have cause to be jealous of it. When it allies itself with one special sect, that sect alone has a direct interest in supporting it, and all the rest (supposing no other considerations entered in) would be thrown into antagonism. Loyalty and patriotism are sufficient to cast into the shade the question of self-interest, and it is not in England that the established powers have to fear aught from Nonconformists. Lord Brougham says that he dreads the influence of "an all-powerful and wholly independent clergy." Experience in the United States shows how imaginary is such a fear. There the clergy are "wholly independent," but they do not seek to injure the State, from the very motives which make English Dissenters good subjects-the existence of loyalty and patriotism. Lord Brougham's argument implies that the only way to keep the clergy loyal is to fetter their independence, for the moment they are made free they will assail the political fabric. If the State is to have them on its side it must pay them. Such a supposition does more injustice to the Established Church than all the objections and attacks of its opponents. English and American history alike demonstrate the danger of making too close an alliance between religion and the civil power.30 There have been times when the union of Church and State gave increased power to the State, but this was always a disadvantage to the nation. The Church was on the side of despotism and intolerance. Mr. Erskine May

30 See Mr. T. Erskine May's 'Constitutional History,' chapter xii.

CHAP. IX.

ELECTING PREACHERS.

205

describes the result when he speaks of Elizabeth's time: "The union of ecclesiastical supremacy with prerogatives already excessive, dangerously enlarged the power of the Crown over the civil and religious liberties of the people." What the alliance of Church and State did in America we have already seen in this chapter.

The objection that, if a congregation elects a pastor, the minority will derive no profit from his preaching, because they were opposed to him, would be too puerile to answer except that it is so gravely made by one who enjoys a high authority. The minority merely preferred another man. Very likely it would turn out that they were better satisfied with the one actually elected. They supported their candidate because they knew him, but his competitor they may not have known. Besides, says Lord Brougham, the people "are little to be trusted with a discretion upon religious subjects." He seems to think that a congregation would change its religious faith and doctrine as often as it changed its pastor. The choice of a minister has nothing to do with the matter. The doctrines are defined and accepted the question is merely which of two men is most fitting to preach them? In Nonconformist sects in England, that question is decided by election without producing any of the violent consequences which Lord Brougham appears to apprehend. It is the same in America. The pastor is chosen, and the defeated minority would no more think of rising in insubordination

than they would of disobeying the laws of the land, because a President whom they did not vote for happened to be the present Executive.

The voluntary system in America works well for the people, but ill, in many cases, for the preacher. Religion itself does not suffer by being placed above the influence of State support and patronage. The State cannot be held responsible for the government of any religious body, it gives offence to none, and the adherents of each sect take a natural pride in doing all in their power to add to its prosperity.

CHAP. X.

POPULAR EDUCATION.

207

CHAPTER X.

POPULAR EDUCATION.1

EVEN Americans who deny that there are any dangers in intrusting the preponderance of power to the bulk of the people, will readily admit that the only safeguard against the growth of future danger consists in the universal spread of education. It is not a question of expediency with them whether they shall educate their poor or not. It is a matter of necessity. They must do it, or submit to the evils attending a rule of men intensely ignorant of the questions they are called upon to decide. The suffrage is open to all, with restrictions in some States which are merely nominal. If men are to govern, they ought at least to be in a position to make themselves moderately acquainted with the course of current events. But the poor are not always willing to send their children to school; they think that it is the duty of their children to help to earn their bread, and therefore the system of compulsory education is recommending itself strongly to the American people.

1 This chapter is partly reprinted, by permission, from the author's letters to the Times,' published 6th and 11th July, 1867.

They believe that they have nothing to fear from the exercise of intelligent and educated opinion, and they spare no pains to make provision for the education of all their citizens. After they have done all that lies within their power, they have only partially accomplished their wishes, but they have at least tried to guard against the shame of being practically ruled by men who cannot sign their own names, or read a line of the Constitution.

The duty of providing the means of education is supposed to fall naturally upon the States. So far as this matter is concerned, the State considers itself the head of the family, and sustains the cost of educating those who look up to it for protection. The Federal Government has from time to time allotted valuable grants of land, nominally as loans, among the States for the establishment or assistance of school funds, and a certain proportion of land is always set aside for the same purpose in new States. The charge of the schools is afterwards always borne by each State for itself, and Congress will probably never be able again to lend that liberal assistance which it was always ready to do before the responsibilities of a vast national debt lay upon it. The tax for educational purposes exclusively is now very high in many States-in New York it amounts to 5 per cent. on the total assessed income,

2

2 See for a list of the Enactments of Congress for grants for educational purposes, Kent's 'Commentaries,' vol. ii. pp. 200-201, note, Part IV. Lect. xxix.