The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1897-06-22

Free higher education by the
State breeds patriotism. 1t discourages
self-reliance. 1t incucates a false idea
OF potriotism. 1t tells the student to
depend upon the State. 1t tells his
father to look to the State for privileges
five would breed a race of patriots, Of
relf-reliant men and women, we must
ra Their teach them what they must do
for the State, not what they must ex-
pect the State to do for them. Let no
one say that hese institutions are neces-
sary in order to inculcate patriotism.
North Cardinals patriots came out of
her corn-fields.
But there is a far grea ter evil: 1T is
an unjust State or Goddess education.
Higher education aims at the develop
ment Of character Without christianity,
the ideal man Christ, it is dangerous to
the State and to the individual. But
the State cannot hold up this ideal. Pub
lie money cannot be expressed to main
tain christianity. The State must re-
spect its religious minorites. 1t is no
plea Of restrainism, it is no narrowness,
burt it is patriotism that insists that
Christ shall be the ideal in education,
and at the same time protests aginst
the State upholding that ideal. You
cannot do christianity a greater injury
than to establish it, as Constantine
proved. 1t is a shame, not merely upon
common sense, but it is a shame upon
free country, a land whose glory is its
religious liberty, to say that State in
stitut;on is Christian. You cannot make
an institution Christian by giving it's
graduates Bibles. You cannot make an
institution Christian by making its
faculty Christian any more than you can
make State Christian by converting its
officers. If the State must offer higher
education, it must be Goddess.
The State, IN us attempt to give higher
education, is thus confronted with the
alternative of teaching christianity and
being unjust, untrue to the nature of
the State, or of raising up a genration of
skeptics.
cannot have a Christian government.
1t is unlawful, undesirable; we must have
a Christian citizenship.
If you say this argument debars the
State from lower education, l answer,
the free schools never have and never
will get up to teaching christianity. We
look to tese schools for intelligence. We
look to higher education for development
in character.
g. hat is the duty of the State to in
situations of higher education voluntarily
supported?
1t should cherish them. Upon them
depends the higher education of by far
the most of its young men and women.
They represent at least one million Of
dollars contributed freely,
1t should not undertake to compete
with them. For by so doing the State
will obligate itself to destroy them. II
the State offer higher education to few
it must offer to ALL Offering it to all, it
would destroy the Christian colleges.
The State can so endow its institutions
that others cannot resist the inroads Of
State competition. But do not fear this.
The people who have given so freely to
Christian education are aroused: they
will stand by the voluntary institutions.
l have not said any thing in regard to
the technical and normal schools. What
shall say must be to the point. IL the
State has a right to maintain the techni-
cal schools, which, under certain condi-
tions, may be granted, it has no right to
so maintain them that they come into
competition. not only with colleges. bit
academies, which is the case in North
Carolina. So of normal schools. The
State has no right to run normal school
for women in competition with every
female seminary in the State. Let the
technical schools be technical; let the
normal schools be normal.
Finally, let me say that from State
institution standpoint, the voluntary
principle must be preferred. 1t would
encourage the teachings Of christianity.
1t would take the institutions out Of
politics. 1t would encourage growth, in
crease of endowments. Our State .nsti-
tutions will never be great institutions so
long as the State maintains them. The
State cannot spare them enough money
to make them great; philanthropists will
not largely endow them so long as the
State treasury is behind them. The
voluntary principle will, moreover, put
higher institutions upon fair basis and
promote wholesome competition. The
great institutions are vo!untary-Yale,
Harvard, Princeton, Brown, Chicago,
Lelaird, Stamford.
This is a discussion of the subject
from the standpoint of a large number
of plain thinking people. They are con-
fdent this view will prevail. They are
struggling to establish the voluntary