it is less inclined to be governed according to their wishes and whether their wishes have always been for the interest of the mob?

It is reiterated, especially in France, that when everybody shall be educated no one will desire to perform menial or arduous work, such as that of a domestic or a common laborer with pick and shovel. Assuredly, the diffusion of education will interfere with the present poise of the social strata and individual relations, and will, in addition, influence both the salary and condition of persons. There will be occupations which will offer fewer chances of employment and there will be others in which such chances will abound, but as it is necessary, after all, that almost every human being shall live by work, it is inevitable that each should come to the point where he will be willing not only to accept, but even to seek an occupation by which a living can be made.

Yet these inconveniences are of secondary importance. When the reconstruction is viewed as one whole its grandeur is apparent. It is therefore no exaggeration to say that public instruction has, in certain respects, been the redemption of humanity. If the desire of the savant to be always increasing his knowledge for the perfection of himself is respected, why refuse, even independently of all practical considerations, some knowledge to the great majority of men. In the daily business of life how profitable would it not be to the mass of humanity, made up as it is of men in their character of workers and of citizens, to participate in the living ideas of their times.

When the nineteenth century shall render an account of its work to history it can not say that its own exclusive work in the domain of popular education has settled all social questions. Popular education is not a panacea. Nor is it a sedative, as it sometimes even gives birth to new questions; for, in spite of exceptions that may be named, it tends to enfeeble rather than to strengthen the religious sentiments of the masses whatever may be the particular form of worship concerned. As popular education acts thus because it gives rise to doubt and the spirit of personal investigation, it is asked if the school can replace the church in inspiring the soul with the principles of morality indispensable to social life.

Again, the school is intrusted with the duty of forming the intelligences of the masses and it should give not only elementary instruction, but should also contribute to the making of a manly character and a good citizen. Therefore it is again asked whether it is easy to obtain teachers having the qualities which are necessary to bring about this double end, and whether the pupils in whom manhood and patriotism are to be developed are always sufficiently amenable to the instruction necessary to accomplish the double end.

But let us not despair of the future and let us not turn our backs to it because the present, like every other historical epoch, presents a mixture of good and bad. When the twentieth century shall have half run its course the people of that age will be astonished that the nineteenth century was even able to debate the question of the education of the masses, but they will be thankful that it settled that question, while democracy, whose advancement the school has aided, will thank the century for what it has done.

MUTUAL RELATIONS OF THE SCHOOL, RELIGION, AND THE CHURCH.

There is evidently a connection between the form of worship practiced by a people and its public instruction. In every religion the ministers being concerned especially with the needs of the soul, are naturally prompted to ponder upon the subject of intellectual development, and they have, speaking generally, more influence than any other class of persons in causing schools to be founded and in pursuading parents to send their children to them. Both the Protestants and the Israelites are usually more advanced than the Catholics in this respect, jusi as the Catholics are more advanced than the Greeks, the Mussulmans, and the Buddhists. Almost everywhere the Israelites establish small churches, the members of which are in the habit

of sustaining and supervising their own schools. Among the Protestants it is necessary that tho faithful shall be able to read the Bible in order that cach may seek in it the basis of his faith and the rule for his conduct, and they place the age of confirmation so late in life that the child is retained in school longer than is the case among the Catholics, who, although required to learn the catechism, receive their religious instruction principally from the mouth of the priest and their moral guidance in the confessional. Further on it will be seen that with rare exceptions, the States which have at least 15 children in school for every 100 inhabitants are Protestant or have a majority of Protestants within their borders, while of those States which have fewer than 10 children in school for each 100 inhabitants none are Protestant. Among peoples professing the Greek religion the most advanced nation has only 54 children in school for every 100 inhabitants. Of course this rule is not universal and does not apply to the southern portion of the present German Empire, nor to Algeria, nor to Lower Canada, while the departments in the cast of France show that a Catholic people can rival the Protestants in the matter of school attendance.

Before the Reformation, the school in Christian countries was to some extent the child of the church; when the church had founded a school, she kept it under her control and when some one else had founded an educational institution she invariably demanded the right of directing or at least of supervising it. The cause of this early subordination of the school to the clergy is this: In the Middle Ages the monks (clerks), being almost the only members of society that were educated, were the only persons capable of educating others and from that very fact, education tended especially to form monks. When Protestantism had divided the Christian world the Protestant ministers were compelled to teach the children of their congregations, because the reading of the Bible was necessary for the acceptance of the Protestant faith just as the Catholic priests for the same reason were compelled to teach the catechism. The chief object of education in those times being to make adherents to the Christian religion, both sects were solicitous that instruction should not deviate from the purpose cach had in view, and for this reason the clergy was invested by the civil power with authority over the schools. In very many countries, both Catholic and Protestant, the ministers of religion retained this authority for a long time after the people had determined that instruction properly so called should be the principal aim of the school. Thus, .in France, the first minister of public instruction was a bishop, but from the time of the restoration of the Bourbons (1815) to that of the third Republic (1875) the question of the authority of the Catholic clergy over the public schools was the subject of long and angry debates. M. Guizot, who introduced the law of 1833, while minister of public instruction in the monarchy of that date, writes in his memoirs these sentences: "It was upon the preponderating and united influence of church and state that I counted in striving to found a system of public instruction, yet the dominant fact that opposed my efforts both on the floor of the House of Deputies and throughout the country was precisely a feeling of mistrust and even of hostility toward both the church and state. What was feared for the schools more than anything else, was the influence of the priests and the central power."

This law of 1833 made a place for the curé both on the communal and on the departmental committee. Under the second Republic (1848) the bill of M. Carnot, minister of public instruction, made the school entirely lay, though the amendments made by the constitutional assembly authorized religious instruction outside of school hours. The law of March 15, 1850, however, which was voted under the idea that it was necessary to oppose increasing revolutionary ideas by religious influence, declared that the public school ought always to be open to the minister of the gospel, and assigned an important place to the clergy in the departmental council and in the higher council of public instruction. These provisions, however, though they were in great part inserted in the law of 1873, were omitted in the law of 1879.

Since 1879 there has been no ecclesiastic either sitting in the "councils of instruction" or filling the office of inspector.

The law of 1882 has in France removed from the programme of public education the subject of religious instruction and has replaced it by instruction in morals and civics, has withdrawn from the clergy all right of inspection and of superintendence over schools, whether public or private, and has enacted that religious instruction must be given outside of the schoolhouse. These provisions of the law of 1882 were considered by its authors as obligatory upon the Government, because of the compulsory education feature which the law also contained, for though it was proper to oblige the parent to educate a child, it is improper to compel it to receive instruction in a form of worship not its own. The law of 1882 was completed by the law of October 30, 1886, the seventeenth article of which relates that "in the public schools of every grade instruction is exclusively intrusted to persons not connected with a religious order (exclusivement confié à un personnel laïque).” In this way there have originated in France the public school, compulsory education, free instruction, and laic instruction, which is the very programme that the republican party had formulated before coming into power.

But there are other nations which have maintained in their legislation the tutelage or superintendence of the ecclesiastical authorities over the schools. Thus, in Spain, the law of 1857, still in operation, has expressly stipulated that neither in the public nor in the private schools shall the exercise of the right of the bishops to watch over religious instruction and the purity of faith and manners be impeached in any way. In Russia the parish schools, which form a considerable part of the whole body of educational establishments and whose principal aim is "to strengthen the faith of the people," are under the authority of the Holy Synod, which also administers several other classes of schools, such, for instance, as Sunday schools. It is to be observed, however, that the city schools of Russia are under the minister of public instruction and have no sectarian character.

In Hesse the ministers of the gospel are members of the school council, but neither ecclesiastics nor members of a religious order can direct a public school. In Wurtemberg the schools are under the minister of education and worship, and are sectarian, and the teacher must be of the faith of the majority of the inhabitants. In Bavaria the communal school commission is presided over by the curé or the pastor, and the inspector of the district who formerly was in orders is now ordinarily the oldest [minister] in the district.

In Lutheran Sweden the educational committee in each district is presided over by the pastor of the congregation, and the inspection of the schools is confided to the clergy, but the bishop and the convocation in each diocese inspect the schools and annually report to the King. In Norway the bishop and the oldest pastor supervise the schools, in respect to religious instruction, in concert with the school director. In Denmark the schools are closely connected with the Lutheran Church. In Greece the general supervision of religious instruction and of the moral tendencies of the schools is lodged in the bishop of the diocese (eparchie), and the nomination of the masters who are to teach religion are confirmed by him. In the Province of Quebec, where Catholicism is supreme, though under the monarchy of England, which has a state religion of its own, the council of public education, which partakes with a cabinet minister the administration of the schools, is composed of two committees, one Catholic and one Protestant, each committee having charge of the schools of its own faith. In the Province of Ontario, where Protestantism is supreme, the school is called "unsectarian," and the religious exercises are limited to a prayer and to reading the Bible; but the schools established by the Catholics have in certain cases rights which are analogous to those of the public schools. Among the greater number of the remaining nations of the world there has been for the fifty years last past a very marked movement to separate the school and church. In the Dominion of Canada, Manitoba changed in 1890 an educational

}

law similar to that of Quebec to one which is detrimental to the interests of the Catholic party as far as sectarian schools are concerned. In the United States public schools which were [at a very carly date] sectarian have been for a long time in every State nonsectarian. Prayer and reading the Bible without comment alone are authorized [in a few instances]. Many of the States of the American Union have even made this neutrality one of the articles of their constitution. The Catholic Church in the United States, however, establishes sectarian schools and is striving to secure the adoption of a system analogous in some respects to that which is in vogue in Ontario.

New South Wales in 1880 suppressed all subsidies to sectarian schools. In Victoria the school is divorced from the church except to the extent that twice a week the session is closed earlier than usual and a minister of the gospel replaces the teacher.

In Europe many States had antedated France in adopting the principle of neutrality in religious matters as far as concerns the public elementary school. These countries are Holland, by the law of 1806, the constitution of 1848, and by the laws of 1857 and of 1878; Switzerland by the federal constitution of 1874, which also obliged the parent or guardian in all parts of the republic to educate their children; Austria, by the law of 1869, and Italy, by the law of 1877, which permitted the communes to eliminate from the school programme the subjects of religious instruction, catechism, and sacred history. In Hungary, where Joseph II had already mooted this question by his regulations, where also the revolution of 1848 had proclaimed nonsectarianism only in turn to be disregarded by the reaction of 1852, the communal schools must not be made sectarian unless they are under the care of a religious or other association. In England the grants of the education department are made only to schools which are open to every child irrespective of religious belief, and in which no child shall be called upon to receive instruction in religion against the will of the parents. The schools established by the English school board by virtue of the law of 1870 are nonsectarian, or at least the Bible is read without comment. In Scotland grants are made to schools where the children are not obliged to take part in religious instruction.

In Prussia, where in 1854 religious instruction in the schools became strongly entrenched as a result of the reaction against the revolutionary tendencies of the era of 1848, the law of March 11, 1872, took away from the ecclesiastical authorities the inspection of the schools with which they had previously been endowed, or at least narrowed the sphere of that authority to religious instruction merely, while giving to the Government the supervision of both public and private schools. The same provisions are found in Saxony, where an early law had put the school under the church, but where also a law of 1873 has reserved to the State the right of inspection. It is also the same in the Grand Duchy of Baden, where, after an active opposition, the exclusive right of inspection given by the organic law of 1834 to the clergy was assumed by the State, and in Bavaria, where the ecclesiastical influence has given way twice since 1848 to the authority of the State, the second time in 1866. Thus a marked movement of separation or, at least, of emancipation of the school from the church has taken place. The school now claims to exist for itself and to govern itself by itself. This emancipation has been caused in some Catholic States by an opposition to the Catholic Church because the clergy actively engage in politics, form a party, and thus provoke a feeling of bitterness in their opponents. This antagonism, which is by no means beneficial either in an ethical sense for the authority of the clergy nor for the education of the people, has been particularly manifest in France. But in the majority of States, especially Protestant States, the emancipation has been rather the result of a compromise between the different sects than an open hostility to religious worship. It has been recognized that the schoolmaster, not being able to teach the dogmas and the ritualism of each church, should observe a neutrality which does not imply hostility to the religious sentiment, but

nevertheless gives a disposition to regard the various forms of its manifestation with indifference.

The moral education of the child is one of the principal reasons for the intervention of the church in management of the school. It is said, "Without religion no morality," or at least no foundation on which to form and cultivate a true sense of morality. This assertion is certainly too absolute, since there are many people who are perfectly moral without being faithful adherents of any form of worship; and again people who go through religious forms without being secured against immorality. There have been nations in ancient times, and there are still races in existence, who have nothing more than religious superstitions devoid of an ideal, and yet they are not deprived of a moral sense in their private life and social relations. Still, there is no doubt but the present religions of civilized nations, especially the Christian religion, which on the one hand exhibits the divine origin of duty and on the other the sanction during life and after of good and evil actions, are powerful supports to morals and the consciousness of duty. To abstain from speaking to children of God, of worship, and of duty under pretext of not wishing to interfere with their liberty of conscience is not to be truly impartial, because such restraint will allow the tendency to indifference to implant itself in the soul. Experience shows that the troubles of life are more apt to extinguish religious belief than sceptical indifference is, and from this it would appear that a man who has been bred in the belief of his fathers is not on that account unable after maturity to discard it. But religious instruction of the child and that given under the authority of the church are two distinct things.

RELATIONS OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION AND POLITICS.

"Give me the school and I shall govern public opinion, and through public opinion the state." Thus many legislators have thought. But by being too absolute in their dictum they deceived themselves in as far as they imagined that programmes mold the minds no matter what the sentiments of the people may be. They have been right in thinking that when these two factors are not in direct opposition education can greatly facilitate and generalize the development of certain ideas, and that when education constitutes a national system which is seriously applied it will contribute in giving the nation greater moral cohesion. It was a political idea that inspired the United States when they made great sacrifices in every township, every county, and every State in order to train citizens, and the same idea is the cause of their redoubled efforts to-day to Americanize the children of immigrants through the school. The Swiss Republic, when the Federal constitution imposed compulsory school attendance in all cantons, and the French Republic, when it voted the laws of 1881 and 1882, were both inspired by a political idea of the same nature. It is easy to recognize the ties which connect many other organic laws of primary instruction with politics: The law of 1833 in France, the law of 1859 in the Sardinian States, the law of 1872 in Prussia, and the law of 1868 in Hungary, etc.

In most countries where the mass of the population has a certain participation in the management of public affairs there is a more lively interest in primary instruction displayed than under absolute Governments: Switzerland, the United States, the Canadian Provinces, and Australasian colonies may serve as examples. But one influence may be replaced or paralyzed by others. In Sweden the primary school had its beginning during the reign of absolute monarchs and through the aid of religious influence; on the other hand, in some Republics of Latin America the climate, the divisions which separate the strata of society, the apathy of the Indian race, and revolutions have counteracted the effects of a democracy which is, it must be admitted, more nominal than real.

The colonies which are peopled by the European race rank among the first in primary instruction; for example, Algeria, Upper Canada, New Brunswick, New South Wales, Victoria, and the United States, all which have the same European origin. Perhaps this superiority is due to that origin; for emigration and coloniza