other nation on earth has caused so much religious persecution as Spain. She invented the Inquisition, and the men who invented this engine of ruin were men of pure morality and unflinching honesty of purpose. Florento, the great enemy and historian of the Inquisition, never insinuates even a charge of insincerity against the moral character of the Inquisitors. Sir, it is not blind, religious sincerity, but cultivated reason, that can guide the march of social republican empire. Calvin was honest, but he burned Lervetas for heresy. Says Buckle: "the great antagonist of intolerance, is nct humanity, but knowledge. It is to the diffusion of knowledge, and to that alone, that we owe the comparative cessation of what is unquestionably the greatest evil men have ever inflicted on their own species." And Mr. Buckle shows beyond a doubt, that, with every advance of the intellect, both persecution and war decline. No man can study with care this great historian of civilization, without coming to the conclusion that knowledge is rapidly destroying the greatest crimes of the world. The intellect alone can furnish the light to illuminate the paths of empire; without knowledge the moral feelings are blind. This moral sense can give the feeling of duty, of honesty, of responsibility; but it can throw no light on the path of social procedure. The railroad, the telegraph, and the printing press, do more to bring mankind into friendly commerce and fellowship than all the sermons of all the ecclesiastics of all nations and ages put together-and these great agents are the discoveries and inventions of the intellect, and not the products of moral feelings. MR. PRESIDENT, if the Senate will allow me I shall quote from my own speech made on this floor two years ago on this same subject: "Knowledge is not only power, it is also democracy. Intelligence abolishes all fictitious distinctions of rank, for it knows no aristocracy but that of thought; it recognizes no sovereignty but that of truth, justice, liberty. Universal knowledge is the only universal liberty, for nations as for individuals. Her voice is the fiat of eternal reason, and her discoveries are the announcements of immutable law. The touch of her sceptre turns rocks into palaces, minerals into utilities, and darkness into light. Science recreates the world. It tames her savage energies, and reinforces the instincts of liberty and progress with the cumulative experience of all ages. The mind which can pick the very light of the heavensof the stars to pieces in its fingers, will not bow down before the accidents of rank or birth, but acknowledges only the fiats of eternal law. Sir, light, and light alone, is liberty. And universal education is the only means of universal light. It was the perception of the great superiority of the compulsory system of education which drew from Playfair the exclamation: For my own country I have no higher ambition than to get schools approaching in excellence to those of Holland.' In the competition of nations, the two factors of industry, raw material and intellect, applied to its conversion into utilities, are altering their values. The first is rapidly declining, the second quickly augmenting in value. There are instances of nations rich in the natural material resources of industry, yet poor from lack of scientific knowledge to wield them into wealth; and there are instances of nations devoid of these natural material resources, but possessed of that scientific knowledge which can turn all things to account through the skill of an educated people. Spain is an example of the first class, and Holland of the second. The first is rich in all the great material resources of wealth; her climate, the richness of her soil, the vast amount of her minerals, her geographical position, all give her infinite material fountains of prosperity. But she has no schools, hence no skilled artisans and no science. Spain committed two great crimes. By the first she banished the Jews, and by the last, in 1609, she thrust out of her dominions one million Moriscoes, Christianized Moors, her only industrial artisans, and thus deprived herself of the gathered experience of centuries. She neglected her schools until her people had sunk into intellectual torpor and industrial barbarism. And she has only begun to awake since the Paris Exposition of 1867. Under its influence she is establishing compulsory schools for her ignorant people; the reign of her darkness is now broken, and the dawn of day is now tinging her mountains with the promise of a full noon-tide sun. Hollanda mud produced country, rescued from the ocean by the hand of man, fenced around by dikes, without any mineral resources, with only a maritime position, but fired with the spirit of liberty under the lead of William the Silent-estab lished her schools, educated her people, and has outstripped her old mistress, Spain, and now is far in advance of most European nations in general intelligence and industrial art. These examples are sufficient, and they illustrate and enforce the great truth that the educated brain of a nation is the one great source of power and prosperity. It is brain, not mere muscle, which opens and utilizes the sources of wealth. The mind is the aboriginal power of all civilization. Spain illustrates the maxim of scripture: He that wandereth out of the way of understanding shall remain in the congregation of the dead.'"' With these unquestionable facts of history before them, how can Senators who are supposed to know, and who ought to know something of history, and the lessons which it can teach, assert that ignorance has not caused the wholesale crimes of the world? If nations knew better they would do better. But all this may be admitted, and yet the necessity and policy of compulsory education be denied by Senators. I concede that a Senator can be honestly opposed to compelling the education of children, and yet believe in the policy of education in the old voluntary forms. Senators may favor education, but oppose compulsion. But not all the legislation of the world is of as much utility, as much protection to the State, as either the railroad, the printing press, or the telegraph. But it may be said that the idea of education which I hold up is not realized in fact in any nation at large. True. But then, the little knowledge and culture the best educated do acquire tends to the realization of this idea. Neither nations nor individuals can mount at once to the highest summits of intellectual and moral power and perfection. But is this a reason which grave Senators would give to show that we should not take the first few faltering steps up the glowing ascent of knowledge, of culture, and of moral power? Sir, shall we be exhorted not to learn the alphabet, because we cannot at once attain to an exhaustive knowledge of all that is knowable in the Universe? Because our schools are imperfect or incomplete, shall we abolish them? Because the education they give is defective, shall we refuse to educate at all? If the incompleteness of our child has not taught it to walk, and its mother neglects to feed it, this neglect, according to Spencer, in no way "takes from the child's freedom to get that food wherever it can find it." "The liberty to exercise the faculties is still in tact." The child can still take its chances, hunt up its own food, or starve. It is no answer to say, parents will not starve helpless children. The question is one of rights-the rights of childhood to knowledge. And besides, parents and guardians do sometimes starve not only their children but themselves for rum. Sir, it is the question of food for mind as for body that is here involved. Suppose the child is three years old and its parent neglects to furnish it with food? Mr. Spencer's theory is still applicable; it can still be said: "The parent who is careless of a child's" food "does not infringe the liberty of the child to exercise his faculties in getting it the best way he can." Spencer continues: "Every aggression, be it remembered, every infraction of rights is necessarily active, whilst every neglect, carelessness, omission, is necessarily passive. Consequently, however wrong the non-performance of a parental duty may be it does not amount to a breach of the law of equal freedom, and cannot, therefore, be taken cognizance of by the State." [See Social Stat., p. 361.] Sir, can logical stupidity go further? Has the State, then, no right to require a parent not to so neglect his child as that it shall starve? Can't a parent or guardian starve a child by "the non-performance of parental duty ?" "A mother can starve a child without a single "aggressive" act; she can refuse it the milk of her breast, of the bottle and other food by simple "neglect," "by the nonperformance of a parental duty." And yet if she does so the State can take no cognizance of the deed, because it "does not violate the law of equal freedom." "The liberty to exercise the faculties is still left in tact." The omission of food "in no way takes from a child's freedom to do whatsoever it wills, in the best way it can." Sir, this "in the best way it can," of Spencer, is in no way whatever to any purpose of self-preservation of the child. The child cannot preserve itself against fatal neglect, therefore the State should. But time will not allow me, Sir, to pursue this criticism of Spencer's legislative nihilism further. I turn to educational statistics for instruction as to the wisdom and necessity of compulsory education. I refer the Senate to the following statement of the United States Commissioner of Education for 1872. He makes the following exhibit in carefully prepared form of the educational statistics of the Republic. He says: "Who can speak boastingly of American intelligence, with a knowledge of the fact that over 17 per cent. of the adult males of the country, who are essentially all voters, are illiterate, and that nearly one fourth of the adult females (over 23 per cent.) are in the same condition? But the amount of intelligence in the country, as tested by the capacity to read and write, is not limited to these adults. The census gives those who can not write, 10 years old and over; and those from 10 to 20 certainly should not be excluded in an effort to estimate accurately the intellectual power of a people. Even those from 5 to 9, inclusive, though not a great direct power in this particular, yet, as being able to read, may be a medium of information to parents and other adults around them, and we may, therefore, include them in the reckoning. The census does not give those under ten who can not write or cannot read; but we may make an estimate on the basis that the same percentage holds good as in the case of those over 10. With these considerations for our guidance, we have, from the figures, the following results: Total population of all ages.. Number under 5 years old.. 38,558,371 5,514,713 Number 5 years old and over. Number 10 years old and over.. Number 5-9 years old inclusive.. Number of illiterates 10 years old and over. Estimated number (20 per cent.), 5-9 years old, inclusive, illiterate. 5,658,144 962,942 6,621,086 So that the number 5 years old and over, not illiterate, is.. 26,422,572 Per cent. of illiterates 5 years old and over to population of the same ages..... Per cent. of non-illiterates 5 years old and over to population of 20.04 same ages..... 79.96 Per cent. of illiterates 5 years old and over to population of all ages 17.17 Per cent. of non-illiterates 5 years old and over to population of all ages... 68.53 14.30 From these figures it will be seen that out of the 38,558,371 of the population of the United States of all ages, 12,135,799, or 31.47 per cent. of the total population, must be excluded from any estimate which would ascertain the number who are able, through reading and writing, to exchange information with others for the guidance of their conduct. How many of the remaining 68.53 per cent. of our entire population who can read and write have any instruction in reckoning, or know anything of the grammar of our language, or the history or geography of our country, or how many have completed the course in our high schools and academies, or how many have received a collegiate or professional education, we can not tell as yet." Per cent. of population under five years to population of all ages.. Seventeen per cent. of adult males, and twenty-three per cent. of adult females, illiterate! Sir, it is awful to contemplate. Now if we examine the school statistics of our own State we shall find no cause for self-gratulation. I find from the report of our able State Superintendent of Public Instruction that 40 90 per cent. of the children of school age are truant and utterly non-attendant together. 41 per cent. of the children in the State of California, not in school, not being educated. "We also find that the evils of truancy have increased 7.35 per cent. It also appears that out of 97,681 listed as having attended public schools at any time during the School year, only 71,170 of these have attended long enough and regularly enough, to be entitled to be considered as pupils of the public schools. That even among this number a large percentage was irregular in attendance, is proved by the fact that the average daily attendance was only 63,063, 88,60 per cent. on the average number belonging, or 44.53 per cent. on the total number of census children, so that in fact at least 50 per cent. of our children are practically out of school." And the Superintendent finds but two remedies; first, a more generous endowment of the public schools, and, second, compulsory attendance thereon. Chancellor Kent says: "A parent who sends his son into the world uneducated, and without skill in any art or science, does a great injury to mankind as well as his own family, for he defrauds the community of a useful citizen and bequeaths to it a nuisance." And I add, the State has the unquestioned right to abate a nuisance. And here before us lies the fact, that in the nation at large more than 31 per cent., near one third of the whole 38, 558,371 of our population, "are unable through reading and writing to exchange any information with each other," while one half of the children in our own State are growing up into adult illiteracy. And if we inquire for the cause, it is found in the indifference, neglect or willful conduct of parents and guardians. And this can be remedied only by compulsory education. Michigan passed a mild compulsory law two years ago, and the State Superintendent writes me, that though the law has not been enforced in the courts, the attendance on public schools has increased over four per cent. in the last year. Such is the direct moral of a compulsory law. But Sir, if the law should be enforced, it is safe to predict, that in two years, all the children of the State, not excused for cause by the Boards of Trustees, will be practically in school in Michigan. And, Sir, Connecticut has had a compulsory school law too, for two hundred and twenty-four years, or since 1650; but it was defective in that it allowed the children of poor to be excused from attendance. And Mr. B. G. Northup, Sec'y of the Board of Education of Conn., went to Europe to study the various systems of education in operation there, and he tells us that, though when he left Connecticut he was opposed to compulsory education, when he returned he was strongly in favor of it; and under his influence, Connecticut has since adopted a more stringent compulsory law. New Hampshire. Massachusetts, Connecticut, Michigan and Maryland have now compulsory school laws; even England has such a law, while Prussia, Holland, Austria Russia, Egypt, the Ottoman Empire, the Sandwich Islands, and last and best of all, Spain, the long silent land, the once leading nation of the ancient world, sunk almost into hopeless decrepitude, has arisen and established compulsory schools. Sir, the entire civilized world is awaking to this great necessity of educating every child in the State. The awakening cry of nations is for light-more light still. MR. PRESIDENT, let us reflect on the intellectual and moral condition of the world. Now no intelligent man disputes that Prussia has become the leading nation of Europe, because her people are more thoroughly and nearly educated than any other continental nation. Austria admits, through its authorized Minister of Instruction, that not the needle gun, but the educated soldiery which invented and stood behind it, was conqueror at Sadowa; and France admits, through its leaders that she was beaten in the late war by the common schools of Prussia; and Jules Simon drew up a compulsory school law for France. All the great English political economists admit that England is fast loosing her ancient mechanical and manufacturing ascendancy, in consequence of the better education of the mechanics and people of the great German Empire; while it is now admitted by all the best informed men of every nation that ignorance and crime are twins-nay more-are cause and effect. If the Senate will bear with me for a moment, I will boil down the statistical evidence that ignorance causes crime, and so can be cured, or at least be reduced to its lowest terms. Let Senators listen to the voices of statistics, gathered during the last three or four years, relative to the relations of ignorance to crime. They have been carefully compiled from the tables of the census, aided by those gathered since by the National Bureau of Education. The following are found in the report of the National Commissioner of Education, page 593: THE PROPORTION OF CRIMINALS TO THE ILLITERATE POPULATION IN REGARD TO EDUCATION. "Here we come to test facts in regard to the influence of ignorance in producing crime. If the proportion of ignorant criminals to the whole number should prove greatly above that of the illiterate to the whole population, it will be a fact con clusive that ignorance is one great cause of crime. Fortunately, the returns of education and illiteracy embodied in the census of eighteen hundred and seventy, will enable us to examine this question and obtain reliable results. "Taking the returns of the census of eighteen hundred and seventy in connection with the tables we have above given, we have the proportions below, premising, however, that, as all prisoners are above ten years of ages, so we have taken from the "illiterate" in the census only those above ten years of age. "It appears, therefore, that in the Middle States the proportion of illiterate criminals is eightfold the proportion of illiterate people; in the Central West it is thirteenfold, and in the West and Pacific States it is tenfold. In the South it is only threefold; but this is caused by the great mass of colored people, who make up a large portion of the whole people, and, being nine tenths of them wholly ignorant, furnish the great mass of criminals. When the still larger white population is counted in it makes the disproportion of the illiterate criminals less. As to colored people only it is very great. But we see in the above proportions the great fact that ignorance is one of the great causes of crime. We do not seek to exaggerate that fact. The figures we give show it in its naked deformity, and we leave the fact to the contemplation of our readers. But in the meantime, let us look at how this fact will operate in an intelligent American community. Let us see exactly how it will operate in New York or Pennsylvania. Let us take ten thousand people as the unit of measure. The result will be, according to the above proportions: The "others" means only a very common education. What, then, is the practical result? That because four hundred persons out of ten thousand have been kept totally ignorant, the county or municipality has seven times as many criminals as it need have, and seven times as much expense and evil of all kinds resulting from it." The report continues: "It is, therefore, a matter of primary importance in the prevention of crime and the improvement of society, as well as the avoiding of that combat between crime and law which, in this country, has been the bane of our prosperity." "We need not cite any further testimony of this kind; this is, in substance, the testimony of all the keepers and officers of penitentiaries, prisons, jails, and reformatories in the country. It is the testimony of human experience on one of the most important points which concern human society. The evidence upon the intimate relation of crime and ignorance is clear, complete and ample. It may be comprised in two general propositions: "First-That one third of all criminals are totally uneducated, and that four fifths are practically uneducated. "Secondly-That the proportion of criminals from the illiterate classes is at least tenfold as great as the proportion from those having some education. "If these proportions are true (and we have made rather an underestimate), then, after making due allowance for crimes committed from passion, without regard to education, and crimes, such as forgery, frauds, etc., which require some education, we must come to the conclusion that two thirds of crimes might be avoided by education, but more especially by religious training. Against this fact some one will reply that so also a large number of criminals are intemperate, and, therefore, we may attribute to intemperance a large number of the crimes we now |