The Evening Star. THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1870.

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 273, 24 November 1870, Page 2

The Evening Star. THURSDA Y, NOVEMBER 24, 1870.

The motion to be submitted in the Provincial Council, this evening, by Mr. Dyer, involves a principle larger than usually occupies the attention of a Provincial Legislature ; but we should none the less rejoice that it is thus formally' and distinctly placed before public notice. That gentleman i? to move : —" That, in the opinion of this Council, all children between the ages, of eight , and fourteen, living within two miles of a public Government sphool, should be required to attend such school for at least one hundred days per annum, provided that such children as are being educated at other schools and those being educated at home shall be exempt from such attendance. That a* clause be inserted in the Education Bill, 1870, to give effect to this resolution." The question of compulsory education as raised in this proposal, is deserving of the most earnest consideration. It has long engaged the attention of educationists, and, as is well known, it is in some States embodied in the law of the land. That it is the duty of the State to see to the education of the people in the interests of good government, and as tending to promote the general welfare, is not now denied, except by a few who feel pleasure in pitting their own opinions against those of all the world. And, viewing the subject of general education in the powerful bearing which it has on the public well-being, it is difficult to suppress the conviction that it is the duty of the State to compel the education of its young citizens. The stale objection that it is unEnglish and unconstitutional to so far interfere with civil liberty and parental rights has no force, for the law compels a man to provide food and clothing for his children whether he wills it or not; and if the mind without knowledge is dangerous, the law may as justly demand that a child should be provided with mental as with bodily food.

But, however we may admit the right of the State to, compel the education of its citizens, and sincerely believing "as we do in the wisdom of compulsory education, there are circumstances that must prevent the application of the principle. in the manner proposed by Mr. Dyer. It is true that the State which commands the parents to provide food for the body may also command that education should be provided for the mind; but it does not so necessarily follow that it can compel the parent to provide that education. If food is withholden the child dies, but Jknowledge'may be withholden and the child in after years may supply the defect. The two wants are not equal in their urgency; and while the State, •expressing simply the voice of nature, claims that food should be provided by the parent to his child, it is not warranted in compelling the parent to educate the child for the usefulness of after-life, unless it gratuitously supplies that education. The intention of Mr. Dyer is wise; but the con-

ditions antecedent to the establishment of compulsory education are not present in the province of Auckland.. "We do not know that it has hitherto been advocated that a parent should be compelled to keep his child at school, while compelled at the same time to pay for his education ; but so soon as our legislators are so impressed with the necessity of education in the people, as to make abundant and liberal provivision for placing it within the reach of all, then will they be warranted in demanding that no parent shall have the right of interposing his authority between the mind of his child and the education which the state has freely provided.