consolation in death, that his country stands pledged, by the faith, which it has plighted to all its citizens, to protect his children from ignorance, barbarism, and vice."

From such sentiments as these, I believe there are none in this community, who would wish to dissent. As to the wisdom and policy of making some publick provision for the general education of the people, there has never been a doubt. But in regard to the extent of these appropriations, there now exists some diversity of opinion. And it is. most deeply to be regretted, that those who are most timid and sceptical as to the great utility of such appropriations, seem to be increasing. At least we are left to infer this from the policy, which has been lately adopted, in regard to the schools and other seminaries of learning. Economy is emphatically the order of the day. This is well. Economy is a great political virtue, while it is economy. But when it degenerates into parsimony, and leads to a "pence calculating policy," it is not well. While the publick appropriations are judiciously expended, there is little danger of being liberal to a fault, in the means of diffusing knowledge. And it was most ardently to have been hoped, this was the last expenditure, where a retrechment would have been found necessary. There is certainly no expenditure, from which a government, especially a republican government, realizes so full and ample an equivalent, in the increased aggregate of happiness; and none, by which

it so effectually provides for its own peace and stability. On some political measures, different classes of the same community have conflicting interests to balance and adjust; but in providing liberally for schools as well as higher seminaries of learning, the interest of all classes perfectly coincides. The rich, upon whom the principal burden of all publick appropriations falls, have their equivalent in the improved condition of society, and the increased security of their property. How would the value of property be impaired, and at how dear a rate would the rich man purchase, or save a few dollars, by suffering an ignorant and naturally jealous populace to grow up around him! a populace equally impatient of the influence and authority, which property naturally confers, and rebellious against the salutary restraints of the laws. What would the splendour of wealth contribute to happiness, if it only put the lives of those surrounded by it, in jeopardy, by placing them between their treasures and the rapacity of the hungry, the destitute, and unprincipled. It is not from this quarter, that we either expect or find opposition to liberal expenditures for education.

The middling and poorer classes find their equivalent, in having their families educated at a small expense to themselves. For these classes of society to refuse ample provisions for publick instruction, is virtually to refuse to have their children educated at other's expense. Yet it is here, oftener than any where, we find a backwardness and indifference upon the subjects

If we can suppose the small and country towns to have an interest, distinct from the large towns; or if we can suppose the middling and poorer classes of any given town, to have an interest distinct from the rich of the same town; the former in both cases stand with their back to the light, when they oppose, as such, public appropriations for education. Either they do not clearly understand their interest, or they completely reverse one of the safest principles to be assumed in all political reasoning. In the case of individuals, there may be some honourable exceptions in favour of human nature; but with classes of men and nations, in order to foresee how they will act in a given case, we have only to learn, what their own interest will be. Now, in regard to any pecuniary appropriation for a publick and general use, it seems as plain as possible, that it is decidedly for the interest of the small towns in one case, and of the poorer people in the other, to advocate a large appropriation. Take for illustration the example of a bequest of publick money to the University, or any public seminary of learning, for educating indigent scholars. The two or three largest and most opulent towns in the Commonwealth will pay one half of the tax necessary to raise the required amount, and will probably not derive one tenth of the advantage of it. So the small and country towns by paying one half of the tax, may avail themselves of nine tenths of the advantage accruing from the whole. I do not pretend to great accuracy, but

wish merely to illustrate the principle. In the appropriations for schools in the towns, that class of the inhabitants, who are to be the greatest gainers at the least expense, are often most reluctant at the expenditure. In this state we have no means of calculating precisely the advantage, in a pecuniary point of view, which the middling and poorer classes have in publick appropriations for schools; because we have no returns of the number of scholars, who attend the common schools; or of the number sent by the most opulent class. But the advantage is great. I have selected a few towns, which are fair examples of the equal distribution of property in the country, and inquired particularly into the operation of this principle. And I find that on an average about one sixth, or at most, one fifth of the legal voters in town affairs, embracing the richest men in the towns, will pay half the tax. And this same class of men, who, if they had advantage according to what they pay, would be entitled to send half the scholars, will not, on an average, send more than one sixth of them, and probably not so many. I cannot pledge myself for great accuracy here, but I am sufficiently accurate to illustrate the operation of the principle. Notwithstanding the burden of the schools comes principally upon the rich, they are the strongest advocate for their support. No one would wish the principle changed. "Government cannot subject the property of those, who have estates, to a burden, for a purpose more favorable to the poor, and more

useful to the whole community. This is the living fountain, which supplies the ever-flowing, ever-refreshing, ever-fertilizing stream, of public instruction and general intelligence."* These are the aliments, which nourish and sustain free government. If they are withheld, the body politick is languid and disordered; if they are withheld longer, a few convulsions may end its existence. Many an ardent and aspiring mind is touched at a vital point, when the means of education are withheld or perverted. Those in humble life are far removed from public observation. But if they could be heard, they would ask with an eloquence, which would touch the heart of the most calculating politician, that those means of instruction may not be farther removed, which they have so long enjoyed. Their prayers would make an argument, which none either.could or would wish to resist.

Much, however, as all are disposed to attribute to the free schools, and zealously as some, and probably a majority of the community, would advocate a more liberal provision for them, it is very far from certain, that they produce all the good of which they are capable, even with their present means. Nay, it is certain, they do not. And it is much to be lamented, that means comparatively ample, and afforded by a community so deeply interested in their appropriation, should be misapplied, or fail of their hap

*See Webster's Speech in Convention, on a Resolution for basing the Senate on population.