
ness our statesmen. In what does the present
generation, with all its boasted advantages of
education. excel former onesr At the time of
the Revolution the people on the wnoic were
not ignorant. They had private schools, at
which they gained Il solid education. And who
VIII say that if there had been no change in the
mode of education it would be as good, il not
better, shan present system? And then
there was no "compclsion" used
BY the present system of e1ucation the sa-
cred rights of many are trumpled upon. the
claims of conscience are disregardcd. and the
child receives his mental pabulum at the hands