THE HIGH SCHOOL QUESTION.

ADDRESS AT THE DEDICATION OF THE INDIANAPOLIS HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING, 1885. BY JOHN W. HOLCOMBE.

Superintendent of Public Instruction of Indiana.

The high school argument has been made, the fight has been fought in this State and the high school is accepted as an essential part of our common school system. Yet, as we have been advised that we ought often to re-examine the grounds of our beliefs, however well settled, such an occasion as this ought not to pass without some inquiry into the principles upon which our public education in its different parts and institutions is based. The question is a large one, and but a small part of it can be gone over in the time allowed this evening,

The familiar proposition that the state has a right to educate because intelligence is essential to good citizenship-from which it follows that it has a right to educate only so far as may be necessary to make good citizens-certainly needs re-examination. That the justification of the state's expenditures for education is the necessity of securing intelligence among the people, so that they will in turn preserve and maintain the state, is an inversion of ideas and an argument at variance with the genius of our institutions.

For what is the state? The French King, inheritor and perfector of an autocratic despotism, said: "The state, that is I!" The Spartans conceived the state as the corporate unity of all, absorbing into itself all powers, all rights, before which the individual stood stripped of every essential attribute of personal liberty. The French King might have said consistently: "If I give my people a certain kind of training it will be to the advantage of the state, and that is my advantage. I will give it to them. May I not do that I will with mine own?" The Spartan Government in effect said this. It assumed control of every citizen in his childhood and relaxed not its hold till old age, training his heart in devotion to Sparta, his intellect in cunning for her service, his body in the hardships, discipline, and tactics of war, for her aggrandizement and defence, regulating his domestic relations, practically destroying his private life-and all for the state, nothing for the man.

But with us, what is the state? Is it the governor-to-day one man, to-morrow another? Or is it the entire body of men who administer the public business-State, county, city, town, and township officers, including school trustees and superintendcuts? But perhaps it were safer not to attempt a precise definition of our notion of the state. It is at any rate very different from the Spartan's, still more different from the French king's. It is the res publica, the commonwealth, the interests that are public and common to all the people. What these interests are, after the few general classes always entrusted to the governing agency, may give rise to differences of opinion. Various socialistic and communistic theories are based upon the belief that the control of government should be extended over a greater or less number of interests beyond those usually committed to it. But, in this country at least, the maintenance of schools is undertaken by society in its corporate capacity, either as the State, the town, or the district; the property of all contributes to the common education. In this we are communists; but we are a practical people, and do not take fright at names. A communistic practice that proves to be of general advantage we adopt. But, if the distinction be appreciable, the people establish and support schools not in their political capacity, but in their corporate social capacity.

The support of education at the public expense is justified on the grounds of utility, economy, and the general good, without special reference to civic duties. From the general diffusion of knowledge results, of course, a higher citizenship, better government, a more perfect state; but to say that the state educates the people to make them good citizens is to substitute effect for cause.

May we not say instead, "The people, wishing to give their children and to secure to the community the benefits of education, find that they can do this cheapest and best and with greatest advantage to society by means of free common schools?" There is the all-sufficient justification of the system. No need to elaborate strained theories as to the right and power of the sovereign State. It is a purely economic and social question, not hard to understand.

It will not be doubted that the average taxpayer secures the education of his children in the public schools cheaper than he could in private schools. The amount he pays in school taxes is less than he would otherwise pay in tuition for equal advantages. This is true of the large majority, the people of small and moderate means. The system is justified to them on the score of economy.

The case is somewhat different with the wealthy. The greater their wealth, the larger their tax. A few contribute far beyond the mere cost of educating their own children. Some also have no children, and yet must contribute in proportion to their property. Do these receive any return commensurate with their outlay? They do,

beyond a doubt. They are benefited in their property. What would be the shrinkage in values in this city if the public schools were forever swept away? The panic of 73 would not compare with it. If property holders reflect well on this point they will never complain of the school taxes.

But many contribute nothing-the poor who pay no taxes. To them the free schools are a precious boon, affording to their children the means of escape from poverty and crime.

Ignorance and poverty are inseparable. Careful calculations based on the statistics of several States show that a common school education adds 50 per cent. to the productive power of the laborer, an academic education 100 per cent., a collegiate education from 200 to 300 per cent. Also, that of the illiterate about 1 in 10 is a pauper, while of the educated the paupers are but 1 in 300. Whence it may be inferred that ignorance is the very probable road to poverty, while education is the almost certain way to competence.

The statistics of crime are not less instructive. An examination of the returns of twenty States shows that one-sixth of the crime is committed by persons wholly illiterate, one-third by persons wholly and substantially so, and that in proportion to numbers there are ten times as many criminals among the illiterate as among the educated.

Property holders can, therefore, well afford to maintain schools in which the nontaxpayers enjoy equal privileges; for if the ontlay for this purpose were cut down to any great extent, it is not rash to say that for every dollar so saved two would be paid for the support of paupers and the punishment of criminals. Thus the free school is again justified to the taxpayer on the score of economy alone.

But there are other considerations. Cyrus the Younger said that the greatest ornament to a prince was to be surrounded by prosperous and happy friends. So we may say that the greatest ornament to a citizen is to live in the midst of prosperous and intelligent fellow-citizens. The greatest addition to his dignity, his personal and social privileges, his opportunity for an elevated enjoyment of life, is secured by residence in a cultivated community. Such a community can be created only by the general diffusion of knowledge; for the average can not be high if a large number be left in ignorance.

But while admitting the need and utility of free schools affording instruction in the elementary branches of learning, many doubt the advantage to society at large, and hence the right of society to maintain the high school. It can be supported, they say, only in cities and towns, and in these it is reached by but a small proportion of the pupils; so the people ought not to be taxed to sustain an institution so limited and so partial in its benefits.

The charge that the entire State is taxed to support high schools in cities and towns may be answered by a general denial. In nearly every instance the high school is entirely supported by the community which enjoys its benefits. This city, for instance, with a lower rate of taxation than is permitted to townships and towns, not only maintains her entire graded system for nearly ten months in the year, but out of her abundance contributes many thousand dollars for the payment of teachers throughout the State. The aggregation of wealth here produces a large revenue, the aggregation of population makes it possible to furnish instruction at a less rate per pupil than in the country. The same is true of all centers of population in proportion to their wealth and numbers.

But confining the question within the city limits, can we justify the maintenance of the high school, which is patronized by so few? I think we can.

The term high school is perhaps misleading, as suggesting a school different in kind and separate in some way from the grades below, which are often spoken of as the common schools. Such is not the case. The high school is as much common in every proper sense as the lowest primary grade. In the words of the constitution, it is equally open to all and tuition in it is without charge. It is merely the continuation, without break or interruption, of the graded course of study as far as the number of pupils desiring advanced instruction will justify its being carried. Upon what other principle can the course of study be abridged? There are but half as many pupils in the fifth year as in the first primary. If those grades only are to be kept up which accommodate the greatest number, an average might be struck and all above the fifth year abolished.

By the immemorial custom and law of the English-speaking race the age of majority is fixed at twenty-one years. All our institutions, statutes, and social arrangements tally with that theory. So it is held that a person is entitled to school privileges till he is twenty-one years of age. As Socrates would have asked, Is he entitled to receive instruction suited to his advancement or not suited to it? The answer is obvious, as to most of Socrates's questions. As the conditions of life adjust themselves the larger number of pupils in the schools will be young, under fourteen; but many will remain after that age; some will be willing to remain as long as they can receive instruction suited to their needs. Such instruction should be furnished whenever a

sufficient number desire it. It should not be a question of the grade but of the number of pupils. If this be sufficiently large to justify the employment of teachers and assignment of rooms for their benefit, they ought to be accomodated. It is not appreciably more expensive to provide for fifty pupils instruction in advanced studies than to teach the same number the elementary branches.

This principle applies to all times and places. The country district is not prevented from maintaining higher grades by lack of money, but by lack of numbers. When the numbers are collected the money is forthcoming. As a neighborhood becomes thickly settled the district school expands into a graded school, growing as the population grows; and as the village becomes a town and the town a city the school develops into a graded system, the higher departments, in such a city as this, surpassing in variety and extent many colleges of fifty years ago.

Even on the citizen-making theory the high school can not be dispensed with. Reading, writing, and arithmetic may qualify a man to cast an intelligent vote, if he uses these acquirements to advantage; but the collective citizenship of the State must furnish much more than voters. The citizen is now a voter, now a legislator, now a judge, and now a governor. If the State undertakes to make good citizens she must give the men who will fill all the positions incident to citizenship the means of qualifying themselves for their duties.

But whatever theory we may prefer, the return to the public and to every individual upon an investment in a high school is rich and abundant. It is a center of elevating influences, drawing up, all the lower schools, awakening the ambition of the young, and making for the ambitious a way to the "career open to talent." More than any other agency it raises the average intelligence and the general tone of thought and manners, sending into the homes of the people disciplined minds, enlarged views, refined tastes, and somewhat of that admirable but indefinable condition of mind and heart called culture-qualities belonging to the realm of infinite values, not to be measured in gold;-making "the poor man's hour of leisure richer than the baron's of old time." The high school is essential to the dignity of the city and the well-being of the citizens.

THE RAISON D'ÊTRE OF THE PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL.1

BY GEORGE STUART, A. M.,

Professor of Latin in the Central High School of Philadelphia.

Our ordinary ideas of the ground on which the public high school rests and of its relation to the body politic are too often loose and shifting. At one moment the institution is regarded as the result of a kind of benevolence on the part of the state, and the money appropriated for its support as a public gratuity. At another, the institution is looked upon as one in which the children of a well-to-do favored few may, for their own individual advantage or distinction, add a few finishing touches or some ornamental appendages to the education acquired in the lower schools. Too rarely is the public high school regarded as an essential part of the social structure, and in the same sense in which halls of legislation and of justice or systems of police are parts of the same structure.

To fix and focalize our loose and shifting ideas on this subject, let us ask and answer the following questions: 1. What is the reasonable ground upon which the public high school rests? 2. What is its relation to the body politic? 3. What are its functions and how should it perform them?

In what we have to say on this whole subject, let it be understood that by body politic we mean a government of the people, for the people, and by the people," and that reasoning which may be irrefragable when used in reference to such a government may fail utterly when applied to other forms of government; and that by public high school we mean any public institution imparting superior as distinguished from elementary instruction; and that institution in which the principles of art, literature, and science are explored to their farthest limits is our ideal public high school, whether it be called academy, school, college, or university.

The application of the argument herein presented is necessarily limited to a popular government; for under other forms of government there are privileged classes, with class prerogatives and strongly guarded barriers separating the classes. But it is the peculiar glory of a free people that the individuals of whatever classes exist pass freely from class to class, or rather gravitate from class to class under the attraction of conspicuous fitness, and he who is governed to-day may be a governor to

morrow.

Reprinted from Education, January, 1888.

What, then, is the reasonable ground on which the public high school rests? We shall begin the answer by showing that the state does not establish charitable or benevolent institutions from motives of charity or benevolence. On the contrary, the principal motive is undoubtedly selfishness. In proof of this assertion it is not necessary to say that charity can not be predicated of states or that corporations are soulless. The state simply aims at compassing a certain end for its own well-being. It cares not whether A or B is to be the beneficiary; its purpose is that those who are to be beneficiaries shall be the best fitted to be beneficiaries. It recognizes that there always will be beneficiaries entailing burdens and discomforts upon the citizens, and it believes that it is best for the body politic not to leave to chance the relief of such persons; and, notwithstanding the expense incurred, society is the gainer in decency, in comfort, and in safety. The state neither gives, nor has the right to give, value for nothing. It always expects at least an equivalent; and if the equivalent be not received, or forthcoming, it either miscalculates or is defrauded. The existence of private charitable and benevolent institutions does not alter the case with the state; these depend on chance, upon which society must not depend; and thus while they lessen, they do not remove public responsibility.

We shall next observe that the state does not establish prisons and penitentiaries from motives of vindictiveness. Here again the principal motive is selfishness. The state does not care one whit whether A or B is to be imprisoned; its intention is that those who are to be imprisoned shall be the best fitted to be prisoners. It recognizes that the violation of law and the commission of crime will be constant, and it believes that it is best for society not to leave to chance the removal of this constant menace to its well-being; and notwithstanding the expense incurred in supporting penal institutions, society is the gainer in good order, peace, and safety. The exist ence of private reformatory institutions does not alter the case with the state. Such institutions aid in the work of repression and reform; but the state believes that, while they lessen, they can not remove public responsibility, and it finds solid foun dation for its belief in the irresponsible atrocities of lynch law and vigilance cominittees.

Similar arguments may easily be framed in defense of other institutions established by the body politic for its own well-being; as the lazaretto, quarantine, public sanitation, illumination of cities, coinage of money, regulation of commerce, etc. In each instance the decision of the state is that the welfare of society demands that the object which the institution has in view shall not be left to chance, whatever private enterprise may contribute to its accomplishment.

It is wholly in recognition of public responsibility that common schools are established by the state, and the almost universal consent with which this responsibility is acknowledged is evidence of its weight. Equality of civic rights, equality of civic responsibilities, and equality of civic duties belong to all the citizens of a free state. Without a full enjoyment of rights, a full comprehension of responsibilities, and a full discharge of duties, either the state or the citizen suffers. If the state suffers, the rights of all are menaced; if the citizen suffers, his equality is impaired. Hence the citizen must know; he must receive the elements of education; his intelligence must be awakened and his mind developed; he must learn his relation to the body politic, and while he learns how to enjoy his civic rights, he must also learn not to neglect his civic responsibilities and his civic duties. Hence the popular verdict is that the education of free citizens for citizenship can not be left to chance, and that the public school system stands in precisely the same relation to the body politic as other great institutions established for the well-being and safety of society. The existence of numerous private schools can not alter the case with the state; these aid in the dissemination of knowledge and the broadening of intelligence, and, while they lighten, they can not remove public responsibility. They are schools for such of that small, rich minority as may prefer them. The failure of any state to establish free public schools lessens the citizen's responsibility. But recently, in a European city, during the prevalence of the cholera, some soldiers sent to apply disinfectants as a means of sanitation were assailed and either killed or wounded by an ignorant and superstitious mob, who imagined that the disinfectants were in some strange way responsible for the cholera. Such ignorance and superstition can not exist by the side of the free public school. The pupils of such a school soon learn that Heaven never helps a man when he can help himself, and that it is vain at such a time to pray against the force of inertia.

At this point we make the digressive remark that the efficiency of the American public school in training for citizenship is likely to be severely tested in the near future. Until within recent years, the immigration into our country was nearly homogeneous and largely sympathetic, and assimilation was comparatively easy. But recently there has appeared in our midst an element peculiarly alien in race and sympathies, or revolutionary in tendencies, and in numbers sufficiently large to disturb the calm posture of our social forms and the settled traditions of centuries. Against the subversive influence of this element our common school is our tower of strength, and civics as a branch of instruction assumes paramount importance.