The national leader., 1889-04-13
Compulsory Education.

The Committee ON Legislation of the
Board of Public Education, of Phila-
delphia, met on the 21st inst, and
adopted resolution to the effect that
it is inadvisable that the Ritter Compul-
sorry Education bill in its present shape
should be passed by the Legislature.
1t is to be regretted that this COM
mittee did not look at this matter in its
true light and adopt resolution in OPP
position to compulsory education on
general principles. 1t was said at this
meeting by one of the members of the
committee, that this was the only civil
lied country which has not compulsory
education.
The high state of civilization In this
country is, perhaps, one of the reasons
why it has not compulsory education.
Another reason why no such measure
has been adopted in this civilized coun-
try, is, because it is the only country
which has thoroughly republican
form of government, to the spirit of
which any such measure would be re-
pugnant. Has 1t not occurred to the
advocates of this measure that this
country is so highly civilized, and our
public school systems so efficient IN the
accomplishment of the objects for
which they are designed. that there is
really no evil which a compulsory meas
ure could remedy, and no good which
it could accomplish These people
should bear in mind that ignorance is
not vice per Sc; nor is intelligence virtue
per Sc. In fact there is no necessary
connection between ignorance and vice,
intelligence and virtue. Persons are to
be found everywhere in society who
from an educational standpoint are
ignorant and uneducated, and yet are
good and useful men and women. On
the other hand, we find everywhere in
society. persons who have had all the
advantages which this compulsory
measure of education proposes to give,
and yet they are monsters of iniquity-
the pests of society. Educated and un-
educated men alike, are sent to prison
every day. 1t is simply lud .crous to
presume, or to 60 upon the theory, that
education is virtue, or that 1t is some
thing which you can compel children to
get or compel parents to gaUe to their
children. 1t is true you can compel
children to attend school, but if they
are to acquire an education in the true
sense Of that word, they must acquire
it voluntarily. All intelligent and
moral culture must from its very
nature be voluntary. There must nec-
essarily be many obnoxious features in
any measure making attendance at
school compulsory. Parents have a
right over their children which cannot
be taken from them or infringed upon
by any statute that is based upon sound
principles of law. The notion that the
State owns the children cannot prevail
in this country, and woe unto the Leg
islature that should be so forgetful of
the rights of mothers over their own
offspring as to incorporate such abom-
Unable ideas into statute. There are
many children who are taught and edu-
Gated at home quite as well as they
could be at school. In fact there are
many schools to which some parents do
not wish to send their children, for the
simple reason that they wish them well
and thoroughly educated, which object
they can more surely secure by having
them taught at home under their own
supervision.
In short you cannot on any sound
principles of law make m1sdemeanor OF
that for which person is not RESPONSE
BILE to society. A person is not respon-
sible to society for what he as, but only
for what he does in his relations to
others.
Making attendance at school compul-
sorry would not only be in opposition to
the established theory of education, but
in direct violation of the principle of
the relation OF the citizen to the State.
Under our public school systems at
tendance at school is privilege, based
on the principle of benevolence, and any
compulsory measure in relation to it
would be In itself improper and would
always fail to accomplish any good.