The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-06-01
MISLEADING REASONING.

Quite flood of controversy has been let loose, lately over an alleged. re- mark of Charles M. Schwab to the effect that a young man who goes to work at the age of IS without a col. lege education will be more likely to succeed than the college graduate, as | well as on the comment of The New York Sun thai after the non-graduate had achieved success and wealth The would give all he possessed for a col lege education" In the same connec-, ton is the assertion of Professor Noble. of the University of North Carolina, who declares that "out of every 10000 who do not go to college one rises or attains reputation, while out of every forty college men one achieves success.,"'
 NO doubt there is small modicum of truth in all these statements, but they are grossly misleading. MT. Schwab,s statement is nearer the truth than any others. as applied strictly to men, who do manual labor only. and who expect to devote their lives to such labor. A young man who has little or no educa- ti0n outside that which is necessary to make him skillful with his hands, is mind and time and natural abilities to his work than Is the young man who has a thorough education and is con- stantly wishing and scheming for something different from manual labor. The latter is watching for an oppor- tunity to embark in something 'more respectable than work" as some ex- press it-some occupation or business that will enable him to use his educa- tion and requirements to achieve wealth and success without soiling hls hands or straining his muscles. The non- graduate, on the contrary, know ing himself united for anything but physical labor, will devote all his energies to that and will be a better workman and be more in demand and | obtain better wages than his educated companion at the bench. In short, we apprehend that MT. Schwab's refer
 
 machine, and if so he was correct in saying that such a man would be moro likely to succeed than the college graduate will.
 As for the comment of The Sun we think that is true only to a very llmited extent. If we find a wholly illiterate man who becomes wealthy we can well understand that he would be willing to pay liberally to secure an educa- tion, but that any rich man would give all he possessed for a college edu- cation," is absurd. If The Sun will take census it will not find a wealthy non-graduate in the United States who would give up everything he has for college e-educatIon. Men are not such fools. and the evident assumption that a man must either be an illiterare or a college graduate is ridiculous. A man with fair English education may en- joy riches and everything riches brings if he was never within forty miles of a college.
 And the reasoning or statement of Professor Noble is equally misleading and one sided, because 1t necessarily refers to a class. If his reference had been intended solely for men who adopt learned professions there would be some shadow of truth in it, though even then 1t would not be strictly just. The number of men who have risen to hon. or and eminence in Alabama without the advantages of a collegiate educa- tion would disprove the assumption of Professor Noble, while if We take, all classes of men his figures are totally without foundation. To say that 25O times as many college bred men achieve success in all the walks of life