Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1884-12-12

anu STATESMEN tllat II Is leIuSi iiduI u
the Constitution, and contrary tc
sound public policy. How mucI
would their opposition be intensified
did the plan propose what is calleo
compulsory education.
Although it may not be strictly ap
propriato to this discussion. hope yor
will indulge me in a few additional re
marks concerning this particular
measure. 1t does seem singular, tc
say the least of it, that it should b
proposed. sustained. and advocated, by
lis especial apologists and promoters
OF course, its advocacy is based upon
tna 'ea Of imminent danger to oar in.
s'''nions, arising from the prevalence
of ignorance among our voting popu-
lation Bat it has been only few
wears since those. who now play the
ro'c of champions of education as the
Safeguard to our imperiled country.
did not hesitate To introduce to the right
of suffrage an immense mass Of ignOr,
auc,. SO dense and impervious as to rem
deTthat of the present time harmless and
iunocuous by comparison. They saw
m danger in this proceeding then on
the contrary. thev affirmed it to be in
dispensable topubiic safety. What Lew
light has dawned upon them, that they
Sc danger now where only safety ex
isted then: Afterindtviduals. Churc h.
eS. and States have been doing their
utmost, for years. to enIighten and { l.
ucata this new clement Of sovereignty.
how js it possible th,t it has hecome
more dangerous .han it was at the time
Of its introduction Their conduct
is inconsistent and contradictory. Par
y eXI-eucy was the inspiring motive
in a.optin. "m4uhoo1 Sulrag".' and
the very stme thing is AZ the bottom
of this plausible scheme o. national
education" b. former plan. they
sought to fAsten and perpetuate their
Lr.sp upouth. Southern communities :;
bv the latter. they seek 10 restore their
fallen fortunes, and regain their lost
'omlulon. They play the ro'e of pub
lie benelactors to allure popular sup
port. and offer immeus' grArulti,S to
debauch the public mind, and Seduee
men from their allegi lance to conscience
10 pay infamous devotlons at the
shrine Of political charIatanism Il is
4 gIIled bait, which they who are wise
will let severely alone.
| think have clearly shown tat
the General government his no right
to enact compulsory educational laws.
.s-S--------~s-~a.--..----.s
ers. lf.Hher" fore, The r.nt eNtsts al
all. il must reside In the veral State
governments: and To this branch OF
the question now address myself. \
sufficient rerutatinn of this assumed
right will, think, be found in con
troverting the main argument relied
upon for lis establishment and vlndI-
cation. THIS argument NAV be thrown
INTO the form Of sylIogiSm: The
State has the right to adopt and en-
force auv me sure which may appear
necessary for its safety and preserva
ton: but popular education is neces
sary for this purpose; therefore, the
State has the right to enforce popular
education, and, consequently, 10 enact
compulsory laws looking to this result.
Now, upon superficial examination
his argument appears quite conciu-
,ive. bat closer scrutiny will show
that it involves "a doctrine utterly re-
pugnaut 10 the principles upon which
all genuine republican government Is
based. Rights cannot be antogonlstlc.
II the State. as persOniiied by its gov
9rument, possesses this right III all the
latitude which the argument implies,
then ii is manifest that the subject has
no right to resent, much less TO resist,
any action taken under the pretext OF
State necessity. however prejnd ,cial it
NAV be to his interests, or humlllatlng
70 lis feelings. The veriest d'spot that
riots in the wantonness of arbitrary
power. needs no greater justification OF
his ruthless tyranny than such doc
trine atfords. 1t assumes the absolute
IMP, ccability Of the State, the unIlm-
tied authority of the government over
all the interests of its subjects, in all
respects whatsoever and, if admitted,
there is an end to the idea of popular
rights. and oar republican system
must be regarded simply as an usur-
patton ami fraud. But, in point OF
fact. the government, which Is only
the State il concrete form, possesses
no such right. 1t is but the creature OF
the people, organized and constituted
for certain specific purposes and there
are some things which it can no more
do, without culpablity, than can a
private individurl. 1t cannot tran.
>cend the bounds of its legitimate au
thorIty, or violate the principles upon
which it is established for to do sc
would be not only contrary to its pur
pose, but destructive Of its very exist
enc. States may commit suicide by
Overlapping the limits assigned to then
authority, quite as readily as they may
suffer extinction at the hands of some
external enemy. And, !ence, orr po
ltIcal system does not tolerate the lde;
IF absolute authority on the part o.
the State, and passive obedience OF
that of the people; on thr contrary, il
recognizes and atfirms the right of the
people to demand such changes anC
alterations in the organic law as theil
! interests and inclinations may suggest
| With us, at least, "salus p0puH supremc
/ ler' is the fundamental iIea of State
and government is regarded as valu
able onl so far as it may subselve ant
secure this supreme purpose. In view
of these facts, the doctrine of the pro
position. under review, is simply pre-
posterous. 1t is essentially false ant
must be abandoned.
The major proposition having thu
! fallen, nothing but the minor is left a