In like manner, it follows that a state that is stable and true to its obligations, must not neglect to provide for the general dissemination of such intelligence, along various lines, as will certainly protect the state against corruption, decay or any of the multitude of evils which the prevalence of ignorance and superstition makes it possible for designing men to bring about.

It further follows, that the loyal citizen is bound to see to it that the young receive such education, within the limits of their capacities, as the state deems necessary to the general welfare. Unless the truth of this last thesis is granted, the whole preceding argument falls. For, after the state has provided every means for training, unless they can be applied to their purpose, the state will still be at the mercy of ignorance. This principle is the chief basis for the enactment of child labor and compulsory education laws. It also involves provision for all expenses of schooling, including the personal needs of children not otherwise provided for.

There can be little doubt but that laxity in regard to these points often defeats the purpose of the state in providing schools at public cost. A system which thus permits the loss of what is expended, by failure to provide in full, is doubly wasteful. No one can justify economy in such matters when the practice of it tends to nullify the results of such heavy public expenditure as any system of public education naturally involves.

The employment of education as an instrumentality by the state implies, perpetually, the existence of trained leaders; it does not imply an aristocracy of learning. It needs no argument to enforce the point that the state must provide teachers for the schools of the people; and if teachers, then teachers of teachers-leaders in the great realms of human thought and achievement. To produce such leaders there must be the university, free and untrammeled in its pursuit of social and scientific truth. Its doors must be open to all who are prepared to assume its burdens. None may be excluded merely because of class; and those who enter and participate in its advantages are thus obligated to return to the state each his due proportion for the training of others.

One of the facts to be deplored concerning much of our higher education to-day, is the tendency to a certain exclusiveness on the part of college trained men, as though they were independent of the soil from which they sprung. This tendency to shirk and even repudiate the obligation which training lays upon a man, is no slight element in the opposition which the masses frequently present to the cause of higher education. The training of men to-day in the great technical schools organized in a group along with colleges for training in the liberal arts and the so-called learned professions, is doing much to eliminate such an abortive conception of the privileges and duties of the educated.

From the standpoint of the state, the degree of intelligence to be sought is to be determined by the complexity and difficulty of the problems involved in the self-government of the people who compose the state. This would seem to be almost axiomatic in a state where the people are to be the court of final appeal in all matters of government. Yet only in a few commonwealths has public opinion risen to the point of demanding even the minimum standard of ability to read and write as a qualification for citizenship. It is just here, perhaps, more than in anything else, that we see the necessity for a positive conception of democracy.

It is not that our people are lacking in an ideal conception of our form of government. Indeed, we may say that the loftiness of this conception is apparent to the world. Its magnetic influence on people of other nations is everywhere recognized. James Bryce, in his American Commonwealth (Vol. II, p. 277), has very aptly stated the case in these words: "If the political education of the average American be compared with the functions which the theory of American Government lays on him, which its spirit implies, which the methods of its party organization assume, its inadequacy is manifest. This observation is not so much a reproach to the schools as a tribute to the height of the ideal which the American conception of popular rule sets up." If our ideal as to our government is correct, then it would appear that our educational standards are far too low. But if our schools are all that we should

expect, then must we be content to lower our standards as to self-government; in other words, we must be content with a partial democracy. This is little less than saying that we need a constitutional monarchy with pretty strong emphasis on centralized authority. In the very nature of the case, we must depend upon popular standards to determine our system of education. If, then, our ideal is to remain a true democracy, we must seek to train to higher educational ideals among those who lead in affairs of state. As Horace Mann has said, “In our country, and in our times, no man is worthy the honored name of a statesman who does not include the highest practicable education of the people in all of his plans of administration."

As a free people we must do our own educating. The state may well encourage sound education when offered on private foundations; but the state may not safely intrust any essential part of its system of schools solely in the hands of individuals or societies. "We hold in America to the doctrine of selfgovernment," says Lyman Abbott; "but we hold as the basis of self-government, self-education; and as we will have no one to rule over us, and determine what our laws shall be, so we will have no one to educate us and determine what our education shall be. Our self-government rests on our self-education." Yet in spite of the simple logic of such a statement, there are not wanting those, even among our political leaders, who argue that there are higher institutions of learning enough without burdening the people for the support of such institutions by the state. These leaders point to our great private and religious institutions, and even to those of Europe, as the ones on which we should depend for all except common school, or, at most, high school training.

At least two European nations have, by their experience, demonstrated the futility as well as the danger of intrusting to the church and to private enterprise the educational interests even of a monarchical state. How much more would such a scheme be impossible in the case of a democracy.

The education involved in the conservation of the state implies not only training for intelligent citizenship, as commonly

accepted, but also training to industry, and to a mastery of those principles involved in the development of a nation's resources. Fundamentally, of course, the state is concerned in intelligent voters, law makers, petty officials of all kinds, in order to insure the proper working of the machinery of government. But the perpetuity of the state does not rest alone in the making and executing and keeping of righteous laws. A people, to be free, must be industrious and self-supporting. More than this, the community must be assured the services of those trained to competency along many lines. This is especially true in matters pertaining to health and sanitation; in the care of the sick and in the suppression of contagions; in the inspection of all structures on whose integrity human life depends; in the development, through scientific treatment, of industries of nation-wide and even world-wide importance, such as agriculture, forestry, canal and railway construction, manufacturing and international commerce. Above all, the state must be assured competent service in the teaching and management of schools and other institutions of learning.

The natural resources of the nation must be developed advantageously to the people, and with such economy as a proper regard for posterity shall demand. In order to do this there must be constant application of the methods and principles of science to the treatment of materials, to the understanding and mastery of such natural forces as may be directed to the service of man directly or as a means of betterment of his surroundings. There must be a study of economic principles and of social problems in the light of all history. Incidentally, languages must be mastered in order to interpret history and to profit by present world experiences. Art must be fostered as an essential phase in the use of natural resources in such a way as to make them minister to all the essential needs of a great people. As R. H. Thurston has put it, "To-day the opportunities, the duties and the victories of peace, rather than war, direct our judgment and our work, and involve the useful employment of all arts and sciences, the utilization of all literatures, of every mental and physical talent, and of all the available energy of man."

Such training in industrial lines as we have here suggested should not, however, be permitted to supplant those liberal elements necessary to training for good citizenship. We cannot lose sight of the fact in this country that every artisan must also be statesman enough to make an intelligent choice of leaders in the affairs of government. To put this in the words of President Hadley: "Technical education is valuable for slave and freeman alike—perhaps even more so for the slave than for the freeman, because the total utility of the slave is represented by what he can do for his employer. Liberal education is necessary to enable man to be a member of a selfgoverning body."

Since some of the results of education are an increase in the efficiency of labor and a development of material resources through the application of science, it naturally follows that the greater wealth thus produced should pay a corresponding royalty for the maintenance of education. Professor R. H. Thurston has demonstrated by a comparison of curves representing the growth of manufacturing industries, wealth and higher education for the past century that these show a remarkable tendency to coincide. Certain it is that the development of science and its application to the problems of the industrial world have made possible much of the vast growth in these fields of human activity. But the application of scientific methods calls for men of higher intelligence to execute the work involved in any industrial enterprise. Hence it may truly be said that the training of the schools has not only given us the instrumentality for advancement at the hands of the scientist, but it has supplied the more intelligent labor necessary to the effective execution of the teachings of the scientist.

This, of course, is a matter for general gratification. It is all in the line of the interests of the state that natural resources be developed for the convenience and blessing of the people of the state. It should not be forgotten, however, that each step in advance not only places new demands upon scientific training, but that this vast accumulation of wealth which is resulting calls for a readjustment of all economic relations. Here again