Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1886-09-23
From tee Pert To5dccO Times.
published by Request
COMPULSORY EDUCATION.

Teachers Association, Mr.. John W.
Haley presented the following paper
1t is a question with me, whether
any compulsory law which aims to
compel the great body of the people
to do certain specific acts, is either
proper or expedient. A little investi-
CATION will show that the general
course Of the Law is prohibitory rath-
er than mandatory. 1t defines what
is right, and forbids its violation
it declares what is expedient,
and prohibits the contrary. Time
was it is true, when compulsory laws
were very common, if not popular.
Compulsory attendance at church,
compulsory acceptance of certain be-
liefs, compulsory everything, was re-
quired Of the people by their masters
who, in the plentitude of their power,
sought to impose whatever their arbi-
trary inclinations suggested as expe-
dient; and such gentle persuasives to
cheerful obedience as the torture
chamber, the gibbet, and the stake,
were the recognized and essential at
tendants upon legislation so far reach
ing, if not benevolent.
But these good old times have
passed away. Governments have
come to recognize and respect the sa
cred rights of private judgment and
individual conscience, in their appro
pirate spheres. the Law has relaxed
it's compulsory features, and now con-
tents itself so far as the community
at large is concerned, with forbiddinl
only that which is inimical to public
safety. So that positive or mandate
ry regulations, at the present day
apply almost exclusively to those wht
are invested with certain officia
trusts, and are designed simply to Sc
cure the due performance of the du
ties growing out of the positions whicl
they hold. With regard to the grea
unofficial body of the people, the Law
as ! have already affirmed, is simpl,
prohibitory. Justice is secured b.
forbidding injustice, order is main
tanned by furnishing disorder, AM
right is vindicated by attaching pen
alties to the perpetration OF wrong,
1t is needless for me to attempt +
show that this course is founded upol
correct principles, and is better adapt
ed TO individual and public need
than any different course would be
Any law, therefore, that deviate
from this well-beaten track may just
" be regarded with suspicion. 1t is
TO say the least Of it, an experimen
merely, and may result in positive in
jury, without any compensating al
vantage. II abridges personal libert
without any apparent necessity,
creates offences where no offences ex
listed before, and it stands as a con
slant menace of arbitrary encroach
ments yet to come. So much for com
pulsory laws in general.
But it seems to me that a compuI
sorry educational law is liable to speci
al and peculiar objections. 1t is base
upon principles essentially arbitrar
and despotic. 1t tseeks to control. ay'
even to destroy, the fundamental cha,
acteristics and qualities of relation
established by Nature, and confrme
by the immutable DEGREES of the On
nipotent God. 1t assumes the abs
lutte authority of government over th
most sacred rights Of humanity; an
If admitted, there is nothiag in whic
the people can be secure from the T,
paeity of unlimited power acting upo
Pretexts Of pretended necessity. BIZ
! may properly reserve my remark
on this point, for the present. and al
prOach the question Immediately b
fore Us.
This question think naturally d
vides itself into two branches lst
with reference TO the right Of the nj