We fijid, then, that the verdict given by the law of state- duty against a public provision for the indigent is enforced by sundry independent considerations. A critical analysis of the alleged rights, for upholding which a poor-law is defended, shows them to be fictitious. Nor does the plea that a poor-law is a means of distributing compensation for wrongs done to the disinherited people turn out to be valid. The assumption that only by law- administered relief can physical destitution be met, proves to be quite analogous to the assumption that spiritual destitution ne- cessitates a law- administered reUgion; and consistency requires those who assert the sujBBiciency of voluntary effort in the one case to assert it in the other also. The substitution of a me- chanical charity for charity prompted by the heart is manifestly unfavourable to the growth of men's sympathies, and therefore adverse to the process of adaptation. Legal bounty further retards adaptation by intei-posing between the people and the conditions to which they must become adapted, so as partially POOR-LAWS. 329 POOR-LAWS. 329 to suspend those conditions. And, to crown all, we find, not only that a poor-law must necessarily fail to diminish popular suffering, but that it must inevitably increase that suffering, both directly by checking the production of commodities, and indirectly by causing a retrogression of character, which painful discipline must at some future day make good.
CHAPTEE XXVI.
KATIONAL EDUCATION, In the same way that our definition of state-duty forhids the state to administer religion or chaiity, so Ukewise does it for- bid the state to administer education. Inasmuch as the taking away, by government, of more of a man's property than is need- ful for maintaining his rights, is an infringement of his rights, and therefore a reversal of the government's function towards him; and inasmuch as the taking away of his property to edu- cate his own or other people's children is not needful for the maintaining of his rights; the taking away of his property for such a purpose is %vroug.
Should it be said that the rights of the children are involved, and that state-interposition is required to maintain these, the reply is that no cause for such intei-position can be shown until the childi-en's rights have been violated, and that thek rights are not violated by a neglect of their education. For, as re- peatedly explained, what we call rights are merely arbitrary subdivisions of the general liberty to exercise the faculties; and that only can be called an infringement of rights which actually diminishes this Uberty — cuts off a previously existing power to pui-sue the objects of desire. Now the parent who is careless of a child's education does not do tliis. The hberty to exercise the faculties is left intact. Omitting instruction in no way takes fi-om a child's freedom to do whatsoever it wills in the NATIONAL EDUCATION. 331 best way it can; and this freedom is all that equity demands. Every aggression, be it remembered — every infraction of rights, is necessarily active; whilst evei7 neglect, carelessness, omis- sion, is as necessarily passive. Consequently, however wrong the non-performance of a parental duty may be — however much it is condemned hy that secondary morahty — the moraUty of be- neficence (pp. 68 and 69) — it does not amount to a breach of the law of equal freedom, and cannot therefore be taken cognizance of by the state.
Were there no direct disproof of the frequently alleged right to education at the hands of the state, the absurdities in which it entangles its assertors would sufficiently show its invahdity. Conceding for a moment that the government is bound to edu- cate a man's children, then, what kind of logic will demonstrate that it is not bound to feed and clothe them? If there should be an act-of-parliament provision for the development of their minds, why should there not be an act-of-parhament provision for the development of their bodies? If the mental wants of the rising generation ought to be satisfied by the state, why not thek physical ones? The reasoning wliich is held to estabUsh the right to intellectual food, will equally well establish the right to material food: nay, will do more — will prove that chil- dren should be altogether cared for by government. For if the benefit, importance, or necessity of education be assigned as a sufficient reason why government should educate, then may the benefit, importance, or necessity of food, clothing, shelter, and warmth be assigned as a sufficient reason why government should administer these also. So that the alleged right can- not be established without annulling all parental responsibihty whatever.
Should further refutation be thought needful, there is the ordeal of a definition. We lately found this ordeal fatal to the assumed right to a maintenance; we shall find it equally fatal to this assumed right to education. For what is an education?
332 NATIONAL EDUCATION.
Where, between the teaching of a dame-school, and the most comprehensive university curriculum, can be drawn the line separating that portion of mental culture which may be justly claimed of the state, from that which may not be so claimed? What pecuhar quahty is there in reading, writing, and arithmetic, which gives the embryo citizen a right to have them imparted to him, but which quahty is not shared in by geography, and history, and drawing, and the natural sciences? Must calcu- lation be taught because it is useful? why so is geometry, as the cai-penter and mason will tell us; so is chemistiy, as we may gather from dyers and bleachers; so is physiology, as is abundantly proved by the ill-health written in so many faces. Astronomy, mechanics, geology, and the various connate sciences — should not these be taught, too? they are all useful. Where is the unit of measure by which we may determine the re- spective values of different kinds of knowledge? Or, assuming them determined, how can it be shown that a child may claim fi-om the civil power knowledge of such and such values, but not knowledge of certain less values? Wlien those who demand a state-education can say exactlj' how much is due — can agree upon what the young have a right to, and what not — it will be time to Hsten. But until they accomplish tliis impossibility, then' plea cannot be entertained.
A sad snare would these advocates of legislative teaching betray themselves into, could they substantiate their doctrine. For what is meant by saying that a government ought to edu- cate the people? why should they be educated? what is the education for? Clearly to fit the people for social life— to make them good citizens. And who is to say what are good citizens? The government: there is no other judge. Ajad ■who is to say how these good citizens may be made? The government: there is no other judge. Hence the proposition is convertible into tliis — a government ought to mould children NATIONAL EDUCATION. 333 into good citizens, using its own discretion in settling what a good citizen is, and how' the child may be moulded into one. It must first fonn for itself a definite conception, of a pattern citizen; and having done this, must elaborate such system of discipline as seems best calculated to produce citizens after that pattern. This system of discipUne it is bound to enforce to the uttermost. For if it does otherwise, it allows men to become different from what in its judgment they should become, and therefore fails in that duty it is charged to fulfil. Being thus justified in can-ying out rigidly such plans as it thinks best, every government ought to do what the despotic governments of the Continent and of China do. That regulation under which, in France, " private schools cannot be established without a licence from the minister, and can be shut up by a simple ministerial order," is a step in the right direction, but does not go far enough; seeing that the state cannot permit its mission to be undertaken by others, without en- dangering the due performance of it. The forbidding of all private schools whatever, as until recently in Prussia, is nearer the mark. Austrian legislation, too, realizes with some con- sistency the state-education theory. By it a tolerably stringent control over the mental culture of the nation is exercised. Much thinking being held at variance with good citizenship, the teaching of metaphysics, political economy, and the like, is discouraged. Some scientific works are prohibited. And a reward is ofiered for the apprehension of those who circulate bibles — the authorities in the discharge of their function pre- ferring to entrust the interpretation of that book to their em- ployes the Jesuits. But in China alone is the idea carried out with logical completeness. There the government pubhshes a Ust of works which may be read; and considering obedience the supreme virtue, authorizes such only as are friendly to des- potism. Fearing the unsettling effects of innovation, it allows nothing to be taught but what proceeds from itself To the end of producing pattern citizens it exerts a stringent discipline over all conduct. There are " rules for sitting, standing, walk- 334 NATIONAL EDUCATION.
ing, talking, and bowing, laid down -with the greatest precision. Scholars are prohibited from chess, football, flying kites, shuttle- cock, playing on wind instruments, training beasts, birds, fishes, or insects — all -(vhich amusements, it is said, dissipate the mind and debase the heart."
Now a minute dictation like this, which extends to every action, and will brook no nay, is the legitimate realization of this state-education theory. Whether the government has got erroneous conceptions of what citizens ought to be, or whether the methods of training it adopts are injudicious, is not the question. According to the hypothesis it is commissioned to discharge a specified function. It finds no ready-prescribed way of doing this. It has no alternative, therefore, but to choose that way which seems to it most fit. And as there exists no liigher authority, either to dispute or confirm its judg- ment, it is justified in the absolute enforcement of its plans, be they what they may. As from the proposition that government ought to teach rehgion, there springs the other proposition, that government must decide what is religious truth, and how it is to be taught; so, the assertion that government ought to educate, necessitates the fuither assertion that it must say what education is, and how it shall be conducted. And the same rigid popery, which we found to be a logical consequence in the one case (p. 307), follows in the other also.
There are few sayings more trite than this, that love of offspring is one of our most powerful passions. To become a parent is an almost universal wish. The intensity of affec- tion exhibited in the ghstening eye, the warm kiss, and the fondling cai-ess — in the untiring patience, and the ever ready alarm of the mother, is a theme on which philosophers have written and poets have sung in all ages. Every one has remarked how commonly the feeling overmasters all others. Observe the self-gratulation with which maternity witnesses NATIONAL EDUCATION. 335 her first-bom's unparalleled achievements. Mark the pride ■with which the performances of each little brat are exhibited to every visitor as indicating a precocious genius. Consider again the deep interest which in later days a father feels in his children's mental welfare, and the anxiety he manifests to get them on in life; the promptings of his natm'al affection being ofttimes sharpened by the reflection that the comfort of his old age may, perchance, be dependent upon their success.
Now " servants and interpreters of nature " have usually supposed these feeUngs to be of some use. Hitherto they have always thought that the gratification accruing to a mother from the forwardness of her httle ones serves as a stimulus to the proper culture of their minds — that the honour which the father expects to derive from the distinction of his sons acts as an incentive to their improvement — and that the anticipation by parents of the distress which ill-trained children may one day entail constitutes an additional spur to the proper manage- ment of them. In these strong affections and mutual depend- encies observers believed they saw an admirably-arranged chain of influences, calculated to secure the mental and physical development of successive generations; and in the simpUcity of their faith had concluded that these divinely- appointed means were fully sufficient for this purpose. It would appear, however, according to the state-educationists, that they have been mistaken. It seems that this apparatus of feeUngs is whoUy insufficient to work out the desideratum — that this combination of affections and interests was not provided for such a purpose, or, what is the same thing, tliat it has no purpose at aU. And so, in default of any natural provision for supplying the exigency, legislators exhibit to us the design and specification of a state-machine, made up of masters, ushers, inspectors, and councils, to be worked by a due proportion of taxes, and to be plentifully supplied with raw material, in the shape of httle boys and girls, out of wluch it is to grind a population of well-trained men and women, who shall be "useful members of the community"!
336 NATIONAL EDUCATION.
But it is argued that parents, and especially those whose children most need instructing, do not know what good iustraction is. " In the matter of education," says ]\Ir. Mill, " the inten'ention of government is justifiable; because the case is one in which the interest and judgment of the con- sumer axe not sufficient secuiity for the goodness of the commodity."
It is strange that so judicious a writer should feel satisfied with such a worn-out excuse. This alleged incompetency on the part of the people has been the reason assigned for all state-interferences whatever. It was on the plea that buyers were unable to teU good fabrics from bad, that those compli- cated regulations which encumbered the French manufacturers were estabUshed. The use of certain dyes here in England was prohibited, because of the insufficient discernment of the people. Directions for the proper making of pins were issued, under the idea that experience would not teach the purchasers which were best. Those examinations as to competency which the German handicraftsmen undergo, are held needful, as safeguards to the consumers. A stock argument for the state-teaching of religion has been that the masses cannot distinguish false religion from true. There is hardly a single department of life over which, for similar reasons, legislative supervision has not been, or may not be, established. Here is Mr. H. Hodson Eugg, M.K.C.S., pubUshing a pamphlet to point out the injury inflicted upon poor ignorant householders by the adulteration of milk, and proposing as a remedy that there shall be government officers to test the milk, and to confiscate it when not good — police to inspect the ventilation of cow-sheds, and to order away invalid cattle — and a government cow-infirmary, with veterinary surgeon attached. To-morrow some one else may start up to teU us that bad bread is still more injurious than bad milk, equally common, quite as diffi- NATIONAL EDUCATION. 337 cult to distinguish, and that, consequently, bakehouses ought to be overlooked by the authorities. Next there will be wanted officials with hydrometers and chemical re-agents, to dabble in the vats of the porter-breweries. In the wake of these must, of course, follow others, commissioned to watch the doings of wine merchants. And so on, until, in the desire to have all processes of production duly inspected, we approach a condition somewhat Uke that of the slave states, in which, as they say, " one-half of the community is occupied in seeing that the other half does its duty." And for each additional interference the plea may be, as it always has been, that " the interest and judgment of the consumer are not sufficient security for the goodness of the commodity."
Should it be said that the propriety of legislative control depends upon circumstances; that respecting some articles the judgment of the consumer is sufficient, whilst respecting other articles it is not; and that the difficulty of deciding upon its quality, places education amongst these last; the reply again is, that the same has been said on behalf of all meddlings in turn. Plenty of trickeries, plenty of difficulties in the detection of fraud, plenty of instances showing the inability of purchasers to protect themselves, are quoted by the advocates of each proposed recourse to official regulation; and in each case it is urged that here, at any rate, official regulation is required. Yet does experience disprove these inferences one after ano- ther, teaching us that, in the long run, the interest of the consumer is not only an efficient guarantee for the goodness of the things consumed, but the best guarantee. Is it not un- wise, then, to trust for the hundredth time in one of these plausible but deceptive conclusions? Is it not rational, rather, to infer, that however much appearances are to the contrary, the choice of the commodity — education, Uke the choice of all other commodities, may be safely left to the discretion of buyers?
StUl more reasonable will this inference appear on observing that the people are not, after aU, such incompetent judges of z 388 NATIONAL EDUCATION.
education as they seem. Ignorant parents are generally quick enough to discern the effects of good or bad teaching; will note them in the children of others, and act accordingly. Moreover it is easy for them to follow the example of the better instructed, and choose the same schools. Or they may get over the difficulty by asking advice; and there is generally some one both able and wilUng to give the uneducated parent a trustworthy answer to his inquiry about teachers. Lastly, there is the test of price. With education, as with other things, price is a tolerably safe index of value; it is one open to all classes; and it is one which the poor instinctively appeal ■ to in the matter of schools; for it is notorious that they look coldly at very cheap or gratuitous instruction.
But even admitting that, whilst this defect of judgment is not virtually so extreme as is alleged, it is nevertheless great, the need for interference is still denied. The evil is under- goiug rectification, as all analogous ones are or have been. The rising generation wiU better understand what good educa- tion is than their parents do, and their descendants will have clearer conceptions of it still. Whoso thinks the slowness of the process a sufficient reason for meddling, must, to be con- sistent, meddle in all other things; for the ignorance which in every case serves as an excuse for state-interposition is of very gradual cure. The errors both of consumers and producers often take generations to set right. Improvements in the carrying on of commerce, in manufactures, and especially in agriculture, spread almost imperceptibly. Take rotation of crops for an example. And if this tardiness is a valid argu- ment for interference in one case, why not in others? Why not have farms superintended by government, because it may take a century for farmers generally to adopt the plans sug- gested by modern science?
Did we duly realize the fact that society is a growth, and not a manufactm-e — a thing that makes itself, and not a thing that can be artificially made — we should fall into fewer mis- takes; and we should see that amongst other imperfections NATIONAL EDUCATION. 339 this incompetence of the masses to distinguish good instruction from bad, is being outgrown.
When in the matter of education " the interest and judg- ment of the consumer" are said not to be " sufficient security for the goodness of the commodity," and when it is argued that government superintendence is therefore needful, a very questionable assumption is made: the assumption, namely, that "the interest and judgment" of a government are sufficient security. Now there is good reason to dispute this, nay, even to assert that, taking the future into account, they offer much less security.
The problem is, how best to develop minds: a problem amongst the most difficult — may we not say, the most difficult? Two things are needful for its solution. First, to know what minds should be fashioned into. Next, to know how they may be so fashioned. From the work to be done, turn we now to the proposed doers of it. Men of education (as the word goes) they no doubt are; well-meaning, many of them; thoughtful, some; philosophical, a few; men, however, for the most part, bom with silver spoons in their mouths, and prone to regard human affairs as reflected in these — somewhat dis- tortedly. Very comfortable lives are led by the majority of them, and hence "things as they are" find favour iu their eyes. For their tastes — they are shown in the subordination of na- tional business to the shooting of grouse and the chasing of foxes. For their pride — it is in wide estates or long pedigrees; and should the family coat of arms bear some such ancient motto as " Strike hard," or, " Furth fortune, and fill the fetters," it is a great happiness. As to their ideal of society, it is either a sentimental feudalism; or it is a state, something Uke the present, under which the people shall be respectful to their betters, and " content with that station of life to which it has pleased God to call them; " or it is a state arranged with 340 NATIONAL EDUCATION.
the -view of making each labourer the most efficient producing tool, to the end that the accumulation of wealth may be the greatest possible. Add to this, that theii- notions of moral discipline are shown in the maintenance of capital punishment, and in the sending of their sons to schools where flogging is practised, and where they themselves were brought up. Now could the judgment of such respecting the commodity — educa- tion be safely relied on? Certainly not.
Still less might their "interest" be trusted. Though at variance with that of the people, it would inevitably be followed in preference. The self-seeking which, consciously or uncon- sciously, sways rulers in other cases, would sway them in this likewise — could not fail to do so, whilst the character of men is what it is. With taxation unequally distributed, with such a glaringly unjust apportionment of representatives to popula- tion, with a nepotism that fiUs lucrative places with Greys and Elliots, with a sttiff of a hundred admirals more than are wanted, with lavish pensions to the undeserving, with a system of retrenchment which discharges common men and retains ofiBcers, and with such votes as those given by the military, the naval, the landed, and the clerically-related members of parliament, we may be quite sure that a state-education would be administered for the advantage of those in power, rather than for the advantage of the nation. To hope for anything else is to fall into the old error of looking for grapes fi-om thorns. Nothing can be more truly Utopian than expecting that, with men and things as they are, the influences which have vitiated iall other institutions would not vitiate this one.
Thus,.even were it true that in the matter of education " the interest and judgment of the consumer are not sufficient security for the goodness of the commodity," tlie wisdom of superseding them by the "interest and judgment" of a govern- ment is by no means obvious. It may, indeed, be said that the argument proves only the unfitness of existing governments to become national teachers, and not the unfitness of a govern- ment normally constituted: whereas the object of inquiry NATIONAL EDUCATION. 341 being to determine what a government should do, the hypo- thesis must be that the government is what it should be. To this the reply is, that the nature of the allegation to he met necessitates a descent to the level of present circumstances. It is on the defective " interest and judgment" of the people, as they now are, that the plea for legislative superintendence is based; and, consequently, in criticising this plea we must take government as it now is. We cannot reason as though go- vernment were what it should be; since, before it can become so, any alleged deficiency of "interest and judgment" on the part of the people must have disappeared.
The impohcy of setting up a national organization for cul- tivating the popular mind, and commissioning the government to superintend this organization, is further seen in the general tnith that every such organization is in spirit conservative, and not progressive. - All institutions have an instruct of self- preservation growing out of the selfishness of those connected with them. Being dependent for their vitality upon the con- tinuance of existing an-angements, they naturally uphold these. Their roots are in the past and the present; never in the future. Change threatens them, modifies them, eventually destroys them; hence to change they are uniformly opposed. On the other hand, education, properly so called, is closely associated with change — is its pioneer — is the never-sleeping agent of revolution — is always fitting men for higher things, and Mwfitting them for things as they are. Therefore, between institutions whose very existence depends upon man continuing what he is, and true education, which is one of the instruments for making him something other than he is, there must always be enmity.
From the time of the Egyptian priesthood downwards, the conduct of corporations, whether poHtical, ecclesiastical, or edu- cational, has given proof of this. Some 300 years B.C., un-