The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1889-11-21

| uSlt law WHICH Is not Il matter OF 1Uerd-
ton. No candid person can read the law
and find anything Objectionable in it but
its failure to provide means for it's en-
forcement, unless it is Objectionable to
require that English be taught those who
are citizens of the United States. 1t may
be we'll to summarize the arguments on
this law to show how groundless are the
fears that it prohibits anything but the
exclusion of English education of the
child:
o. The Bennett law does not prohibit
the teaching of German or any other
language in any school parochial or
public.
(2) 1t does not require that the paro-
chial or any private schools shall teach
English. They are just as free to ex-
clude that language now as they were be-
fore the enactment Of the law.
81 1t does require that for II weeks
OF each year children between the ages of
7 and IA shall receive instruction in Eng
lish in certain enumerated branches, and
the child is free to attend any school pri-
vate, public or parochial which gives this
instruction.
a. During these twelve weeks Ger
man is not necessarily excluded no more
than it is incumbent that Z. S. history
be taught to the child of seven.
o. II the parochial or private school
does not choose to teach English as a
part of its instruction for twelve weeks
of the forty it is ordinarily in session each
year, it is not compelled by the Bennett
law to do SO. In such an event the law
asks that the child attend some other
school in which instruction in English
may be had twelve weeks in each year. 1t
does not interfere with the school which
!, denies this instruction further than to
provide for the wants of the pupil which
the private or parochial school neglects.
1t is not an interference with the school;
it simply does justice to the child.
o. The status OF no parochial or
rrit,o+a school is in any way disturbed.
IF II teaches Fnoii.-h il certain branches
for three months, not necessary W lne
exclusion of other languages 1t has all
the recognition accorded public school
which must teach English for six months.
a. The Bennett law has a provision
whereby inquiry can be made whether
English is taught at all in private and
!, parochial schools or not, SO as matter
OF fact, English may be wholly excluded
and still the constant attendance of pu-
pills at such shoots for the entire year can
!, not be hindered. OF course this is a
defeat which the advocates of the Ben
nett law desire to have remedied.
Can any one perceive anything porten-
tous of evil to the parochial schools in
such mild and common sense require
ments? 1t will not do to argue that ex-
listing conditions make the law unneces-
sary. There are many people born in
Manitowoc county who have reached the
age of manhood and womanhood who are
unable to speak English and few who
are unable to read or write in any lang
uage. The writer knows from personal
knowledge that the public schools of
. Manitowoc county are not inferior to
those of any other county in the state,
and is satisfied from personal observa-
ton and information that like illiteracy
and ignorance of English prevails in
other counties. Is not this a state of
affairs demanding remedy both in the iu-
terests of the state and in the interests
OF the individuals thus deprived of the
very essentials of success in life? What
folly in the face of such conditions to
seek to profit politically by arousing pre-
JUDGE against an effort to conserve the
rights of the child? Are the fruits of
political victory SO sweet as to justify
sacrificing the rights OF children and ex-
cuslng recreancy to trust more sacred
than ever party imposed? 1t is not a
question of public schools against paro-
chial schools. Let the latter prove the
better of the two and no friend of educa-
ton will refuse to accord them the merit
they earn. Wipe out the public school
if the parochial can do the work better.
Either Is but a creature designed to bene-
fit the people and that which best sub
serves Its ends should be the firstling of
the peoples hearts. It is the rights of
the people to an education not the domi-
nation of any school or class or church
or nationality that is under discussion.
| With all our boosted educational
advantages we are not giving the
rising generation the education their
necessities demand and blessed
be the party whether democratic, republi-
can or labor which will devise meaus &c
make more patent the educational instra-
ments now in our hands. Is there trea-
son to party in this utterance? Is there
aueht antagonistic to any nationality?