The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1890-04-09

equal to that taught in the public schools.
The legislature by making this concession
did not abandon its right to control the char
acter of the branches taught. II children
are being taught in schools in this state
today in which the means of educa-
ton furnished are not equal to that taught
In the common Schools" under the law
they can be removed and compelled to attend
either the public schools or some private
school which meets this condition. The
WORD equal as here used undoubtedly
means equivalent. In the common schools
OF Maine reading in the English language is
one OF the branches taught. If a
chlid between the ages of eight and fifteen
years were sent to private school wherein
reading was taught only in the French Ian
guage and the English language was ex-
cluded, manifestly that school would not
furnish the equivalent of the instruction in
the public schools, and all the children who
attended 1t could be under the law of the
State taken from such school. Thus the
effect of the law would be to break up this
school for sixteen weeks of the year.
The Argus will perceive therefore that the
State of Maine assumes as much control-in
fact much moreover the branches in which
the youth of this State are to be instructed
as the State of Wisconsin in the Bennett
law. Wisconsin assumes the right merely to
compel the instruction of its youth in read
ing, writing, arithmetic and history in the
English language, while Maine assumes the
right to compel its youth to pursue all the
branches taught in the common school, The
Bennett law defines exactly the extent Of
the authority of the State, our statute leaves
1t indefinite and so capable Of very wide ex-
tension.
1t will be seen, therefore, that there is
nothing particularly new about this Wiscon-
sin law. Laws similar to it exist In Maine and
many other states. They all rest upon the
right of the state to supervise the education
of youth. There are two possible grounds
of objection to them; one is that no such
| right as they claim to be based on exists and
| that, therefore, they are usurpations of au-
| thority by the state: the other is that. assum-
| ing such right to exist, they are, or may be.
unwise exercises of it. Both these objec-
| tions are made against the Wisconsin law.
Some who acknowledge the right Of the
| State In this matter regard this particular
law as an unwise exercise of it. But the OBJ
lection made by the great majority goes to
the right itself. "We deny" says the Ro-
man Catholic bishop of Wisconsin, ."to the
state the right to educate the children of
those parents who are willing and able to do
so themselves. If parents want to delegate
the exercise of their inalienabe right to the
state. as those parents do who send their
children to the public schools, the state acts
simply by delegated power as the agent or
functionary of those parents" If this doc
trine is correct of course the State has no
authority to prescribe the branches in which
all children between the ages of eight and
fifteen years shall be taught un-
less the parents of every one of these chill
dren has distinctly delegated to it authority
to do SO, and all the laws of that
import in this country are unconstitutional
because they abridge what the Wisconsin
bishop pronounces the inalenable right of
the parent A few days ago the Argus ap-
| peared to subscribe to this doctrine for it
criticised the Wisconsin law on the ground
that it was "a blow at the personal liberties
of parents to prescribe the manner of the
| education of their children" Yesterday.
however, m seemed inclined to back out of
that position, for it declared that its sole
contention was that the Wisconsin law was
an unwise act. We would respectfully in
ouire of our esteemed contemporary just
what its position is. Does it hold that the
State has no right to supervise the education
ola youth unless authority to do so has been
delegated TO it by the parent Of that youth
Surprising the parents of hundred children
In Portland had delegated to the Catholic
or Protestant clergy what the Bishop of Wis
consin styles their "inalienable right" to
educate their children as they see
fit and the Catholic or Protestant cler-
gy should establish school for the educa-
tion Of those children and decree that the
English language should be excluded from
it and nothing but reading in the French Ian
guage be permitted, would or would not,
in the opinion of the Argus, the State be JUS
titled in interfering and compelling that
school to give instruction the equal of thai
of the public school? This question ad-
mi tegorical answer and we hopt
our esteemed contemporary will give one.