THE

COMMON SCHOOL

CONTROVERSY;

CONSISTING OF

THREE LETTERS OF THE SECRETARY

OF THE

BOARD OF EDUCATION,

OF THE

STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS,

IN REPLY TO

CHARGES PREFERRED AGAINST THE BOARD,

BY THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN WITNESS

AND BY

EDWARD A. NEWTON ESQ.

OF PITTSFIELD,

ONCE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD;

TO WHICH ARE ADDED

EXTRACTS FROM THE DAILY PRESS,

IN REGARD TO THE CONTROVERSY.

www

BOSTON:

PRINTED BY J. N. BRADLEY & CO.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS.

1

Ir cannot be unknown to those who feel an interest in the continuance of our Common School Systein, that a violent attack has lately been made upon it, and upon the Board of Education and its indefatigable Secretary, under whose auspices the Schools have so signally prospered. The defence of the Board and of the System against the charges made by their assailants, has drawn forth three Letters from the Secretary of the Board, and numerous Remarks from able writers in the Daily Press; and the violence of the attack, the ability of the defence, and the great importance of the several papers to a correct history and full understanding of our School System, have induced the publishers to collect all of importance that has been written on both sides of the controversy into one pamphlet, that it may be conveniently read and preserved, and that the public may be awakened to the danger which threatens the most important institution, next to that of independent churches, that has descended to us from the Pilgrim Fathers.

SC

11-1-43

んじ

M4C7

THE

COMMON SCHOOL CONTROVERSY.

The first paper consists of a communication to the Editor of the "Christian Witness and Church Advocate," which, as appears from subsequent papers, was written by Edward A. Newton, Esq. of Pittsfield. It appeared Feb. 23, 1844. CHRISTIAN EDUCATION.

MR. EDITOR: I beg to draw the attention of your readers to the following beautiful sketch of a part of the speech of Mr. Webster, in the celebrated "Girard case,' now under discussion in the Supreme Court of the United States at Washington, published in the Daily Advertiser, of this city. Every Christian heart will respond with delight to the sentiments there expressed; they are truth, and righteousness, and well would it be for our country, if they were universally adopted and acted upon. This was the principle upon which education in Massachusetts was originally established by our Pilgrim fathers, and we cherish the recollection of it with the profoundest thankfulness.

But what are we doing now? Can any one tell wherein the system of Mr. Girard, and the present system of our "Board of Education," or rather of its Secretary, differs; or where the essential line of agreement, varies? I abstain from pressing the subject further at present, desiring only at this time to draw the at tention of Christians of all denominations, holding Orthodox creeds, to the grave question, with the hope that they will examine for themselves. There is scarcely a subject that so much requires, perhaps, demands, more thoughtful investiga

tion.

"Mr. Webster commenced his argument before the Supreme Court this morning. February 10, in the great Girard case, occupying the time of the court from its opening, 11 A. M. till about 3 P. M., when it adjourned. He conclusively proved that the system of education directed to be pursued at the Institution, by Mr. Girard, professed to be based upon principles of morality, but which were separated entirely from religion. He, also, showed that it was not in the power of man to separate them, demonstrating them to be inseparable-as co-existing, or not at all; and that, without religion, there could be no such thing existing as genuine charity.

"The religious sectarianism of which it was the aim of Mr. G. to divest the contemplated institution, was admirably shown up. He proved that by the manner in which he proposed to accomplish it, he was attempting only the lopping off the branches of sectarianism, while he laid the axe at the root of Christianity itself. He traced the principles of Girard's grand moral system of instruction to Paine's "Age of Reason," and Volney's "Views of Religion." He exposed the inevitable tendency of those principles, and showed it to be the undermining of the fabric of Christianity. Whatever might have been Girard's views of religion and morality, he proved that he did not adapt the means to the end he had proposed that end being a high morality-for he closed the door against morals as well as religion. He, likewise, proved that there could have been no principle of Christianity whatever to have influenced the mind of Mr. Girard in establishing the institution; as, in my estimation, he showed that he lived as he died, without the influence of religion; therefore, the grand principle was wanting, and there could be no charity.

"His scriptural allusions were numerous, apt and forcible, when illustrating

P.3