mentioned. It should be distinctly understood and continually repeated that the state has nothing to do with this or that individual's success in life, so far as that may be a matter of competition; that the only "success" the state can undertake to prepare any one for is the success of good conduct and of social adaptation.
Now it is evident that if State education were dominated by this idea, it would have to assume an essentially scientific character. For the conduct of life, what is wanted is not accomplishment of any kind whatever, but knowledge of what life is and a sense of its realities. A true education will, therefore, find its basis in the laws of life—physical, intellectual, and moral—and will aim at bringing each individual face to face with the great realities upon which happiness depends. From such an education all false prudery would be banished. No child would be allowed to grow up in an ignorance which might expose it to the gravest physical perils; on the contrary, the way of physical salvation would be clearly and plainly indicated, and the perils of every kind which wait upon violations of law would be faithfully exhibited. The chief impression, however, would be produced by the constant reference of all instruction to the grand aim of promoting integrity, purity, and harmony of life. Every branch of knowledge would be considered and treated in its bearing upon this aim, and not, as is now generally the case, in its bearing upon individual success in the competition of life. "Do so and so," children are now told, "and you will rise to positions of distinction in society." Yes, provided others fail to act with equal wisdom; but, supposing all to conduct themselves wisely and well, where is the distinction to come from? No doubt it may safely be predicted that all will not; but is it well to assume this in the appeals we make to the young, and so to accustom them to thought of profiting by the errors or weakness of others? The educator, we hold, should use only such modes of appeal as are applicable to all; and a promise of eminence, of distinction, of wealth, of power, is not applicable to all, but only to a few. To all it may be said: "Do so and so, and your life will rest upon solid foundations; you will be a healthful and helpful member of society, and, whatever your lot in life may be, you will have an inward fund of happiness and self-respect that will be secure against all vicissitude. Moreover, the world is so constituted that you can not give without receiving, and whatever you sow for others you will reap the same yourself."
We believe that were education dominated by these ideas, and by the one main purpose we have indicated, the result would soon be seen in quickened intelligences and improved dispositions; and at least the gross ignorance would be removed which at present is answerable for so large an amount of juvenile depravity.
There is, however, another aspect to the question with which we are now specially concerned. What shall be said of the "education" of the men of wealth and leisure, who find their highest pleasure in the most criminal and ruthless forms of vice? These men have passed through public schools, perchance through universities; some are said to be doctors of medicine; others to be eminent at the bar or on the bench; and some even to wear the livery of the Church. In what shape can life have been presented to such men? What sense can they ever have gained of the organic unity of society? What respect can they ever have been taught for the temple of their bodies, or for the cardinal institutes of nature and of society? What regard for others can ever have been inculcated upon them when they think that money can atone for the utter degradation of a fellow-creature? Surely it is time to cry aloud and spare not, when men can pass for "educated" to whom the very
