INDIANA SCHOOL JOURNAL. December, 1868. Vol. XIII. GEORGE W. HOSS, Editor. No. 12 DUTIES OF THE STATE IN REGARD TO HIGHER EDUCATION. REV. CYRUS NUTT, D. D., PRESIDENT STATE UNIVERSITY. Of the importance of collegiate and university education, it is not necessary now to speak. All conversant with human affairs feel it-know it. No sooner has any people emerged from barbarism than it recognizes the necessity of higher institutions of learning. Alfred the Great had scarcely expelled the Danes, and settled the affairs of his kingdom, when he founded the University of Oxford. The Pilgrim Fathers had not yet entirely removed the forests from the spot on which they landed in New England, before they laid the foundations of Harvard, at Cambridge. The New Haven colony, even before they had completed their rude cabins, established an institution of learning. Each inhabitant was required to contribute a peck of corn, per annum, for its support. This was the origin of old Yale, since so famous among the colleges of America. In the settlement of each new State in the West, steps have been promptly taken for the establishment and support of colleges and universities. The institutions of learning springing up everywhere throughout the land clearly show the estimate placed by the people upon higher education. Indiana is no exception. Her State University, and the universities and colleges established by different religious denominations, were they sufficiently endowed, would afford an abundant supply for the entire demand for higher education. But what is the duty of the State in regard to this department of education? This is a question of the greatest practical importance. Should the State establish, support and control colleges and universities, or should higher education be left wholly to the different religious denominations? On this subject there may be some diversity of opinion. Some affirm that the State should not undertake the management of such institu tions. Such education, it is alleged, can better be furnished by the various church organizations. THE OBJEC TIONS urged against State institutions will be noticed hereafter. It is now generally conceded that the government should provide common shool instruction for all the children of the commonwealth. This, however, was formerly strongly contested, and it required long years to educate public sentiment up to this point. It is a significant fact that the same arguments now urged against State Colleges and Universities were, some years ago, urged against a State system of public schools. As these arguments have been proved to be invalid in the latter case, so will they be found futile when applied to higher edueation. The educated minds of a nation will originate its policy and government and control its destiny. In what institutions ought these governing minds be educated? Should it be in State Colleges and Universities, or in those belonging to the different religious denominations? These have done nobly in the cause of education and are deserving of all praise; nor would we detract aught from the high reputation which their institutions of learning enjoy, or lessen the influence which they wield. We would not say to their friends, "slacken your efforts," but, on the contrary, we would commend their zeal, and urge them to still greater exertion in their noble cause. But should these institutions exclude or supercede the necessity of government Colleges and Universities? We think not any more than private, individual or parochial schools should usurp the place of the public school system. Many reasons confirm this opinion, some, among which are the following: 1. The permanent and dominant influence which higher institutions of learning exert over the minds of their students is well understood. To gain the advantages of such influence is the motive for those strenuous efforts made by the various denominations to establish and support their own church Colleges and Universities. In these they wish to educate their own children, and as many others as they can pursuade to attend, fully believing that the denomination which educates the greatest number of the youth will hereafter wield the greatest influence in the community. Now all those educated at these sectional Colleges and Universities must receive a strong bias in favor of the particular church to which their "alma mater" belongs. This, none will pretend to deny. This bias enters their very nature, and becomes a part of their being. The son has an affection for his mother, which he can have for no other human being. The Alumnus feels through life a very strong partiality for his College and its sect, perhaps stronger than he can possibly feel for any other College or sect. State Institutions will, doubtless, impress the minds and hearts of their students in like manner, but with this difference, their prepossessions will not be partizan or sectional, but general, embracing the whole commonwealth, whose fostering care they have enjoyed. They become the alumni, the sons of the State. Having enjoyed her bounties they feel obligations arising from this relationship, and gratitude combines with patriotism to render them good citizens, and faithful and energetic public servants. Indebted to their country for much that has contributed to their success in life, their social standing and influence, they will never consent to sacrifice that country upon the altar of sect, party or denomination. Their plans and enterprises will be comprehensive and liberal. All their sentiments and sympathies will be based upon broader principles, rendering them firm pillars of State. 2. While the graduates of the State Institutions must regard themselves, in some degree, the property of the State, the State likewise has a claim upon them which she has not upon those educated in sectarian institutions. She has a right to expect more from them; and she will look to them in preference to others for public services. A band of well disciplined and noble young men are thus raised up, strong in virtue and wisdom, on whom the government may rely in every emergency. The great importance of educating the youth in government institutions is a thought by no means new in the world. Prominent among the ancient Persians was the system of public education for their young men. From boyhood to mature years they attended the State University, in which all their powers, physical, mental and moral, were thoroughly trained and developed. Educated in this, their State institution, they, under the leadership of Cyrus, conquered the world, and established the second great universal empire. The Greeks held similar views. Their most distinguished philosopher, Plato taught the same doctrine in his Utopia, or Model Republic. The Spartans put it in practice in their public insti tutions which were designed to make their young men invincible warriors. In these were educated "Leonidas and his three hundred !" The monarch mind of modern times, the immortal Bacon, in his Atlantis, makes his model nation provide for the education of its youth in institutions of learning, founded and controlled by the gov ernment. Plato, indeed, carried his principle so far that he recommended "that all the children should at an early age be separated from their parents and placed under the care of the State to be brought up in the government schools, lest filial affection should interfere with their patriotism." He was, doubtless, mistaken in his philosophy of the human mind, but he was right in his estimate of the importance of social and civil duties. Where such minds as those of Plato and Bacon, gifted with penetration so deep and searching thus agree in questions of civil polity, their views deserve the profound consideration of rulers and statesmen. 3. Public education forms a strong bond of national union. The need of such a bond of union is well known to every statesman. We had, up to the time of the recent rebellion, scarcely any bond of national union. The general government was so far removed from the people that it attracted little interest, except when a president was to be elected, and a quadrennial distribution of the "spoils" was to be made. Municipal affairs are managed by the State Legislatures. The home interests, and all that immediately concerns the masses, concentrate in the State capitals. One of Indiana's most honored statesmen, in a public speech delivered in 1854, remarked, "your true interests are your home interests. If you have a wise man in your county, make him president of your agricultural society; if you have another, make him county commissioner; and if you have a fool, send him to Congress. You have little or no interest in national affairs." The prevalence of like sentiments led to secession and our terrible civil war. In the Federal Union, each of the States, “an imperium in imperio," constitutes a community by itself, and controls directly the individual citizen. Hence, not like the sun with his attendant planets, held in their places by the paramount influence of the central orb, the American Union is a constellation composed of stars of equal magnitude. Our greatest peril consists in the liability "that the equilibrium should be disturbed-in the wandering and dispersion of the distant stars. This came very near overwhelming the nation in most direful ruin. We need, then, more great national institutions, in which the interests and affections of the whole people, from the Lake of the Woods to the Gulf, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans shall center; and which shall bind in one every section. From this fearful peril of disintegration, foreseen by Washington, we have recently been saved by the sacrifice of half a million of lives, and eight billions of dollars. Not our National Union alone is thus endangered, but our State govern |