COMPULSORY EDUCATION.
The SPEAKER announced the special order for this hour to be Mr. Ryan's bill [H. R. 8] to protect the rights of children, providing for a uniform system of common schools, compelling the attendence of children, defining certain duties of Township Trustees, etc., which: was read the third time.
Mr. BAKER said there are some things about this bill that I do not like; yet, knowing that the next Legislature can repeal any law passed by this body which is obnoxious to the peop1e, I will vote for it, but with a great many misgivings, as I do not like to vote for any bill that strikes at the rights and liberties of the people. I do not know that we have a right to interfere with a poor man, I care not how poor he may be, any more than we have to enter the palace of the rich man and say to him, you shall educate your children at Purdue University, when this land is filled with Universities? Have we the right to interfere with the poor man in his domestic relations? There is nothing dearer to man on earth than liberty, and no man want an official, I care not by what power he is clothed, to enter his home and interfere with his rights. Under the old common law of England, on which our statute law is founded, the poor man's home, how ever humble, is considered his palace, and even the King can not invade.
Mr. FLOYD--I think this bill will bring gladness to the hearts of many poor parents. I do not regard it as being adverse to their liberties and inalienable rights, but as a means of protection against the cruelty of tyrants.
Mr. RYAN said I can not see the propriety the argument that this bill is invading the rights and liberties of any citizen. No principle in it is in contravention to the rights of anybody. The bill is peculiarily republican. It had its origin in America. Compulsory education was originated and put forth in Massachusetts in 1850, and from the United States it was transported into Germany and other countries. The principle was so manifest in the Franco-Prussian War, when it was found that in the knapsack of every German soldier he not only had a map of all the roads, byways and localities in France but that he could read the map and could take care of himself; on the contrary the soldiers of the French army were so illiterate that when they were found to make their escape, they were at the mercy of their enemies because they did not know enough of the geography of the country to get out of it. Indiana to-day is more illiterate that all of New England put together. Indiana has fallen behind in her school attendance of every one of the States, especially the Western States, which have enforced the compulsory school laws.
Mr TETER--I am prompted to say that there is one thing about this bill that has probably not received the attention to which it is entitled, and that is the name that is given to the bill, wich is in itself a misnomer, viz.: "Compulsory Education." I do not understand it. I can not see where there is any compulsion about it. It is only making the way possible for the poor children of the land to receive an education. Is it any advantage to the gentleman to my left that he is an educated man; that he can read, write and, as the boy says, "sifer;" know something about geography and history, while without it he would not be exactly the very same kind of a man he is? We may look all over this Assembly, or go around and visit the 2,000,000 of people in the State of Indiana, and you mark the educated man or woman every time you meet them.
The liberties of the country are based upon the intelligence of the people. I might ask what is intelligence? I might justly say it is that by which man is enabled almost to score over the heavens and earth and make the whole empire of matter tributary to his power. Then will we say that this intelligence shall not be cultivated? Shall it lie there dormant and die? I say let it live, let every child in the land have the opportunity to go to school--give it a chance. Talk about compulsion! It is foreign to the facts.
Mr. MEREDITH favored this bill on principle. He believed if the people are taxed for the purpose of creating Public Schools, it as much to their interest, and nothing more than justice that the children should be required to attend them.
Mr. CAUTHORNE said: I am opposed to this bill on principle. I like to hear a man talk the same way on the same subject. The other day, when it was proposed to interfere with the institution of County Superintendent, the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Ryan) treated us to school-boy lectures as to the advantage of the County Superintendent; that the County Superintendency advanced the Common School system--they perfected it, and that was the reason it was so perfect, and all owing to the County Superintendent. Now, the condition of affairs has changed somewhat. The system is not perfect, and the gentleman gave us the startling information that the Common School system is retrograding; that it is the worst of any State in the Union.
The teacher will furnish the Trustees with an enumeration of all the children that do not attend, and the Trustees are authorized under this bill to hunt up the children, invade the family circle, go in there and find out why it is that the page: 102[View Page 102] children have not been to school; and it they can give no sufficient reason, to prosecute them for it. I am in favor of furnishing all the facilities for education, and not deprive anybody of this priviledge, but when we have done that that is all we should do. Let the people avail themselves of it. It is dangerous to put this power into the hands of Trustees.
Mr. McSHEEHY--This bill strikes at the fundamental principles of our Government. All men were created free and equal. We have certain rights, among them is liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and this bill proposes to enter into the home of the parent and child. That of itself strikes at our free Institutions. The gentleman says it provides for those who are unable to send their children to school by sending an officer around to ascertain how many children he has, etc. It is a well known fact our Trustees are not the most intelligent class of people; and they will exercise this power as they think best, and oftentimes unwisely. I hope this bill will not pass.
Mr. FURNAS hoped the bill would pass, as it would work good in many cases.
The bill failed to pass--yeas, 46; nays, 40--as follows:
Ayes--Baker, Bartlett, Beatty, Carr of White, Compton, Cotton, Davis, Edwins, Fall, Fancher, Floyd, Frazer, Fuller, Furnas, Gardner, Gillum, Gilman, Gregory, Hamilton, Hinton, Huston, Johnson, Lindley, Linsday, Marshall, Mason, Meredith, Miles, Mitchell, Murray, O'Neal; Roberts, Robinson of Decatur, Ryan, Schweitzer, Smelzer, Stewart, Sulzer, Taylor of Lagrange, Taylor of Noble, Teter, Westfall, Wilson of Montgomery, Wilson of Morgan, Wright, and the Speaker--46.
Nays--Barnett, Benham, Bryant, Cabbage, Carr of Whitley, Cauthorne, Chandler, Cole, Cooper, Cummins, Franklin, Gibson, Ham, Hammond, Hargrove, Hottell, Huff, Jackson, Kerr, Lee, McClure, McCormick, McDowell,. McIntosh, McSheehy, Messick, Miller, Moody, Neff, Null, O'Brien, Robinson of Ripley, Roelker, Shields, Sinclair, Thompson, Walker, Walz and Weaver--39.
for the want of a constitutional majority.
